New norms are much more than a PR disaster

It is truly sad that the Vatican oligarchs succeed in equating violent imMORAL
behavior with a traditional teaching of the Church which can be changed with a proper mandate. It is NOT dogmatic theology. I do not believe that even in the deepest recesses of the moral conscience of the aggregate Vatican personnel can they believe that child sexual abuse can be re-evaluated and be made morally acceptable. At least, I hope not. They seem to have become close in not taking action against Bishops, Cardinals, Popes who were conspirators or "complicitors" by not taking action other than move the problem around.

How long do we have to accept, justify, rationalize the behavior of intelligent but stupid leaders within the Church. I do not know if I would have passed John Allen's "Vatican Literacy" quiz, but I have decided again to decry the lunacy of the Vatican officials.

So well expressed. No rancor, hate, demeaning of others, demands for rights, "my way or the highway." Just seeing clearly into the heart of the matter from a highter perspective. This gives me hope for the younger generation. Thank you.

The Church didn't declare them equally grave. Gravioribus is third plural, ablative, comparative. That is, the delicts dealt with in the normae de gravioribus delictis are simply graver than other delicts. No claim is made about their relative gravity.

Likewise, woman aren't guilty of any delicts by being women. They're guilty if they try to get ordained. If you believe that not believing that women can be ordained is the same as saying that God can't work through women and that women defile the Eucharist, I pity you. If you really believe that the only way to allow God to act to God's fullest potential in a woman is to ordain her, I pity you.

Such clericalism and clericalists have no business in the Catholic Church.

I am agree with you and also what about all those nun that were rape by them!

So after all that, are you intent or leaving the Catholic Church or not?

Breakaway groups that ordain women, like Spiritus Christi, the Ecumenical Catholic Communion, and Roman Catholic Womenpriests, though respected by many reformers, have a compromised view in the eyes of some because they did not "stay in the church and fight."

Very astute Jamie, as what follows it. I mean the bit about "what have we really got to lose?"

For a case-in-point you have to look no further than the pages of NCR. Oh, womenpriests get some coverage--- especially when a prominant MALE priest gets excommunicated for participating in an ordination (hmmmm).

But Tom Roberts' otherwise-excellent "Emerging Church" series is now up to the 24th in the series according to his latest entry. He has not, as far as I know, covered any of the vibrant, growing, Catholic-but-not-Roman parishes that have been under way for years, now.

One earlier article covered IEC's-- but none have covered parishes like
the Christ Hope community in the Pittsburgh area, or the numerous affiliates
of the Ecumenical Catholic Communion?

It is not just the existence of such communities that merit coverage; it is the theological issues such as Apostolic Succession which also should be delved into.

One must ask "why?" Is the NCR afraid of the consequences of elevating the visibility of such "rebels?" Or are the NCR staff still stuck where many of us were in 1980 and 1990, "if we just stick around and wait, Rome will come around?"

I fail to see how one can talk about the "emerging Church" without including those who choose to "emerge" from affiliation with Rome without necessarily affiliating with existing Protestant denominations.

As a woman, I am outraged that women think so little of me and my fellow parishoners when they become "ordained". It shows that we do not value ourselves. It is the opposite of what you and they are fighting for. In being defiant, you mock and in mocking you expose yourselves as only caring about self, gender and your rights. It's not about service or calling, it is about ego, self-gratification and power. All of these are the very attributes thrown at the men. The very act of defiance shows we don't know what we are talking about or doing - it's frankly, stupid.

This article hurts to read. The lack of understanding of theology and Church history is easy to see throughout. Before you criticize, you need to understand the arguments from within. I see you have done very little reading on the teachings of Theology of the Body, the book Love and Responsibility, the understanding of masculinity and feminity. If the research was done, you would see the Church has a very good, well thought out, explanation to the different-but complementary-abilities between the sexes.

Unfortunately, people who like to tear down its understanding of sexuality rarely have done the research to understand it.

Moreover, in a Church that believes the ordination of women is an "impossibility," and believes that it receives its teachings from Christ and the through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, it makes sense that it would be a "grave crime" to go against this teaching.

NCR needs to do a much better job of displaying the true Catholic faith or, at the very least voicing both sides, otherwise it should title itself what it is-A Protestant Newspaper.

I love that first sentence in your last paragraph. I think too many churches (Roman Catholic included) have gotten the idea that they can control when, where, how, and in whom God can work, although the bible and our history is full of evidence that God's work transcends our ideas of when, where, how, and in whom. How on earth can we possibly be so confident that all women are excluded by God from ordained ministry on the basis of being women? Especially when yesterday we celebrated the feast of St. Mary Magdalene, the first recorded person to see the risen Christ; although she was a woman and now supposedly outside of God's use, Christ did not hide himself from her and she could go on to spread the good news of the resurrection.

A week ago Sunday, I attended Eucharist at St. Finn Barr in Cork, Ireland. I wasn't sure if it was a Catholic Church, but it seemed exactly the same. I partook, but Bob did not. Too much Brother Rice High School, perhaps.
The lady greeters at the door, welcomed Bob and me so much, and I had forgotten that the Anglicans, which they were, had just allowed women to be bishops. Maybe that was why they were so joyous. Maybe that was why 500 of their priests left to join our Catholic Church. Weird, weird, weird. Hasn't it been 2,000 years since Our Lord told us he had much more to tell us, but we weren't ready for it yet? "How long, oh Lord? How,long?", until we're ready? It seems a lot of us are ready. It's a good thing. Too much Martha Stewart, perhaps.
Didn't everybody just love Bishop Gumbleton's latest The Peace Pulpit column for the gospel, ". . .and Mary was welcomed?" I did.
I also liked how a call for extending the statute of limitations for sex-abuse claims is being made by the curia, as Bishop Gumbleton suggested long ago. Someday Ms. Manson's call for equality will be called for by the curia as well. It's happening now, and I'm not even dead yet. Yeah.

God does work through the body of women....he worked through Mary....and he still works through women, it's just that the Vatican hierarchy doesn't seem to see it. Thanks for this very good article that looks at women issues more globally and beyond the Roman Catholic church. Having spent most of my life in middle and upper middle class parishes on the East Coast, the plight of women in the world rarely came up. Not until I pursued my bachelor degree as a non traditional student at a local Jesuit university in Sociology did I learn about the abortion of female Chinese babies because of the Chinese one child policy. The Chinese tradition of valuing male babies more became very problematic. I see the clerical hierarchical Vatican tradition of the male only priesthood as problematic as that of the Chinese tradition of valuing males. Since change comes to the Roman Catholic Church at less than a snail's pace, and since I don't want to be among all the previous women who have said "not in my life time" I have left the church and am looking for a breakaway group of women who are already ordained.

Another article that maintains a sense of coherence yet is still written while Ms. Manson vacations in lala-land.

Let us not forget that the teaching on female "ordination" is infallible -- Pope J.P. II spoke definitively (but not ex cathedra) in 1994 in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, and the CDF confirmed the infallibility of the doctrine as part of the deposit of faith through the universal and ordinary Magisterium (versus the aforementioned potential instance of Papal infallibility). At least Ms. Manson realizes that the Church is no longer a place that supports heretical and deeply misguided views.

Now, to comment directly on the article.

"the church's statements only reinforce the idea that female bodies are not of equal value in the eyes of God, that they do not hold the same potential to be a sacred vessel of the life of God in our world. "

The Church does believe that, and the fact that the institution of the Church is not capitalized here reflects the fact that it has already been discarded as something not worthwhile, so I don't know why Ms. Manson would bother changing it instead of going someplace where she can feel a sense of vacuous spiritual fulfillment. Furthermore, she is arbitrarily and narrowly defining the role of women (much as she claims the Church does).

"Not only can God not work through the body of a woman, now, it seems, women's bodies actually defile the Eucharist."

What a statement.

Ms. Manson, do you realize that you have literally insulted every woman who is Catholic on this planet, whether she supports attempted female ordination or not? You, here, demonstrate a total lack of respect for faithful female religious and faithful female laity, whether they are involved in ministry in the Church or simply attempt to live a life honoring God.

And nowhere does it state that women's bodies defile the Eucharist. Nowhere. Women's ordination is not a condemnation of women's bodies. That logic is simply false.

"But for those women struggling to worship or work in the Catholic church, these latest norms demonstrate unequivocally a painful truth: The church can be, and often is, a very toxic place for women."

It also can be a wonderfully beneficial place for women in the West, many of whom support the Church's position.

For those reading this post (if there are any), please note the continued lack of capitalization in the institutional Church.

"Why shouldn't Catholic women allow God to act to God's fullest potential in them?"

They do. God's fullest potential is NEVER attempted female priesthood BY DEFINITION of God's fullest potential. If you seriously disagree with this, start attending one of the services offered by the fake women "priests" and stop attending your regular parish.

"I know many liberal Catholics who will occasionally attend Masses led by ordained Catholic women,"

No you don't. Because there is literally no such thing as an ordained Catholic woman. It doesn't exist. It's immaterial. Sort of like the validity of your argument.

"In the Roman Catholic church, they have no status and no potential to work in a church environment that will courageously and creatively supportive their callings to and gifts for ministry"

Lies. I hope that Ms. Manson realizes that the Church not supporting her prolonged bout of psychosis is not the same as the Church violating the sanctity of their bodies or whatever the claim is. It's simply recognizing that men and women are different. The "callings to and gifts for ministry" I see every day, with my mother who supports the Catholic stance yet finds fulfillment as director of liturgy at our parish.

"These communities can begin to model now what may very well be the life-giving future of the church."

It will not be. They will likely die out, much like fad-based Protestant sects (like extreme Pentacostalism, which only lasts one or two generations).

"The Vatican's new norms are only proof that movements that empower women to answer God's call are being perceived as viable threats to an institution desperate not to lose control over people who are too educated and faithful to be controlled."

Hardly. "Too faithful?" To what? To what YOU think is right? To your OWN beliefs? I thought Catholicism was about something greater than ourselves.

I am happy to see advocacy for intellectual honesty -- I hope that people like Ms. Manson live faithfully, which will require them to change their views to at least some degree. But until they do, it is nice to see that they are being true to themselves and leaving the Church in favor of whatever invalid sects they want. At least then they will not seek to undermine the Church anymore.