The Charge Of The Barking Cats

Youthful cats trying to bark. Source: "Catholic WomenPriests" (sic)

I have written already about the strange idea (entertained even by some people who, for reasons unknown to yours truly, define themselves as “Catholic”) that a cat should be allowed to bark or, if you want to put it more directly, that a woman should be allowed to be priest.

The very simple fact that a woman cannot be a priest more than a cat can bark (to become a priest it is necessary to be a male in the first place; to bark it is necessary to be a dog – oh well, a canidae – in the  first place) appears to elude the ladies (of both sexes) who fight such an heroic battle against common sense and ridicule.

In the last days we had another example of this astonishing forma mentis, when a rather routine like announcement from the Vatican has been attacked again by feminists fringes looking for the usual self victimhood festival.

The Vatican has decided to promote the canonical crime of attempted ordination of a woman (attempted, mind: you can’t ordain a woman as priest more than you can make a cat bark) to the exclusive rank of the delicta graviora, which are the most serious category of canonical crime and attract, inter alia, exclusive Vatican competence.

The feminists reason that if you decide that a crime involving women should be considered with more severity, you are attacking women. One must love the logic. It is as if those deluded women attempting to obtain “ordination” were punished because born women, rather than because they offend a sacrament. The harsher rules apply, by the way, to both sexes, so that the argument of the feminists (of both sexes) that the Church is persecuting the foemina diaboli so dear to their imagination is, as always, devoid of any logic.

Logic or no logic, these news are always worth reading because they provide some very nice entertainment in these distressing times. For example, it may make your day to know that there are people around calling themselves “Roman Catholic WomenPriests” (last one is only one word I think; more progressive, you know……) and that these people demand that the Church “affirm women’s full equality in the Church, including priestly ministry”. I can’t wait for the demand that the Evangelists be referred to as St. Lucia, St. Joan, etc.

Incidentally, the women also complain because the Church dares to mention them in a document also dealing with paedophile priests. Here we see the height of delusion and paranoia. It is as if the paedophile priest issue were highly radioactive: if the Vatican wants to mention it, well of course no mention of women must be made in the same document… Document they haven’t read, because if they had they’d have discovered that it also deals with several other canonical crimes (simulated celebration of the Eucharist, say).

God forgive the poor deluded old girls. They are obviously pagan blasphemers worshipping the god of feminism. A god showing the signs of its age, as do the worshippers themselves.
Still, the infinite mercy of God might reach out, we are told, even to them.

I’ll remember them in my Fatima prayers. And plead for insanity on their behalf.

Mundabor

About these ads

Posted on July 21, 2010, in Catholicism, Dissent and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 9 Comments.

  1. I’m glad you’re accepting comments, and not just so that I can make the following point, which was the first thing which occurred to me when I saw this post:

    When I was a lad there was a popular joke in bad taste which began “how do you make a cat go ‘woof’?”

  2. Well, should I ask? ;)

  3. Something to do with petrol and a match.

  4. Mundabor — You may have been half-serious about the ‘pagan blasphemers’ bit, but I have read where some ‘wimmin’ nuns (the feminista contingent) enjoy their tarot cards, pentagrams and things wiccan.

    What I don’t understand about these priestesses is that if they wish to be ordained, why don’t they become Anglican? They don’t believe in the authority of the Magisterium, anyway (if they did, they wouldn’t wish to be priests), so why not just leave? Maybe they think they have a point to make. Sad, really.

    • Churchmouse,
      about the “pagan blasphemers”, I think it is pagan enough to think that there can be anything as a priestess. The canaanites, the amalechites, all those people ending in “ites” had priestesses. The Greek had priestesses. The Romans had priestesses. Only the Jews hadn’t. But yes if someone think that Jesus got it wrong when he only chose males as Apostles I think it is only a matter of time before they start believing in cat’s innards or such like.

      As to your second question, I’d say the reasons why these people do not become Anglicans are the following: 1) they are nutcases and even the Anglicans would see that. 2) They’d had to admit that they were wrong being Catholic. This is not how these people’s minds work. 3) Conversion wouldn’t actually guarantee that they are accepted into a seminary and become, one day, Anglican “priestesses”. Making her own “church”, in their mind, does.

  5. Gee, Mundabor, I shall give your second paragraph there some serious thought. Reason 1 I can see. Reasons 2 and 3, I can’t quite get my head around, although I suspect you’re right. There is some weird stuff that goes on in Episcopal seminaries in the US — services with God as ‘She’, and the head of the one in Cambridge, MA, has gone on record as saying that abortionists are ‘saints’. But, you will have read about that on Damian’s blog last year.

    Reason 2 gives me the biggest problem because these women aren’t even Catholic. They’re heretics. They do not obey the teachings of the Church or Scripture. ‘This is not how these people’s minds work’ — agree, and because my mind doesn’t work like that, I’m having problems following their train of thought. Oh, well.

    • yes Churchmouse, they are heretics but they think (or they say) that they are Catholics. A lot of people believe that they are Napoleon. They obviously aren’t, but this is not the way they think.

      I do understand that there are absolute madmen (and madwomen) among the heretics, but everyone of these positions come with money; or they have to be elected; not so easy, there’d be ten or twenty nutcases for every available “job” and nineteen out of twenty would remain without the ego satisfaction they crave. The way they do it, they can delude themselves that they are all “priestesses”.
      It reminds me of when we were children and played army: we were all officials! ;)

  6. Thanks for the explanation — I understand now. :)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,031 other followers

%d bloggers like this: