B.C. woman to be ordained Catholic priest
The irony of it all: a woman’s “ordination” in international waters so that no diocese has jurisdiction. She must be looking for a Vatican smackdown instead of a diocesan smackdown.
And a very special quote:
She said she is willing to conduct some church rites with followers, but doesn’t expect to be invited to preach sermons at local churches.
I wonder if she’ll try to do baptisms in international waters?
(I’d be remiss if I didn’t comment that the article is amazingly one-sided, starting with the title.)
The public has a right to know. Who is the bishop who will ordain her? Surround the boat with photographers and identify the man. His flock does not deserve his secret apostasy.
I think you can be there’s no bishop “ordaining” her. It’s probably a self-service “ordination”
The media- bias in calling a non-ordination an ordination is not exclusive to the Canadian Press. The Catholic News Service in the U.S. also reffered to this charade as an “ordination” implying it was somehow creating a woman priest. When I sent them an e-mail strongly objecting to their biased reporting, I got a nasty reply.
I’d love to see the nasty reply… please post here or send to me at js -@- tenor.com
It turns out that trying to muddy the jurisdictional waters by staying off land does nothing for these gals. The bishop of her place of residence can apply any necessary penalty, as happened in the last case a few weeks ago in Europe.
By the way, the “bishops” involved are not actual Catholic bishops, so this isn’t a case of our dissenters going off the deep end.
These persons attempting to confer holy orders are men — and now women — claiming to have obtained episcopal consecration that traces back historically to “old Catholic” sources.
Incidentally, I’m wondering how many scare quotes ought to be added to that headline:
B.C. woman to be “ordained” “Catholic” “priest”
looks about right — and that’s going easy on it.
RC – I’m sure the “ordinati” would object to being called “gals.” They probably wouldn’t like “broads” or “chicks” either.
So let’s just call them misguided, shall we?
If the bishops are not Catholic, then why are they secret? Either they are Catholic and thus should be subject to discipline or a fraud is being perpetrated on the public and the media is going along with it.
You’re right, TML; I didn’t read the article closely enough.
I was thinking of the first prominent case in Austria, when the rites were conducted by an “independent” bishop from Argentina claiming orders from an old Catholic source; then some of the women he allegedly “consecrated” joined in conducting more recent ceremonies.
The women have been describing themselves and that Argentine guy inaccurately as “Catholic priests” and “bishops”, so it’s hard to go by what they say: the secret “Catholic bishops” in the upcoming ceremony may be just some more like-minded fantasists and sectarians (more likely, IMO) or might possibly be some actual Catholic bishops.
it wouldn’t surprise me if the dames are stretching the truth.
The irony: if you won’t obey the church, why does it matter if a bishop does the “ordaining?” The “ordination” is invalid because the matter is invalid.
I’m curious if this woman is a nun, or if she’s a lesbian, or a bi-sexual. For some reason the only woman I see pushing for this are one of the above.
The local “Franciscan” community got started in a similar way. After Sister Alfred and her followers were denied permission in two different diocese to have their convent, they moved out onto the frontier, where there was no church law, and built there.
Now they are in very hot water over allegations of lesbian sexual abuse of girls.