Exquisitely Dumb Editorial from NY Times

…darkly warns wives of Anglican to Catholic priests that medievals a thousand years ago might have been mean to them so… well, there you go. As a bonus the “medieval scholar” offering this delightful piece of condescension asks us to seriously believe that Catholics started to believe in the Real Presence in the 12th Century.

Carl Olson does the autopsy on this exceptionally patronizing and hilarious piece.

"They achieved what they did because their citizens did not rise up. Trump may yet ..."

The Umpteenth Iteration of “You Made ..."
"I would agree. There has always been a large gap between our self image and ..."

All that Happened at the Border ..."
"Chile, 1980. Women disappeared. United States, 2018. Children disappeared. And the junta knows where they ..."

All that Happened at the Border ..."
"Evil is evil. Enjoy your word games."

The Umpteenth Iteration of “You Made ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Rosemarie


    Funny, I thought the liberal talking point for this topic is that the majority of Catholics want married priests and so would happily welcome a change in Church policy – Thus saith the Gallop polls! Now, Ms. Ritchey is saying that married priests are “strange and unsettling,” and their wives even moreso. In fact, the latter may never receive “permanent welcome in the church” at all, according to her.

    Well, if that’s the case, why should the Church even bother beginning a “real conversation about the continuation of priestly celibacy,” as she suggests? If we really don’t want ’em after all, why bother allowing married men to be ordained? Note to progressives: Talk amongst yourselves and get back to us once you get your narrative straight.

    (BTW, I’m not against the ordination of married men. If the Roman rite ever decides to change its policy I’ll support the decision as much as I support priestly celibacy now. It’s a policy, not a doctrine so it can change.)

  • Jared

    The critics of the Church are a silly group of people, ain’t they?

  • Owwww…my brain hurts

  • bob

    The St Michael parish in Olympia, WA includes this in their 2010 annual report:

    “We welcomed 243 new families to our parish last year, for a total of 3,013 registered households in our parish.”

    And the website shows *two* priests. No overworked ministers there. All celibate clergy seems to be working just fine. If you are a layman at this parish you can rest assured you are just as important as any of the 3000 or so people each priest needs to care for. Neither man will ever know your name*, but
    * The Parochial Vicar is now on his 25th parish, about to turn 40 years old. How many more before he simply wears out?

  • Margaret

    Bob– I’m not quite following you. How would two married priests at St. Michael’s parish be any less over-worked?

    • dpt

      Not if they have a family to take care of too.

  • bob

    You have a system that precludes 99.99% of all Catholic men from being clergy. You might also notice the vicar priest is an import. Nothing at all the matter with that except the problem that Americans have getting American men to buy in to the celibate world. For 2000 years the Eastern Church has had married clergy. A “parish” this size would be called a “diocese” there and actually be about 6-8 parishes with maybe 10 married clergy. How would it be paid for? Have you looked at the budget of St. Michael’s?
    What would happen if only (!) 50% of the adults there wanted to talk to a priest for 10 minutes out of a week? Assume 1000 people? That’s 500 people, 83 hours. With two priests that would give each one 40 hours a week doing nothing else. When do they celebrate Mass, eat, drink, go to the bathroom….? Inactivity is the only way a congregation that size can ever operate. It’s broke. You need more clergy. Regular, faithful men who are married like St. Peter.

    St Michael’s is also where the Seattle archdiocese explicitly rejected the service of a married priest from the “Pastoral Provision” some years ago. Even with a congregation of that magnitude they were simply horrified at the idea of having a married priest serve in any capacity whatever. The Times article may speak more truth than you think. There really is a phobia about marriage and clergy. Fr. Peter Dally eventually served at St. George, the Eastern Rite parish in Olympia. He was Latin Rite when he was originally ordained.

    • Fr. Peter Dally eventually served at St. George, the Eastern Rite parish in Olympia. He was Latin Rite when he was originally ordained.

      Interesting. That’s some hard data, a nugget of gold in a muddy stream-bed of various ideologically-driven opinion.

    • Dan F.