Althouse: "Women have much to tell us in today’s society... Women are able to ask questions that men can’t understand."

February 5, 2015

"Women have much to tell us in today’s society... Women are able to ask questions that men can’t understand."

"Sometimes we’re too macho, and we don’t leave enough room for women."

Said the Pope.

100 comments:

Pettifogger said...: My wife all the time asks questions I don't understand, and we're coming up on our 45th anniversary.; 2/5/15, 9:19 PM
traditionalguy said...: This Pope is political first, and second and third. Is he the second coming of The King of the Catholics?; 2/5/15, 9:24 PM
furious_a said...: As long as it doesn't involve spiders or changing tires, they do.; 2/5/15, 9:25 PM
Sebastian said...: Has there ever been a more boring pope?; 2/5/15, 9:30 PM
Anonymous said...: Does this mean women didn't have much to tell us in yesterdays society?; 2/5/15, 9:31 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: I would say that's condescending, patronizing... but I don't know for sure since feminism is so strange these days.; 2/5/15, 9:37 PM
mccullough said...: Condescending; 2/5/15, 9:38 PM
The Godfather said...: "Before [the Pope] spoke, he said a young girl who had been a street child before getting help from an organization that helps abandoned children asked why God allowed bad things — like falling into prostitution and drugs — to happen to her and children like her.
“'She is the only one who has put a question for which there is no answer,' the pope said.”

The POPE doesn't know why bad things happen to good people? Don't they cover that in the first year of seminary?; 2/5/15, 9:39 PM
Chef Mojo said...: Hey Pope!

Way to belabor the obvious! Helluva brainstorm you had there.

Now, put on your Pope hat, grab your Pope stick, get into your Popemobile, drive away and don't come back until you "let" women use birth control (at least) and become priests.; 2/5/15, 9:42 PM
chickelit said...: I wonder what the Pope thinks of the Kardashians. We know he's a Madonna fan.; 2/5/15, 9:42 PM
Greg Hlatky said...: We understand their questions just fine. The Fifth Amendment was designed to save us from giving an honest answer.; 2/5/15, 9:42 PM
The Godfather said...: "The pope has said, on the issue of women becoming priests, 'the church has spoken and says no … That door is closed.'”

So all this stuff about elevating the role of women is nothing but hot air, isn't it?

I don't object to Catholic traditionalists believing that women are meant by God to have a subordinate role in the world, the family, and the church. I don't agree with them, and it's one reason I would never join that denomination, but at least they're sincere. Pope Francis seems to want to make happy talk about women in the Catholic church, without accepting the implications.; 2/5/15, 9:45 PM
Presley Bennett said...: That's comical, right? The head of a church that has fairly strict rules when it comes to the official roles men and women are allowed to hold thinks women need to have a bigger role, be listened to more. I guess that means women will soon be allowed as priests in the Catholic church. Yeah, probably not.

I realize that he speaks to a world-wide audience and his comments aren't necessarily intended for those in first world countries, more secular societies. Women in the West have no problem being heard.; 2/5/15, 9:49 PM
chickelit said...: Women have much to tell us in today’s society... Women are able to ask questions that men can’t understand.

If true, it seems likely that there are questions which men are able to ask that women can't understand.; 2/5/15, 9:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Answer me this, Pope: Angled frazzims squelchwise refungent-- besprinkled, credatory, or both? See, I have much to tell us in today's society too!; 2/5/15, 9:51 PM
Anonymous said...: Whenever I see a sexist comment like this, I just reverse the genders:

"Men have much to tell us in today’s society... Men are able to ask questions that women can’t understand."

"Sometimes we’re too feminine, and we don’t leave enough room for men."

Chance of the Pope saying that: Zero.

To know who rules over you, simply see whom you are not allowed to criticize.; 2/5/15, 9:52 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: "Women have much to tell us in today’s society"

Something somebody would say in the 70s.; 2/5/15, 9:53 PM
ken in tx said...: I don't believe that women can ask questions that men can't. I believe that women can get away with asking questions that men can't. It's female privilege.; 2/5/15, 10:08 PM
Chef Mojo said...: Pope said, "macho."

Dude.; 2/5/15, 10:11 PM
Jay Vogt said...: Anyone want to do a word count by gender?
Do you often see a woman in a car w/o a mobile phone to her ear? Do a rear view mirror survey.; 2/5/15, 10:11 PM
Simon said...: With this turbulent bishop of Rome, it's best not to think too much. Stay out of the hall of mirrors if you can, and if you can't, look at your feet and ignore any distractions from, ahem, the peripheries...; 2/5/15, 10:14 PM
Alex said...: What a fucking moron this Pope is.; 2/5/15, 10:21 PM
Michael K said...: The answer is pretty simple.

Avoid hot crazy women.; 2/5/15, 10:21 PM
Gahrie said...: This Pope is emblematic of why I am no longer a Catholic, or even Christian.; 2/5/15, 10:24 PM
PB said...: The infield fly rule is obvious and we're stunned the question even needs to be asked.; 2/5/15, 10:28 PM
PB said...: If women would shut up and watch the game, they wouldn't have so many obvious questions.; 2/5/15, 10:31 PM
one of the bobs said...: I hope he scored some primo nun-tang for that bit.; 2/5/15, 10:33 PM
Real American said...: Men have a lot to say as well. I'm also pretty sure that men also ask questions that women can't understand, so we're even.; 2/5/15, 10:37 PM
Anonymous said...: The hierarchy is in the '70s as evidenced by the ridiculous initial ruling against women priests by JP2, usually a smart guy, whose reasoning was so wanting it had to be issued from the silly chair. Imo,

Having said that, this is definitely the Pope's weak spot for reasons stated earlier in the thread by several co mentors. His focus is the poor, not women. It works out all right since "the poor" are mostly women.; 2/5/15, 10:39 PM
David said...: "The pope has said, on the issue of women becoming priests, “the church has spoken and says no … That door is closed.”

Though women have knockers, the Chruch's door does not. At least at the women's entrance.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.; 2/5/15, 11:53 PM
Mark said...: Catholic traditionalists believing that women are meant by God to have a subordinate role in the world, the family, and the church

Of course the truth is that neither "Catholic traditionalists" nor the Church herself believe that.

It is all quite tiresome, this extreme obsession with bringing up the question of women's ordination (together with married priests, etc.). Of course, beyond the fact that it betrays an equally tiresome ignorance of (1) the Church, (2) nature of the priesthood, and (3) the nature of woman, those who ask this question again and again pretty obviously do not really care if women were able to be priests or not. They just want another thing to bash the Church with.; 2/6/15, 12:22 AM
Carl said...: I wonder that any person reading this, man or woman, would find it more meaingful than if the Pope had said Good morning. I see the sky is blue and so is the ocean, forsooth. When I am hungry I like to eat, and I suggest you do the same. I also like bananas. Many people do! But some don't. I think it's OK to not insist that everyone eat a banana when he is hungry.

Pope Francis is not the Stephen Hawking of popes, if you catch my drift. More like the Jesse Ventura.; 2/6/15, 12:49 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: I think he is saying women are something more than sex bags.

I thought the jury was still out on that one.

I am Laslo.; 2/6/15, 1:06 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: Replace every use of the word 'women' with 'The Kardsahians' and see if it holds up.

Also: Bruce Jenner, now.

I am Laslo.; 2/6/15, 1:08 AM
buwaya said...: He said this in the Philippines, which is a funny place to do it.
Society there is really a matriarchy.
Takes some time to figure it out, for a foreigner, but its so.
American women could take lessons. It does not take all this two-career juggling just to call the shots, at least for those women born to wealth. A network and a word or two and all is arranged. All that strife and struggle and sacrifice is for nothing.; 2/6/15, 1:26 AM
buwaya said...: And a word to women - divorce is a very bad thing, if you want power in a power-couple relationship. Bill and Hilary have the Filipino thing down. It is a country of Clinton's, in more ways than one. Ferdinand and Imelda were not unique. Imelda, at 85, is still scary powerful.
It works much better for ambitious women than spinsterhood on the corporate ladder.; 2/6/15, 1:37 AM
LYNNDH said...: In the early Church, Priest may have been married. I don't when some Pope or Synod decreed no more married Priest, but it caused a lot of problems in England. The Welsh Priests were the last holdout for being married.; 2/6/15, 2:58 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: Mark - agreed that those of us outside the Roman Catholic Church often don't know the ins or outs of those subjects there. But, that doesn't mean that that church is correct (though I suspect that you believe it to be), or that that is a good reason for many not to belong. I see it little different from the LDS Church refusing to allow Blacks into their clergy for so long - they were called racist for that reason. At least they (or their prophet at the time) saw the error of their ways and changed. I think that it is sexist, as do many here (and consider the LDS church sexist for similar reasons). Of course, I am a product of the Reformation, which rejected many of the sacred traditions of the RC Church, and went back to the Scriptures, which we read to specifically endorse at least bishops marrying (only one wife).

I think that you need to expect that any article such as this is going to bring out this sort of criticism of the Roman Catholic Church, and what many of us see as its backwardness in this regard. Sorry, that is the way that we see it. If we didn't, we would probably be Roman Catholic too. And, yes, the claims of hypocrisy can go the other way too - I read yesterday a column that asked how any Christian could be fully pro-choice, and a lot of Protestant clergy are far more liberal than their parishioners. I think that the same could be said of actively homosexual clergy. How is that really that different from a philandering clergy? Sin is still sin.; 2/6/15, 3:13 AM
stlcdr said...: This just in: the pope would like to be surrounded by more women. Maybe he likes women? Maybe a certain kind of woman?; 2/6/15, 4:06 AM
averagejoe said...: "Pope Francis is not the Stephen Hawking of popes, if you catch my drift. More like the Jesse Ventura."
Amen to that. Whether he's blaming the rich for the existence of the poor, or saying it's okay to kill someone if they insult your religion, or babbling like a beta-male pajama boy progressive, nothing but crap comes out of this fool's mouth. Someone needs to kick his bitch ass.; 2/6/15, 4:59 AM
Brando said...: Who can better understand women than a lifelong bachelor? Hey Pope, stick to Pope stuff! If I have a question about the sacraments I'll call you.; 2/6/15, 6:05 AM
CStanley said...: @Mark and Bruce Hayden-
Good discussion.

Bruce, the analogy to racism is inapt because there is no theologically supported reason for races to be treated differently, while there is ample reason to recognize that men and women were created differently.

A second important point is that the entire view of priesthood as a privilege is completely wrong. It is meant to be a servile position, and as such there is no reason to feel that exclusion of women is a slight on our gender.

Granted though, the Church itself has not helped with this misperception because in fact many priests have not embraced this humble role (quite the contrary in many cases.) But the idea remains valid even if it's been obscured by poor implementation.

It's not for women to react to this by also clamorous for the clout and power of priesthood; we should instead be pointing out one of Christ's central themes was humility. This actually circles back to the Pope's point, which does seem obvious although we don't have ears to hear the real truth of it. The feminine nature (when unadulterated by modern society) is more humble and less aggressive, and thus more likely to make the needed corrections in a world where raw power rules. Instead though, modern feminism has taken the wrong road and sent the message that women should seek power in the same way that men do.

In short, the Catholic Church is providing the message that can correct the mistakes of feminist ideology, if you just take the time to study the message and think through the implications.; 2/6/15, 6:23 AM
Paco Wové said...: "Lighten up, Francis."

–or maybe just–

"Sod off, Francis."; 2/6/15, 6:39 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: The Pope then added, regarding to men:

Well, you can tell by the way I use my walk
I'm a woman's man: no time to talk
Music loud and women warm, I've been kicked around
Since I was born
And now it's all right, I'm ok
And you may look the other way
We can try to understand
The New York Times' effect on man

Dressed in a white polyester suit, the Pope then pointed skyward for a count of three.

I am Laslo.; 2/6/15, 6:55 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: The Pope, as part of an outreach to women, showed up on ABC's "The View" this week, where he listened intently, then condemned Rosie O'Donnell to Hell.

I am Laslo.; 2/6/15, 7:00 AM
Bob Boyd said...: Pope Francis is a dancer and a diplomat, the kind of guy who could have Putin struggling to remain calm.; 2/6/15, 7:12 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: The Pope, as part of an outreach to women, showed up on a very special episode of Lena Durham's "Girls," where he explained that, while the desire to munch carpet was acceptable, the actual practice of munching carpet was a sin.

Note: he used the word "tappeto", which Google says is Italian for 'carpet'.

I am Laslo.; 2/6/15, 7:12 AM
sparrow said...: The Church elevates Mary above all other creatures dogmatically. Only God in His 3 persons is above her. Hardly anti-women.

Women are excluded from the priesthood in imitation of Christs selection of exclusively male disciples and crucially in that a priest is chosen to act in the "person of Christ". He, the priest, is meant to be directly emulating Him (Christ) as fully as possible. No women can fully emulate this: rather they are called to holiness by other means and many are recognized as Saints.

Last the Church teaches obedience (rarely in practice unfortunately) and part of obedience is accepting your role in life and not coveting the role of another. All this is of course very much contrary worldly teaching but the Church has always set it self in opposition to the world. In fact the sign of contradiction is one way to recognize holiness.

The key reason many of us bristle when we read the words of the Pope is that he sounds too worldly. He sounds more like Joe Biden than the Vicar of Christ.; 2/6/15, 7:16 AM
Known Unknown said...: Hey, Pope.

Maybe he'll use the portal.; 2/6/15, 7:17 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: The Pope showed up on NBC News with Brian Williams and apologized that, while he thought for awhile that he himself had been shot, it was actually a Pope that had preceded him.

I am Laslo.; 2/6/15, 7:19 AM
Bob Boyd said...: "he explained that, while the desire to munch carpet was acceptable, the actual practice of munching carpet was a sin."

At which point he was bombarded with questions he pretended not to understand.; 2/6/15, 7:19 AM
JSD said...: My older brother, valedictorian at the catholic grammar school, didn’t get to be Father Wren’s alter boy. The priest picked a kid from a fucked up broken home. My mother dryly noted that the son of an imposing Irish policeman would never be a good choice for such a position. Father Wren eventually moved to a parish in Arizona.; 2/6/15, 7:24 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: The Pope showed up on NBC's "Today Show" and explained to Matt Lauer that, while Lauer can fool himself, he cannot fool God. He then called Matt Lauer a balding Zima-drinking child-molester.

Katie Couric could not be reached for comment.

I am Laslo.; 2/6/15, 7:28 AM
sparrow said...: Zima drinking being especially heinous; 2/6/15, 7:29 AM
Anonymous said...: Lem: Something somebody would say in the 70s.

Ignatius wept.

(Remember when the Jesuits were the ass-kickers of the Church, instead of lame-ass?); 2/6/15, 7:32 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: The Pope showed up on MSNBC's "Rachel Maddow Show" and commended her help in drawing attention to the downtrodden in America. He then explained that she just needed to find a good God-fearing Man who would tap that ass.

I am Laslo.; 2/6/15, 7:34 AM
Tank said...: Jay Vogt said...

Anyone want to do a word count by gender?

Do you often see a woman in a car w/o a mobile phone to her ear? Do a rear view mirror survey.

Jay is looking in his rear view mirror at the woman behind him on her phone. This is not going to end well.

===============================

I never imagined that a day would come when I held both the President and the Pope in such low esteem. Sad.; 2/6/15, 7:41 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: The Pope showed up on ABC's "Good Morning America" and explained how people should not slander Mohammed, nor the towel-heads who follow Him.

I am Laslo.; 2/6/15, 7:47 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: The Pope showed up on ESPN and explained how athletes -- both men and women -- can achieve greatness through the very bodies God graced them with. He then commented how he especially likes Women's Beach Volleyball: that is how God intended a woman's buttocks to look.

Some ways are not necessarily mysterious.

I am Laslo.; 2/6/15, 7:53 AM
Fritz said...: Women have much to say, and they keep saying it over and over and over.; 2/6/15, 7:56 AM
bleh said...: I used to talk like that about women back when I was a desperate virgin.; 2/6/15, 7:58 AM
SeanF said...: The Godfather: I don't object to Catholic traditionalists believing that women are meant by God to have a subordinate role in the world...

Women have a different role in the world than men. If you think it's subordinate, that's your own problem.

Myself, I'm reminded of James Franco's line in "The Interview" - "This is the 21st Century! Women are smart now!"; 2/6/15, 8:08 AM
harrogate said...: Lem writes:

"I would say that's condescending, patronizing... but I don't know for sure since feminism is so strange these days."

Because of course before "these days," Lem found feminism straightforward and credible, and gave it serious thought and consideration. Like Jesse Helms said of the Democratic Party: Lem didn't leave femimism--feminism left Lem!!!!

I'm not Laslo.; 2/6/15, 8:13 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: sparrow said...

He, the priest, is meant to be directly emulating Him (Christ) as fully as possible. No women can fully emulate this...

I never realized that a big part of Jesus' ministry was writing his name in the snow.; 2/6/15, 8:14 AM
Big Mike said...: Scratch papal infallibility from the list of Francis' attributes.; 2/6/15, 8:21 AM
Fernandinande said...: “Women are able to ask questions that men can’t understand,” he said.

“She was not even able to express it in words but rather in tears.”

No wonder he couldn't understand it.; 2/6/15, 8:44 AM
The Cracker Emcee Refulgent said...: You no playee the game, you no makee the rules.; 2/6/15, 8:45 AM
Paul said...: We have ISIS going apeshit in the Middle East, Christian massacres at the hands of Muslims in the Holy Land, Putin trying to take over the Baltics, atheist communist pushing into more South American countries, Communist China cracking down on Christian churches, etc...

And the Pope worries about what questions women ask that men don't understand?

Look, I'm Catholic, but this Pope needs his head examined.; 2/6/15, 8:49 AM
damikesc said...: You know, I'm sick of men being ignored now. I love that ONLY men need to change. Apparently, women are fucking perfect to our social justice betters.

I can think of few things the world needs less than an SJW Pope.; 2/6/15, 8:54 AM
Drago said...: Does this Catholocism make me look fat?; 2/6/15, 8:56 AM
sparrow said...: Funny Ignorance, But God as understood by Christians has always been portrayed as male and thus authority is understood to be male as well. Again very contra modern culture, but that is at the core of the religion. When Paul speaks of love in marriage, in perhaps one of the most controversial of biblical passages, he speaks of wives submitting to their husbands authority. It is part of the traditional understanding that authority belongs to the male partner. The key to balance is is in the same often over looked passage that the husband must love the wife as the Christ loves the Church. Meaning literally to give all for her including his life. Again very distinct from modern culture where marriage is treated very lightly, but clearly part of the Catholic teaching. The prohibition against female priests is consistent within the teaching of the Church, you may disapprove/ or reject it but it is not at odds with Christianity.; 2/6/15, 9:08 AM
Simon said...: Gahrie said... “This Pope is emblematic of why I am no longer a Catholic, or even Christian.”
Well that’s just silly. If I had believed the vague, incoherent, inchoate, politicized grab-bag of nonsense of which Francis is emblematic to be the Catholic faith, I wouldn’t have converted in the first place, and if I believed it now, I would resign. If you think that what this man is emblematic of is Catholicism, you either don’t understand Francis, or you don’t understand Catholicism.

One must realize that the Catholic Church does not teach, and has never taught, and in view of history could not possibly teach, that the conclave will always elect the right man or even a good man. Jorge Cardinal Bergoglio was a latin-american Jesuit bishop, asleep at the switch, stupid, dangerous, misguided, undisciplined, arrogant, a gabby oaf, very possibly a heretic, a mediocre prelate from the worst place of the worst era. When he was plunged suddenly into a job for which he is in no way qualified, or prepared, well, ask yourself: When you have seen officers or managers promoted despite their complete incompetence in their previous billet, is the trend that they magically rise to the occasion, transcending as a lieutenant-colonel the limits and shortcomings that beset them as a major? Or is it your experience that they are typically about the same?

If the Catholic Church could be broken by the stupidity of one pope, she would have run aground about the time of Galatians 2:11 if not Matthew 26. You can't worry about this stuff. We've had bad popes; we've had stupid, avaricious, philandering popes. We've had popes who fathered multiple children, we've had popes who would have fathered multiple children had their preference been for female concubines, if you take my point, and, doubtless, ahem, we've had popes who liked to take the point. For fuck's sake, Stephen dug Formosus up and put his fucking corpse on trial! And you're worried about one idiot Argentinian? We've sometimes had bad popes, we happen to have a bad pope, and the church will survive him and live to see another bad pope another day.; 2/6/15, 9:12 AM
CStanley said...: Sparrow I thought of that passage as well. I have heard many Protestants and evangelicals who can articulate the message of it well but have always found it odd that they can't see how this applies to the priesthood too.; 2/6/15, 9:18 AM
Greg Hlatky said...: If the Catholic Church could be broken by the stupidity of one pope, she would have run aground about the time of Galatians 2:11 if not Matthew 26.

The way I've seen it expressed is that the Church must be divinely inspired because no other institution could have survived 2000 years under such incompetent management.; 2/6/15, 9:27 AM
MadisonMan said...: Women are able to ask questions that men can’t understand.

And therein lies the plotline of many a sitcom.; 2/6/15, 9:37 AM
sparrow said...: CStanley,

The Church has a very thorough theology of priesthood that mirrors marriage. The alter is to recall not just a table but also a marriage bed because communion results in unity with Christ not simply spiritual nourishment. In some ways I think that Catholicism is better adapted for women in that the Church is the Bride of Christ. Many awesome female saints (and there are quite a few) have understood their call to be literally a bride of Christ.

Protestant teaching can be very good here it's just so varied it's hard to track.; 2/6/15, 9:50 AM
sparrow said...: The Church is a field hospital for sinners not a museum of saints. We're all broken that's why we're there.; 2/6/15, 9:52 AM
Simon said...: Greg, you bet. A lot of the scandal that Francis is creating, a lot of the cognitive dissonance, is because a lot of Catholics don’t know their history. They haven’t read the history of the papacy, and to the extent that they’ve read about it, it’s been selective hagiography not systematic history. Intellectually they probably know that the pope isn’t infallible (yes, you read that right--see this for an explanation), but they certainly didn’t expect a pope to say or do horribly brain-dead things on a regular basis. They certainly didn’t expect a pope who rarely gives a homily without attacking and condemning Catholics for believing catholicy stuff and living catholicy lives.

Conservative Catholics have been reflexively ultramontane during the last couple of pontificates (see this post for more on that), and they attribute the postconciliar disaster not to Paul VI but to nefarious, unspecific forces, to Annibale Bugnini and “the liberals.” And there’s some truth to all that, I understand it, but the problem is that it has left them profoundly unprepared on a psychological level to face a bad pope.; 2/6/15, 10:02 AM
Marc in Eugene said...: Thanks, AA, for this post. While there may be one or two specific acts of the reigning Roman Pontiff I may find inexplicable, pft, I'm a simple layman, not a theologian or philosopher, even an online one. If just one or two of your readers go to the sources and read the Holy Father's homilies in context, without expecting to treat them as headlines at Drudge, that's a good thing on a rainy Friday.; 2/6/15, 10:13 AM
exhelodrvr1 said...: He's acknowledging that women tend to have a different perspective than men, which is true. And of course, the corollary to that is that men have a different perspective than women. Different abilities, different needs/wants. We've always known that, but modern society keeps trying to force us to ignore that.; 2/6/15, 10:22 AM
victoria said...: You go, Papa!!!

vicki from Pasadena; 2/6/15, 10:23 AM
CStanley said...: Simon I am not completely in disagreement but I feel you overstate it quite a bit with regard to Pope Francis. History will tell but at this point I place him below his two immediate predecessors but nowhere near the bottom of the pack (the ones who clearly were mistakes of the Curia.) I'm also very mindful of the way the current pope is taken out of context and misrepresented in the media. Either by choice, temperament, or ignorance he sets himself up for this, and I do feel he's too political- but those are human foibles and still might be out to use by God in accordance with His will for the Church.; 2/6/15, 10:23 AM
Fen said...: So sick of this shit. Being hearing about the need to "empower" women all my life.

When are they going to catch up? Because I'm beginning to think they are less than equal to men.; 2/6/15, 10:26 AM
Drago said...: victoria: "You go, Papa!!!"

Wow, I didn't think vicky of Pasadena agreed with the Popes pro-life teaching.

But, there you go.; 2/6/15, 10:27 AM
Tank said...: Half the time when women are asking these questions that "men can't understand," men are not listening anyway.

So, whatever.; 2/6/15, 10:38 AM
bbkingfish said...: Great to see GOPers get all snarky re: The Pope. It's a winning strategy. Keep up the good work.; 2/6/15, 10:54 AM
Simon said...: Marc, you say that it’s a rainy Friday where you are. How do you know? Are you a meteorologist? I might have thought that one didn't have to be a meteorologist to look out the window and see that it's raining, but earlier in your post, you suggest that because you aren't an expert, you're a "simple layman, not a theologian or philosopher," you aren't qualified to speculate on what those strange water-like particles falling from the sky might be, or what we might label such a phenomenon.

Lookit: You don't have to be St. Thomas Aquinas to realize that a man whose job is to confirm the faithful is doing something terribly wrong when he spends every day scandalizing the faithful just to feed his addiction to newsprint.; 2/6/15, 11:17 AM
damikesc said...: Great to see GOPers get all snarky re: The Pope. It's a winning strategy. Keep up the good work.

Because nobody knows religion like Democrats.

*snicker*; 2/6/15, 11:24 AM
Simon said...: Drago said... "Wow, I didn't think vicky of Pasadena agreed with the Popes pro-life teaching."

You have to keep in mind that no one actually takes Francis seriously, they just use him as a cudgel when it's convenient. This is what the appeasers don't get: They assume that if you can get someone to buy into Francis when he says crazy wacko liberal stuff that they like, well, they're then along for the ride, and they'll have to go along with him when he says more conservative things. But they don't. Reform Catholics (indeed, liberals generally) have no coherent theory of authority, they just pick what they like and ignore what they don't. And they don't worry about it, they don't give it a moment's thought. Because for them, quite frankly, the ultimate criterion is whether it agrees with them, whether it's helpful, and if it's useful, they'll use it, and if it isn't, they'll ignore it.; 2/6/15, 11:29 AM
Simon said...: CStanley said...
"I'm also very mindful of the way the current pope is taken out of context and misrepresented in the media. Either by choice, temperament, or ignorance he sets himself up for this...."

I really think that the media and the translators take it in the neck for Francis, and while it's true that the media sometimes spins him out of context, first, as you point out, he sets himself up for it, and second, more often than not, the media's sin is accurately reporting the stupid, scandalous thing that Francis said, and Conservative Catholics don't want to face that, they don't want to hear that. They think it's wrong and they can't understand how a pope could possibly say such a thing.

Seems to me that most often, what are billed as "hard questions" are actually pretty easy questions with hard answers. "Do I have to give up all sin?" Yeah, you do. It's not a hard question. It's a hard answer. "Do people go to hell?" Yeah, they do. It's not a hard question, it's a hard answer. It's an answer people don't want to hear. They get angry about it. Similar thing with Francis and the media.

Now, Orthodox Catholics, Francis' real bete noir, on whom he rarely goes a day or two without publicly beating, have already emancipated themselves from all this, because for them, they faced this question decades ago. This is old-hat. And some Conservative Catholics, too, manage to escape the gravitational pull of that reflexive ultramontanism that you mentioned; those of us who are closer to Orthodox Catholicism in our thinking and habits, for example, or, recently, Catholic moms-of-many, whom Francis went out of his way to stab in the heart recently, we've been sufficiently shaken up that we can't do it any more, we have to reexamine assumptions about the papacy, and when you do that, that's the end of the road for the soft papolatry in which a lot of Conservative Catholics have lived certainly since 1978, and probably longer.

But for your average EWTN-listening Conservative Catholic, it's tough, I'm sure. It's tough to deal with a pope doing things that you don't believe a pope can do. I usually have the car radio tuned to NPR, but they had a pledge week not long ago, so I tuned into EWTN for a few days, and it was weird, man. It was like going into a parallel universe. It's no wonder at all to me that so many are bailing out into sedevacantism.; 2/6/15, 11:42 AM
Simon said...: (I realize that the analogy to judaism, the notion of reform, conservative, and orthodox Catholics, is non-standard, but I do think that the analogy is serviceable and useful.); 2/6/15, 11:43 AM
Sebastian said...: Francis gives new meaning to the Peter Principle.; 2/6/15, 11:47 AM
CStanley said...: Simon that all sounds rather like people overreacting and taking things too personally to me, and sedevacantism (even flirtation with it) shouldn't be taken so lightly IMO. It also doesn't seem to jibe with your previous comments. Perhaps I misunderstood but I thought you were endorsing a trust that the Church survives poor leadership, not that the leadership has become illegitimate.; 2/6/15, 12:23 PM
n.n said...: When does a human life acquire and retain value and by whose choice? Many women, and men, in today's society cannot answer this question without invoking fairy tales, faith, and legal penumbras. Whereas the physical process and continuity exists independent of their juvenile fantasies.

The moral principles of Judeo-Christian philosophy are individual dignity and intrinsic value. God said it first, Pope.; 2/6/15, 12:46 PM
Simon said...: CStanley, I should perhaps clarify: I am not hinting that I am a sedevacantist. What I'm saying is that if you believe that a pope cannot do X, and a pope in fact does X, you have three choices. You can, one, shut your eyes, put your fingers and sing "LA LA LA" and hope it all goes away. That's not a choice that is in any way intellectually or morally credible, but it's the safest, easiest, and most common choice. Tune in to EWTN to hear what that looks like! So that's choice one.

Choice two is, you can reexamine your assumptions: "I thought that the pope couldn't do X, and he's doing X; maybe I was wrong. Does the Church actually teach that the pope can't do X?" That's actually the right answer. That's what you have to do. For example, when Francis taught heresy in a homily earlier this year, I couldn't believe it; surely, I thought, the pope can't teach heresy in so formal a setting. But in fact, if you think back to John XXII, it was in precisely that setting that he taught his infamous heresy about the beatific vision. So actually it isn't new information, although it was new to me, that a pope can actually teach heresy in a formal homily. And that doesn't violate any teaching of the Church; it just qualifies how far we can push our construction of Pastor aeternus and Lumen gentium.

But reexamining your assumptions and facing the possibility that you were wrong in a belief is hard. People don't like doing that. So there is a third possible choice that resolves the problem: If a pope cannot do X and Francis did X, ergo!--perfectly logical, right?--Francis isn't the pope! And there are all sorts of arguments that people have cooked up, Socci et al, about how and why. But the argument isn't reason. They are cooking up these arguments because Francis did X and they don't think a pope can do X, and they're willing neither to bury their head in the sand and ignore him (which is admirable) nor to reexamine their own assumptions (which isn't), and so Francis can't possibly be pope and we need some theory about why.

I've written a couple of posts about this (under this tag), and a third is on the way, which I hope make clear that I'm not a sedevacantist. What I'm saying is that I understand what is driving people to take that position, not that one should take that position.; 2/6/15, 1:07 PM
CStanley said...: That does clarify your position but I must have missed the 2015 heresy. I am not one to out my fingers in my ears (EWTN has always been a lot of fluff as far as I'm concerned so I'm not surprised if they are ignoring controversy) but neither do I hang on every dispute. Apparently I've missed something you consider a big deal, so you can fill me in if you'd like.

For that matter though, the John XXII scandal always seemed overblown to me and wasn't it only after the fact that the beatific vision teaching was made official (IOW, is it really accepted that this was heretical instead of just a heterodox dispute until later clarification?; 2/6/15, 2:05 PM
Jupiter said...: At least with Obama, we know that, failing a coup, he'll be gone in two years. No telling how long we'll have to put up with this traveling freak show of a Pope.; 2/6/15, 3:58 PM
sparrow said...: I used to think Francis was taken out of context and I can give an example or two. "Who am I to Judge?" is vastly better in context for example. However the synod, the relatio, the pro communist stuff the rebuking of the mother of a big family etc. Too many examples to ignore. Fortunately my faith is in Christ not the Pope. I believe the Holy Spirit will prevent an outright doctrinal error promulgated from the chair, but that is the only limit. Sad to say I'm left lowering expectations offering prayers and offering this little suffering to Christ in imitation.; 2/6/15, 4:07 PM
UNTRIBALIST said...: Thought experiment: A conservative pope says: “Men are able to ask questions that women can’t understand.” How would the feminocracy respond?; 2/6/15, 4:47 PM
walter said...: Questions like:
"Does this habit make by butt look fat?"; 2/6/15, 7:25 PM