Oh. My. Word.

Some really nasty Traditionalists must have gotten together to try to really humiliate the Women’s Ordination crowd. Because, surely, nobody serious about women’s ordination could have thought that a badly lip-synched, Rebecca Black in clerics… thing like this would appeal to any normal person:

“Don’t listen to St. Paul, cuz I can lead the way”.

Yeah. It’s all about power, isn’t it? As our Lord Nietzsche said: Blessed are the strong, for they shall win power struggles.

Here’s the deal: the Church can’t make women priests, just as it cannot, by Nietzschean will, consecrate water as the blood of Christ and wine as the matter of baptism or margarine as the oil of chrismation. It’s not about power. It’s about the way Jesus Christ (you remember him?) ordained that his sacraments should be celebrated and with what matter. There’s a million ways for women to be saints (which is what the Faith is actually about, not power struggles). Pick one. But you’ll never get to be a saint through rebelling against Jesus.

HT (I think) to Marc Barnes.

  • Maggie Goff

    Maybe it was some really nasty Novo Ordoists? ;)

    • http://N/A Chris Rademacher

      Good for you! Traditionalists always seem to be tarred & feathered on this blog.

      • ivan_the_mad

        I think that you’re confusing traditionalists with zealous and unreasonable reactionaries. It’s rather difficult to be Catholic without being at least something of a traditionalist.

      • Mark Shea

        Um, it’s the women’s ordination crowd I’m chuckling at. I’m *agreeing* with Traditionalists that women cannot be ordained. Grow thicker skin, dude.

        • Christine Radermacher

          I’m not a dude, but a 62 year old grandmother! Foot in mouth, DUDE!

          • Jmac

            Dude is pretty much gender-neutral these days.

  • http://www.lewiscrusade.org John C. Hathaway, OCDS

    What offends me most about the Women’s Ordination argument, and this video in particular, is the abuse of the Doctor of the Little Way. She would NEVER tolerate such an attitude in her name, and the whole point of the “I wish I could be a priest, etc.” passage is to accept one’s limitations and live humbly in service to God where He puts you, because it’s His will that matters, not ours.

    • Mark Shea

      My dear Wormwood, do remember you are there to fuddle the human creatures. From the way some of you young tempters talk, anyone would think it was your job to *teach*. – Uncle Screwtape

  • Hermann

    Hey, we have a few “ladies” you could start with in the protestant churches!

    I at least would be glad to give them away!

    Shalom
    Hermann

  • deiseach

    The most telling point in the associated article is that the ‘vestments’ they are wearing in the video were borrowed from a costume shop that produced them for a local production of “Becket”.

    Playing dress-up, indeed.

  • Suburbanbanshee

    What I noticed was that, in the whole video, God is only mentioned as a sort of supporting player. Also, there doesn’t seem to be any acceptance of suffering, hard work, sacrifice, thought for others…. Apparently, being a priest is all about outfits and power, not about getting up in the middle of the night to help people die, or trying hard to keep people from damning themselves without violating their free will.

    I’m a selfish person myself. But I don’t call it justice.

    • dpt

      “What I noticed was that, in the whole video, God is only mentioned as a sort of supporting player.”

      Years ago while in college, I went on an overnight retreat led by a “feminist” type, and came away afterwards wondering, “why didn’t they mention the name of Jesus at all during the retreat”.

      I see much of this criticism against the Church as being self-centered, not Christ-centered.

  • D. Burdoin

    Here’s the deal: the Church can’t make women priests, just as it cannot, by Nietzschean will, consecrate water as the blood of Christ and wine as the matter of baptism or margarine as the oil of chrismation. It’s not about power. It’s about the way Jesus Christ (you remember him?) ordained that his sacraments should be celebrated and with what matter.

    That favorite argument against the ordination of women is about the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard. On the same reasoning one can argue that certain males: eskimos, those under 4 feet tall, with red hair, or heterosexual, if you want to be blunt about it, can be priests either, because presumably none of the people in these groups were ordained by Jesus. The Roman Catholic Church’s track record of bigotry against various groups of innocent people, women for two millennia, and gays for the past 600 years, for examples, boggles the imagination. And if you infer that my comment implies that Jesus and his disciples were gay, you are right. Jesus himself was almost certainly gay, and it’s time the RC Church stopped lying to itself and the rest of the world about it.

    • Timothy

      A video so bad that it’s hard to tell if it’s serious is followed by a comment so bad that it’s hard to tell if it’s serious. Well done.

    • Rosemarie

      +J.M.J+

      But I thought Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and they had a daughter. Sir Leigh Teabing called it “the greatest cover-up in human history”!!!! And Jesus said she was a goddess but the mean old church men called her a prostitute because they hated the sacred feminine and didn’t want a goddess… and, and then they made the Virgin Mary a goddess and worshiped her, and, and…

      …I’m so confused.

      • dpt

        Rosemarie-

        Right on…critics toss what ever dart is handy. What they need to do is step up to the plate and dig deep so to provide some intellect to support their cause. Feeble darts won’t do.

    • S. Murphy

      There weren’t gay people 600 years ago. People thought homosexual temptations were like heterosexual temptations – anybody could experience them, and everybody should refuse to give in to the temptation. For maybe the last 150 years we’ve thought there were homosexual persons.

      • Hezekiah Garrett

        Lord, How I love you, Murph!!!

    • Seamus

      So the Church *can* use margarine for the oil of chrismation, and presumably consecrate single-malt whiskey, or grape juice, or Kool-Aid as the Blood of Christ, since the fact that Our Lord didn’t use them is no obstacle to our using whatever matter for the sacraments we think is more appropriate for our contemporary needs?

    • Mark Shea

      You have reached the place where your contempt for the Church is now making you stupidly babble nonsense. You literally have no idea what you are talking about. Repent and stop lying to yourself or you will lose contact with reality entirely, and that will be, very literally, hell.

  • Brian

    D. Burdoin: hahahaha! Thanks for the laugh so early!

    And as an added bonus, my autocorrect gave me TWO options to correct your name: Buffoon and Burden.

    When will people realize that The Lord is who the Church says He is and not who modern pop psychologists say he is.

  • Rosemarie

    +J.M.J+

    A YouTube video – Brilliant! That’s a sure-fire way to get the Church to ordain women. And dissing the inspired writer of most of the New Testament just seals the deal. Wonder why no one ever thought of this before….

  • http://chesterton.org Sean P. Dailey

    One way you know that wommyns’ “ordination” could not possibly be possible: their taste in vestments and music is so appalling.

    • S. Murphy

      I still say the real reason the Church doesn’t ordain women is that Italian men between the ages of 14 and 64 don’t go to Mass unless they get to be in charge.
      So ladies, save an Italian soul – offer up your frustrated desire to serve on the other side of the altar. ;-)

  • Ed Mechmann

    Wait a second… I once attended a college campus ministry “liturgy” that reminds me of this video — ugly vestments, irreverent gestures, lousy pseudo-pop music, bad history, disobedient preaching, appalling liturgical dancing. Brings back memories. None of them good.

  • Terry

    What I’d like to know is if this was a “catholic” school they performed their little routine in front of and if it is did their local ordinary “call them maybe?” I would think that should be an interesting conversation.

    • JoFro

      Nope! It was some Episcopal Church, whom the WOC themselves thanked afterwards on their webpage for “schoomzing” up to them by allowing them to film this nonsense!

  • Xpat

    Horrid man, for embedding that!

    It’s not from Rebecca Black. It’s that “Call Me Maybe” song by Carly Rae Jepsen.

  • Mimi

    May I just take a moment to ask, on top of the overlying “WHY”, what liturgical season these people are supposed to be in?
    Also, why do they have to have the catholic schoolgirls in the above-the-knee-skirts and knee socks? If they are sooo feminist, why pander to a stereotype that has been turned into a sexual objectification of women?

    • JoFro

      Because modern feminists are not prudes and they love sex and they too love sexy Catholic schoolgirls!

    • Rosemarie

      +J.M.J+

      Many influential feminists stopped complaining about the “sexual objectification of women” when the Playboy Foundation began funding pro-abortion and other radical feminist causes. Now they mindlessly spout the pòrnògraphers’ line about being “sèx-positive” and run articles in Ms Magazine critical of groups that promote abstinence and such.

  • Subsistent

    Surely I’m far from being the only one to opine that the vast majority of Catholic women, like the vast majority of Catholic men, WOULDN’T WANT to be ministerial priests. It takes “a special breed o’ cat”, IMO, to be willing, for instance, to spend daily about a half hour (at least) in speaking the ritual words and doing the ritual gestures of the celebrant of the Eucharistic liturgy.
    This is in contrast to the matter of women’s suffrage, in which the great majority of women rightly value the right to vote in political elections — a right affirmed, it seems to me, in the first paragraph of section 75 of Vatican II’s constitution *Gaudium et Spes*, which states that it’s “in full conformity with human nature that there should be juridico-political structures providing all citizens in an ever better fashion and without any discrimination the practical possibility of freely and actively taking part … in the election of political leaders. All citizens ["omnes cives"], therefore, should be mindful of the right and also the duty to use their free vote ["libero suffragio"] to further the common good.”

  • The Deuce

    Wow. If only the Internet had been around in the 80′s, the Anglican Communion might have been saved!

  • Confederate Papist

    “Some really nasty Traditionalists must have gotten together to try to really humiliate the Women’s Ordination crowd. ”

    Or *maybe* that’s what the Women’s Ordination crowd wanted Mark Shea to think…hmm??

  • http://spiritualdiabetes.blogspot.com Jeff

    I know you all are just DYING while waiting for their next video which uses PSY’s “Gangnam Style.” ;)

  • http://disputations.blogspot.com Tom K.

    Using the Sign of the Cross — one of the most sacred and powerful of human gestures — as a dance move betrays a Catholic praxis even shallower than the pop culture in which the dance is set.

  • http://www.praybrethren.blogspot.com Andrew Lynch

    I know the Church’s defense of male priests is that it’s just the way Jesus instituted the sacrament – but it just seems like we can better than that. Not to get into the mind of God, but can we not ask *why* Jesus choose to institute a communio of men in the Apostles and their successors? It reminds me of Plato’s Euthyphro – did God will male priests because it’s right or is the male priesthood right because God willed it? Did Jesus have a reason, or is he some arbitrary decision-maker? If the Church has a Theology of the Body related to sexuality and marriage, she also needs a Theology of the Corporate Body to explain the exclusively masculine forms of communio (like the priesthood).

    • rjolly

      There are reasons given, you just don’t hear about them much. Keep in mind though- just because we can’t think or explain a thing does not mean it is not a good thing that God has a good reason for. To a Roman Citizen there would be no good reason for taking care of a crippled or mentally defective child instead of letting them die of exposure.

      One of the better explanations I have read has to do with the fact that the priest is in persona Christi when performing the consecration in mass. Another has to do with the spiritual fatherhood of a priest in relation to his parishioners- a man’s soul is ordered more to defend and protect, while a woman’s soul is ordered more to nurture. Women can (and do) defend and protect children- but it is considered suboptimal to having a man perform the same function. Interestingly one argument against having women having to be the sole protector and defender of child and family is that they can be too zealous about it and go overboard to the point of harming others that don’t need to be harmed (examples of which I have seen first hand).

      In short a priest is a spiritual Father- it only makes sense that a priest has to be a man when seen in this light. Unfortunately we live in a culture that has so successfully harmed and redefined what a Father and what the family is- that one has to give reasons why Daddy has to be a man.

      • Karen

        Thank you for actually admitting that this doctrine is based on the opinion that women are inferior beings who can’t be trusted out of doors. I genuinely appreciate your honesty. I get exhausted by the “equaldignitydifferentroles” claptrap. Separate wasn’t equal for different skin colors and isn’t equal for men and women, either.

        • Mark Shea

          You should really learn to read or you will reinforce the unjust stereotype that women are hysterics incapable of reason.

        • http://a-star-of-hope.blogspot.com JoAnna

          You’re absolutely right, Karen. On that note, the fact that men cannot be conceive children is equally unjust. Down with the patriarchy! I insist that God make men childbearers!

        • Hezekiah Garrett

          Really?

          You’ve got to be a mysoginist acting as agent provacatuer, right? No woman is really this blinkered, dare I say it?, hysterical?

          Grab the Funk&Wagnall’s and look at the etymology of hysterical. Recognise the picture at the margin?

    • The Deuce

      Okay, here’s a reason that takes into account the differing natural roles of men and women: Watch the video, observe its level of respect for the faith and for reason, and the “arguments” presented therein, and consider what female spiritual leaders are likely to be like in general, and how likely they are to uphold the rest of orthodoxy. Or, alternatively, look at what they actually have done in the Episcopal church.

    • Mark Shea

      I know the Church’s defense of male priests is that it’s just the way Jesus instituted the sacrament – but it just seems like we can better than that.

      Think what you are saying.

      • Jamie R

        Jesus is cool and all, but where did he get his Ph.D.? I’m not even sure he got a bachelor’s degree. He definitely didn’t study under the Jesuits. We can definitely do better than that.

        • Nate

          “Jesus is cool and all, but where did he get his Ph.D.?”

          WIN

          • Margaret

            Seriously!!! And has anybody ever had a chance to scrutinize his thesis or take a look at his curriculum vitae?? Honestly…

  • http://www.leepenn.org Lee Penn

    I can offer a Newspeak word to describe the practice of ordaining priestesses and bishopesses: OrdFem.

    Lee

  • Morgan

    The bottom line is women and men are not interchangeable. We are ordered as God created us. Rebelling against God’s order is nothing new (original sin anyone?) and, time after time, ends in calamity. The priesthood is a tough vocation and, as stately previously, most Catholic men are not called to this vocation. Priests rely completely on God to equip them with the special graces to fulfill their vocation. If a person tries to force what only God can give…calamity. I think you are right, Mark, that this video conveys, in a very loud and offensive manner (somehow I can’t imagine The Little Flower shaking her rump to the funk while urging us not to listen to St. Paul), a desire for some privilege being denied. Rest assured folks, you will get a chance to suffer for Christ if you haven’t already and it will be for His glory. Why suffer in rebellion against Christ in an attempt to glorify yourself?

  • Tim Jones

    Jesus may have chosen to ordain only men just to prepare the Church for her role as the only institution willing to fight for the idea that men and women, though equal in dignity, really are different. Once again, the Church draws the line where every modern institution has failed.

  • astorian

    If we don’t listen to St. Paul, why then we have to keep kosher and continue going to the synagogue, right? After all, it wasn’t Jesus who said we were no longer bound by Mosaic law, it was mean old Paul.

  • Marty Helgesen

    dpt wrote, “Right on…critics toss what ever dart is handy.” Or as British author Philiip Guedalla said, “Any stigma will do to beat a dogma”.

  • Marty Helgesen

    He spelled his name “Philip Guedalla”.

  • http://fernandapowers.com Fernanda

    I haven’t watched the video (I’m scared to). I was thinking about this last night–what is the whole concept of leadership in Church meant to be anyway? A lot of people–men and women–make the mistake of viewing leadership as being about power and promoting their own agendas or gaining admiration and respect. I had a lot more of those sentiments earlier on in my faith life and as a result I had a more difficult time accepting in my heart that women couldn’t be priests (though I certainly never made waves about it–it was one of those things you just trusted Jesus and His Church with until you finally figured it out). But I see leadership now more as a place of humility and service, especially since I do have a position of influence in my own parish (DRE).

    When Jesus came, He completely turned upside down the whole cultural expectation of how leaders behave. He said it wasn’t about being powerful and lording it over people, it was about placing yourself in the lowest position and serving, pouring yourself out on behalf of other people. So, anyone who would want to be a leader should have that attitude. Even Christ emptied Himself and did not grasp at His Divine nature when He came to earth and became obedient even to death on a cross.

    If you genuinely want to be a leader for the right reasons, you will aspire to humble and empty yourself and serve everyone entrusted to you in some way and see them as more important than you, even better than you. It’s at that point that you will drop the ambition or desire to be something you can’t be, or even something you can be which comes with a certain amount of power (like it or not). Many men who were saints took offices of priest, bishop or even pope reluctantly, because they did not seek power and believed those powerful positions would sorely tempt them to pride, and that reluctance made them all the more qualified for those positions.

    As a woman I find there are all kinds of ways for me to be humble and serve and sometimes that happens in the context of a leadership position and sometimes I really do perceive that I’m at the bottom of the proverbial totem pole, and yet I find it doesn’t make that much difference. Why is Mary so influential in the Catholic Church today, even centuries after her life on earth ended? Because she was so humble and obedient and did not strive for one iota of the great honor that God saw fit to bestow on her.

    It would seem to me that as a more or less ambitious and even occasionally power-hungry woman myself, I’m going to get a lot farther by following Mary’s example than by turning my church involvement or desire to be involved into some pathetic and obnoxious little power struggle or personal kingdom building venture. These women are missing so much by focusing on the wrong thing. If I *am* destined to be entrusted with power in a worldly-recognizable sort of way, then I want the real thing (along the lines of St. Catherine of Sienna being able to successfully influence the Pope to move from Avignon to Rome), not some cheap and worthless substitute like a loud but meaningless soapbox and a bunch of people figuratively patting me on the back and calling me a hero or kick-ass woman because I accomplished the “fantastic and rare” feat of being verbally abusive towards or about others who probably were just trying to care for my soul.

    • Subsistent

      In this connexion, in Rome on March 2, 2006, Pope Benedict responding to a question-comment said that “at a charismatic level, women do so much, I would dare to say, for the government of the Church, …. I would say that this charismatic sector is undoubtedly distinguished by [i.e., from] the ministerial sector in the strict sense of the term, but it is a true and deep participation in the government of the Church.”
      Benedict continued: “How could we imagine the government of the Church without this contribution, which sometimes becomes very visible, such as when St Hildegard [of Bingen] criticized the Bishops or when St Bridget offered recommendations and St Catherine of Siena obtained the return of the Popes to Rome? It has always been a crucial factor without which the Church cannot survive.” (The Vatican’s translation.)

    • http://www.mystagogia.net Kathleen Lundquist

      Spot on, Fernanda. I too had to make a journey from a modern zeitgeist, “Liberte’, Egalite’, Fraternite’”- sort of mindset toward accepting the Church’s teaching. I’ll spare you all the gory details of the spiritual abuses I suffered at the hands of self-ordained Christian leaders, but my experiences taught me that 1) Christ’s authority in the Church on earth is a real thing and 2) it’s most appropriate, even the most humane thing, for that authority to be exercised through a limited all-male priesthood. The key for me was learning an important difference between the baptismal priesthood and the ordained priesthood: The ordained priest exercises the authority of an office, a structural thing that doesn’t have much at all to do with who he is personally; he inhabits and ‘wears’ it like a uniform, acting with delegated authority. The baptismal priesthood, however, is attached to our personalities and is meant to be exercised in the jurisdiction – not of a parish, but of our daily lives (work, family, school, etc.) Of course, this can include lay parish ministry, but our priesthood, Christ’s priestly ministry into which we were baptized and in which we were confirmed, is meant primarily to be exercised in the world outside the four walls of the church. In fact, the ordained priesthood was established _in order to bring forth and support_ the priesthood of the baptized.

      I’m all but certain these women have no concept whatsoever of the priesthood that Christ has already given them in their baptism – or they’ve hopelessly conflated it with their hunger for power. At the end of the day, it’s just sad.

  • David Norris

    I bet there would have never been a pedophile coverup and crisis had women been i. Charge, I’ll say that.

    • Mark Shea

      Three words: Mary Kay LeTourneau

    • http://fernandapowers.com Fernanda

      I have heard of numerous situations where women covered up for years for their pedophile husbands when it was their own children who were being abused. What makes you think they wouldn’t cover up for the pedophiles for the sake of other people’s children? Granted, many women (and men) do the right thing even when it’s very difficult, but it’s definitely not a guarantee with any particular gender. In other words, women are just as prone to royally screwing up as men are.

    • Albertus M

      Setting aside the question of whether there would have been less abuse of children if priests were all women, why in the world should women in the hierarchy have led to less coverup of crimes committed by their underlings? Is there some biological reason to believe that women are inherently less likely to play political games, cover for their friends, or bury their heads in denial than men in similar positions? I don’t get it.

      • Michael O.

        Because if you say that women are better than men at something, that’s feminism, which is good. But if you say men are better at something than women, that’s sexism, which is bad.

      • S. Murphy

        No one who’s ever been to junior high could think women incapable of office politics. At 12, the impulse to reveal other people’s embarrassing secrets may be stronger than the impulse to cover up one’s friends’ secrets, but add the adult intellect to the junior-high gamesmanship, and yeah, women will do just as badly as men at sacrificing truth and justice for convenience and career.
        They’d never give us TS/ SCI clearances, otherwise. ;-}

    • Hezekiah Garrett

      Don’t know many wives of pedophiles, huh? I know two, they both covered up for their own children’s abuse just to save face.

      Your sexist views don’t stand up in the face of reality.

    • Tim in Cleveland

      I suppose there is some truth to that. If this woman, Sarah Goode, were in charge, the abuse would happen out in the open.

      “For [Sarah] Goode, though, broader, societal change is needed. ‘Adult sexual attraction to children is part of the continuum of human sexuality; it’s not something we can eliminate,’ she says. ‘If we can talk about this rationally – acknowledge that yes, men do get sexually attracted to children, but no, they don’t have to act on it – we can maybe avoid the hysteria. We won’t label paedophiles monsters; it won’t be taboo to see and name what is happening in front of us.’

      ‘We can help keep children safe, Goode argues, ‘by allowing paedophiles to be ordinary members of society, with moral standards like everyone else’, and by ‘respecting and valuing those paedophiles who choose self-restraint’. Only then will men tempted to abuse children ‘be able to be honest about their feelings, and perhaps find people around them who could support them and challenge their behaviour before children get harmed.’”

      http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100196502/guardian-paedophiles-are-ordinary-members-of-society-who-need-moral-support/

      • Jon W

        Actually, her position sounds almost exactly like the our position on adult homosexuality. What if it read like this:

        ‘If we can talk about this rationally – acknowledge that yes, men do get s*xually attracted to other men, but no, they don’t have to act on it – we can maybe avoid the hysteria. We won’t label homos*xuals monsters; it won’t be taboo to see and name what is happening in front of us.’

        And:

        ‘We can help keep marriage safe, popes argue, ‘by allowing homos*xuals to be ordinary members of society, with moral standards like everyone else’, and by ‘respecting and valuing those homos*xuals who choose self-restraint’. Only then will men tempted to abuse themselves or other men ‘be able to be honest about their feelings, and perhaps find people around them who could support them and challenge their behaviour before they, other men, families, and society get harmed.’”?

        The only significant difference I can see is that she probably doesn’t believe that adults can harm themselves or each other through mutually consensual s*xual activity while we do. I didn’t read the link you provided, but, frankly, I find the position sketched in what you quoted to be rather compelling.

        (And I apologize for the censoring. I’m trying to get this post past the stupid spam filter.)

    • dpt

      Here in the Bay Area, we had a local school principal, a woman, found guilty for not reporting a suspected abuse of a student by a teacher. Not sure what to make of your point David.

    • Rosemarie

      +J.M.J+

      Part of me almost feels flattered by this latest mutation of the “Women are more virtuous than men” meme. (another common mutation is: “If women ran the world there would be no war.” Riiiiiight.) Yet we of the fairer sex are sinners, too, so I have to say, “Thank you for the kind sentiments, but sadly it’s not so.”

  • Stephen J.

    As always, the logical question which no women’s ordination advocate I’ve ever read has answered is:

    “If you believe that the Church is so far removed from Christ’s Message and the Holy Spirit’s guidance that it has, *for its entire history*, categorically and unjustly denied the opportunity to serve God through Holy Orders to half the human race — that it is *capable* of being so catastrophically mistaken about the nature and proper use of one of the *Sacraments*, a fundamental touchstone of its definition of itself *as* a Church — why would you *want* to be ordained to such a Church? If the Church is wrong about how to define its own priesthood, what else is it likely to be wrong about, and why seek ordination therein at all if you aren’t sure which teachings are ‘right’ and which aren’t? Or do you really think that the *one* thing the Church got wrong is the one thing that, so conveniently, happens to be the obstacle to your personal wish-fulfillment fantasy of prestige and privilege?”

    It’s an eat-your-cake-and-still-have-it pursuit: these women want to be ordained so they can gain the influence necessary to make the Church and the priesthood into the thing they really want to be ordained to in the first place, because that’s easier and less frightening than striking out on one’s own and founding a new group. Martin Luther and John Calvin would be disgusted with these ladies.

    • http://fernandapowers.com Fernanda

      Nah, the Church got it wrong on contraception too, which is why *they* need to be ordained to change it.

      Seriously, though, that is an excellent point :-)

  • victor

    It’s not a perfect mashup at all, but I think I managed to make the Ordain a Lady video a bit more watchable… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9gPkd7gtLE

  • ginger

    I was principally amazed at the disrespect that pervades this video, from “Don’t listen to St. Paul, ‘cuz I can lead the way.” to “A pope in a hat”. Wow. I think that illustrates what kind of priests the women who made this video would be. I think that the Bible shows many women being leading the way as disciples and evangelists. God can use us all according to His gifts, we don’t need to be in a particular club.

    • http://www.usmc.mil S. Murphy

      Yeah, I thought making fun of the office you apparently aspire to was a little odd…

  • kath

    I think we should talk about pants.

  • http://redcardigan.blogspot.com/ Erin Manning

    I’m just jealous that nobody will make a video out of MY old Women’s Ordination song, set to a Muppets ™ classic:
    http://redcardigan.blogspot.com/2013/01/repost-and-request.html

    ;)

  • Gordon Zaft

    Apparently I’m the only one geeky enough to point out that Rebecca Black sang “Friday”. “Call Me Maybe” on which this is (very loosely) based is by Carly Rae Jepsen.

    • Xpat

      You’re not the only person to point it out (see above) but I cannot properly assess our relative geekiness; I may have pointed it out for non-geeky reasons . . .

      • Hezekiah Garrett

        Nope, Xpat, ontologically impossible.

  • Fr. Christopher

    It is also important to respond to the “claim” that a wonderful Saint, a Doctor of the Church herself wanted to be a priest, which is untrue. Her statement was essentially discussing all the amazing vocations and callings that people undergo suffering, that is denying-them-selves out of love for Christ. The absolute twisted notion that a calling is a matter of what we “want” is nothing more than the fruit of a spirituality that seeks to serve itself which is antithetical to the Gospel in all its substance, and thereby most certainly CONTRADICTS St. Paul who infallibly wrote what is innarently part of Sacred Scripture. St. Therese, the little flower was simply loving all the vocations and wishing in a sort of humble way, how she could do everything all at once to glorify God. She however knew this was impossible, but it was simply her love for Christ bubbling over, something I DO NOT HEAR from many Catholics today. This is what should be bragged and shouted from the roof-tops. Lets deny ourselves in extreme ways for the glory of God.

    Fr. C, a priest preaching to himself and letting others hear it.

    Pax

  • The Next to Last Samurai

    I wonder why each girl in the line of background dancers is doing a different dance?

  • The Next to Last Samurai

    And I also wonder, if you feel you need a priestess to minister to your spiritual needs, why not just join the Episcopal church? Wouldn’t that be easier than annoying the Catholics?

  • http://thecrawfordfamily.net/blog Ken Crawford

    It occurred to me about a half hour after watching this that they never make an argument for why women should be ordained other than “this is crazy” (which isn’t really an argument) and that they’ve “heard a call from God” (quotes not for a lyrical reference but in the scare quotes sense).

    Which seems like a very American way of thinking about a call. I’ve had conversations with many Protestants who throw around being called by God in a very casual and definitive sense as if calls from God are both blatantly obvious and a daily occurrence, when in practice it takes much discernment, with the guidance of the Church, to really discern the will of God.

    So I’m curious, is there much of a push for Women’s ordination outside of the US?

    Going further, I’m currently early in the application process to become a Deacon, and they make it QUITE CLEAR, that whether or not I believe I have a call to the diaconate, they’ll be making the decision as to whether I’ll be admitted to the program and eventually ordained. These ladies seriously misjudge things if they think that they’re the only ones who feel they have a call but are eventually rejected by God’s Church. Happens to men all the time. Happened to a friend of mine when he was nearly completed with the seminary.

    We have to be open to the will of God, not just our own will’s masquerading as God’s will.

  • A.M.

    I, for one, cannot wait for the REAL feminism movement to begin. That is, the one where women make an outright militant effort to be as WOMANLY as possible, instead of just trying to be men of a different physical model. Society has told women for about the last hundred years (a little more actually) now that 1) men and women are equal… yet 2) in order to prove it, they must essentially become as close to being men as possible, mustaches aside. Anyone who thinks that makes any sort of sense needs to think about it a little longer.

    Women and men already were equal, before the offer to become men came along. Equal, yes… but also different. Equal and different are two different things, just as equal in value and equal as -fill in the occupation- … are also two different things. If a building is on fire, and there’s a 350 pound man loosing consciousness in the room on the third story while the stairs have collapsed, that man had better pray that the fire department is at least willing to admit that difference in that moment, because if they send a 100 pound half-anorexic woman up there… that man is DOOMED.
    But society stubbornly insists that for the honor of woman, that man should burn to death, so the woman “isn’t denied the right of being the one to go up the ladder sometimes.”

    We’ve had a century of girls growing up being told (by overwhelming insinuations, if nothing else) that they are worthless and disgraceful unless they want to be as much like men in every possible way, as they can manage to be. If they actually want to be girls instead, they are treated as disgraceful or inferior… if not downright disgusting. And what is the result? Empty cradles, full dumpsters behind abortion clinics, lots of women with iron-hard, masculine faces, bad tempers and attitudes, and a world of men who increasingly prefer men to women in more-than-platonic relationships.

    Hooray for the brave women who are leading the charge in the other direction… toward women actually being women, and showing the beauty, strength and virtues of womanhood bravely in a world that will bubble over with seething hatred at the very sight of a truly womanly woman. The sooner girls get to know that they don’t have to be men to be worth anything, the better! The Blessed Virgin was the most womanly woman there ever was… and there is not now, nor will there ever be, any greater human being in the whole history or future of mankind, after Our Lord’s own Humanity, than her. And any woman who thinks she needs to be more manly to be better, has clearly forgotten it.

    God made them male and female. If there was never supposed to be any difference between them beyond the differences that facilitate procreation, I’m certain He would have given us all the same, naturally stronger physique, the same manner of looking at the world, the same way of having social relationships, approximately the same emotional makeup, etc.. It would, after all, be a lot easier for the women to be exactly like men if the women basically already were! But evidently, Our Lord did not intend for them to differ only and exclusively for the sake of propagation of the species. And when the world stops trying to forget it, we’ll probably see a lot less of the chronic suffering so many girls and women endure trying to live like the worst kind of men, because that’s what society is demanding of them.

    I do feel sorry for all of the young women who have that “conversion moment” when they realize, 20 or 30 (or more) years into life, that they’ve not only been sold a very bad and poisonous way of life, but that they have effectively lost any sense or shred of femininity because of it. There’s nothing like waking up one day with the realization that you’ve been robbed of something very, very precious, that, even if you try for the rest of your life, you know it will be harder than heck ever to get back again, if you can ever get it back at all. Perhaps worse is knowing it was lost because of a deception one fell for under the pretext of some happy ending. But I also don’t believe it’s hopeless (there are plenty of women “waking up” and determined to go the other way), and I hope ever more young women find the courage to be who they were born to be, and to live a fully feminine life, in respect to God’s design of them, and in defiance of all the women out there who hate their own womanhood (eg, want to be what amounts to men instead), and demand all other women do the same.

    The ordination of women is just the rebellion against God and His designs, by women who are too proud (or too greatly deceived) to submit to, obey or defer to anyone, for any reason, or to be told ‘no’ about anything. (And considering that obedience, ability and willingness to defer to others, and submission are just as important even for men … such as in the military… they’re not even aiming to be GOOD men!)

    • The Next to Last Samurai

      I’ve noticed this too–feminists all seem to be stuck in the fictional America of the ’50′s, where Dad carried a briefcase to some glamorous job and struggled up the promotion food chain and probably had a few girlfriends on the side. They not only want to be bad men rather than good women, they want to be men who, if they ever existed at all, have been gone for half a century. I think that, in a literal sense, feminists need to grow up.

    • sibyl

      A.M. — I’m with you. Let’s get going on the real feminism. You know that Psalm that says, “Your wife shall be like a fruitful vine within the recesses of your house, and your children, like olive plants, around your table”? There is amazing peace and satisfaction in being a fruitful vine. God has greatly blessed me.

    • Bryan

      This lady emphasizes the same point you’re making quite eloquently:

      http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2012-1131-hertz-housewife-as-guerrilla.htm

      [CAUTION: the above article is from one of those "extreme, reactionary zealot" groups]

  • http://paxchristirochester.blogspot.com/ leefstrong

    Who needs satire when they produce efforts like this themselves!

    • Andy, Bad Person

      I’m actually struggling with this. I just can’t believe it’s not satire. I know it’s actually on the Women’s Ordination Conference Facebook page, and I know there’s a story that goes with it. It just can’t possibly be real. My brain hurts thinking that this could be serious.

  • Joseph

    Wow. This is retarded irrespective of the theme. They could have at least gotten someone whose voice didn’t sound like she had a marble stuck in her throat. This is like some really bad high school production.

  • http://pavelspoetry.com Pavel Chichikov

    It occurred to me at Mass today that one qualification for the priesthood is that you should be willing if necessary to die in the most horrible way you can imagine in the defense of the Faith. You may have to.

    Some of the Japanese martyrs were hung face down over a cesspit. In the SU during the purges some people were beaten with red-hot metal rods.

    In a much milder case, a priest-relative of ours had a gun held to his head by a Mexican cop when he objected to the way the guy was acting towards a nun. Members of his order have been shot and killed in the Philippines for defending the poor. They weren’t wearing neat vestments either, because those are awkward to wear while on a motorcycle.

  • ChrisB

    I made it to 50 seconds. I just am very sensitive about people embarrassing themselves.

    • Andy, Bad Person

      Me too. I even find it difficult to watch movies and TV shows when a character obliviously gets into a humiliating situation. This is hard to take.

  • Mike Harrison

    “Comments are disabled for this video.” Gee, what a surprise …

  • SouthCoast

    Ach! Just had an Airplane 2 moment. “If the space program were run by vegetarian women instead of flesh-eating men…” (My sentiments being with the woman doing the sign-language translation in that scene!)


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X