Two Seperate Questions Entirely
According to a story in the Ottawa Citizen a group of nine women (including one Canadian) are going to be ordained as Roman Catholic priests on the 25th, Vinny did a post on this a while back and ya know…. I pretty well gotta agree with him. Women, under current Catholic structure and convention, cannot be ordained… they can go through the motions, they can follow the rituals, and they can call themselves Priest[esses?], but unless they follow the training, pass the tests, and are recognized by the governing body, it’s just a word. Now I’m sure that we could have a great debate here about whether or not women should be ordained, and in my opinion I see no reason why they should not, but that’s a separate question all on its’ own ain’t it?
I can see all the head scratching a go’en on now, everybody wondering where ‘ole stageleft is going with this one, yer probably think’en me and balbulican have been into the home made honey mead again - agreeing with the Catholic church [and a rightie] in the same post… but hear me out, there is in fact logic to this.
Regular readers are no doubt aware that I’m not exactly what you could call a stranger to the Pagan community, and I see the same damned thing there; time and time again, and quite frankly it p1$$3$ me off to no end. Somebody wants to be a Druid, so they read some lore, meet with other people who want to be Druids, dance naked around a bonfire a few times a year [I still don't know where that part came from], and poof, there they are.. insta-druids, in the flesh. Bards - same thing. High Priestesses - pretty much the same thing. Shamans - yup. It don’t seem to matter, everybody can be what they want to be. Well, what if I decided I wanted to be a doctor, or a lawyer, captain of the Love Boat, or an electrician? Would calling myself something make it so? Please don’t tell me it’s not the same thing - because it is. The simple fact of the matter is that people just can’t go around calling themselves this, that, or the other thing just because they want to, or just because it feels right… saying something is does not make it so, and as much as that may get a few people’s knickers tied up in knots so tight they can’t breath [or walk properly] that is the way things are and if you give it even passing thought you’ll see that.
If these women want to be Priestesses[?] then I say go for it. I think they should start a new Christian sect, lay down the quidelines, the rules, the conventions, and the procedures…… go gather some followers, and be a Priestess, be the best damned Priestesses in what ever they call their sect that they can - but don’t do it in some other sects name and do not try and scoop somebody elses titles in some misguided effort to validate what’s happening because that only cheapens everything.
Amen, Brother.
Very well-said.
Much as it pains me, I have to disagress with my distinguished colleagues, Messrs. Stateleft and Vinny. Partly.
I agree that, having gone through this ceremony, these women will not be priests of the Roman Catholic Church. Religions, as my colleagues have pointed out, have the right to define terms of reference for their memebership.
However, I don’t think these women are under any illusions that ordination will actually make them priests. This is an act of political theatre.
The British suffragettes who showed up at polling stations demanding to register didn’t really expect to be allowed to vote. The gay activists in the seventies who applied for marriage licenses didn’t expect to receive them, and those who found gay clerics willing to perform the ceremony didn’t really expect the law or society to recognize their marriage. These were public gestures, intended to draw public and media attention to a perceived inequity.
That’s what these women are actually doing: hoping people will scratch their heads, and say “Why not?”
It will be interesting to see if they try to practise as Priest(esses). Balb nails it really, this act is more for show than anything. Should they start performing mass or administering the sacraments then we will be closer to the scenario that you describe SL.
A Catholic priest, like a doctor, or a lawyer, or an mechanic, is supposed to be a trained professional. I know, for example, people who are really good with small engines - they can take them apart, find out what’s wrong with them, sometimes fabricate the necessary parts (out of the strangest of things) to make the engine run, put it all back together, and the thing will run like a top… but as good as they are if they were to hang a sign outside their garage that said mechanic would that make them one?
Protesting against injustice and inequity is great, but is calling yourself something you ain’t protest? Is saying you are something that you are not a form of protest? Or is a rose by any other name not really a rose?
Politics and religion do seem to result in strange bed fellows don’t they?
A profession is about skills, knowledge, and certification. Given that women are serving at the highest levels of ministry in other Christian churches, I don’t think anyone doubts that women could master the body of skills and knowledge associated with the Catholic priesthood.
Which leaves certification. And the Church has said: Sorry, girls…no balls, no ordination. Nope. They’re not priests. And as I said above, I’m quite sure they know that. The answer to your questions is: yes, it IS protest. A pretty effective one, too, given that at least two of my favourite bloggers are now disseminating news about the issue to their readership.
At the risk of seeming to drag this out how does claiming that you are something that you are not become protest?
Their goals are to promote discussion among Catholics about changes to the Church’s policy on the ordination of women, and hopefully to initiate a long term process to change that policy.
This mock ordination is achieving the first goal already.
I’m really not sure what isn’t clear about that.