Trump World Grab-Bag--A Collection

Sunday, July 18, 2010

Ordaining Women on a Par with Pedophilia.



As if to reinforce the message of the book I reviewed in my previous post--this:

Vatican: Ordination of Women a Grave Crime

Abuse victims said the rules are little more than administrative housekeeping since they made few substantive changes to current practice, and what is needed are bold new rules to punish bishops who shield pedophiles.

Women's ordination groups criticized the new rules because they included the attempted ordination of women as a "grave crime" subject to the same set of procedures and punishments meted out for sex abuse.

The rules, which cover the canonical procedures and penalties for the most serious sacramental and moral crimes, were issued as the Vatican confronts one of the worst scandals in recent history: revelations of hundreds of new cases of priests who raped and sodomized children, bishops who covered up for them, and Vatican officials who stood by passively for decades.

In 2003, the Vatican streamlined its 2001 procedures for disciplining abusive priests, allowing them to be defrocked without a lengthy canonical trial if the evidence against them was overwhelming. The rules issued Thursday codified those procedures into church law.


Things I feel I should point out: the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, from which Cardinal Ratzinger was elevated, is the modern-day evolution of the Inquisition. You can Google it. Thus, his fixation on the rules. But I fail to see how the ordination of women is in practice equivalent to the cover-up of the abuse of children.

What is the worst that happens if women are treated as priests? They are considered equals? They are seen as--also human? Also capable of invoking the Divine? How is this in any way the equivalent of the abuse of children, which violates the children's personhood and their choice of how to use their bodies, and affects their relationships with other people later in life? It is absurd to consider these things equivalent.

No comments: