The Neo-Catholic mind continues its modernistic drift leftward and against Tradition.

Cdl. Dolan and Fr. Benedict Groeschel Affirm Me in My Okayness!
March 21, 2012
by Mark Shea

For 15ish years, ever since the publication of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, I have maintained that one implication of the docuмent is that women can be created cardinals of the Church (since the office of cardinal does not require holy orders and it is *only* the sacerdotal office to which the Church lacks the authority to ordain women). When I say this, I invariably get chewed out as a subversive modernist.

However, the other day, Fr. Groeschel and Cdl Dolan noted exactly the same thing (go to the 3:50 mark):



I suspect we will see something like this in my lifetime. If not, in my children’s or grand-daughter’s lifetime. Should it happen, do not freak out that the Church is “abandoning the Tradition”. Cardinals are a bit of bureaucratic machinery for taking care of housekeeping in the matter of getting a new pope. They are not The Tradition. The Church could abolish the entire college of cardinals tomorrow (just as she invented it a thousand years ago) and it would not alter the Tradition a jot. You may as well say your parish finance council is apostolic tradition. Do not bind God to contracts he never signed.


Link

Nauseating.

I think you will see women cardinals after Benedict 16 dies.  

I've already seen arguments for the ordination of deaconesses in Novus Ordo circles as well and I think you'll see "permanent deaconesses" in the Novus Ordo too.  In fact, the two will probably come at the same time to great applause in Conciliar circles.

The only question will be, how long will they be able to maintain deaconesses without ordination of priestesses?

The pseudo-episcopus of Antwerp has already been 'ordaining' female 'pastores'. That is the title they give to so-called pastoral workers. They are vested in priestly robes and some kind of triangular stoles. One of them is apparently on the way to the 'diaconate', according to a modernist website.

So my question is, what do people like Stevus say to this?

Mark Shea is nuts.

Add CAF to the list of those ok with the idea...

http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=661402

Just one example, there are others:

Quote from: Lancer

Does not bother me a bit...if the Pope and Magisterium...that is The Church...does this...it won't be for sentimental or modernity reasons...so I trust them. "...There is genius in Catholicism..." [Matthew Kelley] because our founder is Truth himself...and He promised to that His Holy Spirit would lead and guide His apostolic Church into all Truth...Himself...

Lastly, I like the idea of having a real woman of truth, character and accomplishment...like Janet Smith or maybe Mary Eberstadt or Phyllis Schlafly or Ambassador Mary Ann Glendon...or one of the Holy Women of the Church who has started/runs a Lay Apostolate...in the College of Cardinals.

In sum...let the Pope do his "pope-stuff"... and I hope and pray for the grace to do my "laity-stuff"!

In others words, X is true or ok because the "current magisterium" says that it is. Magisterial Positivism run amok.

Another:

Quote

We discussed this issue several months ago in this thread. I remain of the view that there is no theological reason why this could not be done (in the way that there is a theological reason why women can't be admitted to holy orders). There have certainly been cardinals, even in the last century, who did not hold major orders at all, and although I think it's disputed whether there have been any who did not hold minor orders, it's hard to imagine anybody seriously maintaining that minor orders are a dogmatic prerequisite to anything. It must be remembered that the cardinalate is a humanly instituted office created to help fulfill certain administrative tasks within the church; it is not an office with theological significance at all, and it did not really exist for the first thousand years or so of the Church's history. Doctrinally speaking, there is no barrier whatsoever to disbanding the cardinalate tomorrow and devolving the function of electing the Pope upon the clergy of Rome, or the college of bishops. Any such change would be untraditional, but it would not violate Sacred Tradition.

Certainly, appointing woman cardinals would present numerous practical questions and problems, such as what to do about the precedence of cardinals in liturgical functions. And, at least in the current climate, it would have the very bad effect of signaling to people that all things are open for debate and change and that, if women can be admitted to the office of cardinal then it is only intransigence that would not admit them to the "lower" office of priest.

That actually sounds pretty reasonable:  possible, but a bad idea.  I would go further and say it's a terrible idea, but if it's true that non-priests have historically been made cardinals (which it seems to be, from what I can tell), then it is hard to think of a doctrinal reason why it would be impossible to extend it to womenfolk.  Or am I missing something obvious?  Have any of the saints or doctors answered this for us already?  I think that post is right that Sacred Tradition can't really be implicated here at all, since the current state of affairs only dates to like 1000 or 1100 AD, and before that the evidence seems to by that the clergy and people of Rome would elect the pope, or occasionally he would be essentially appointed by a local warlord.  Anyway, prudential reasons not to do such a thing, yes, there are a million of those!

In the Church of Christ, women do not receive ecclesiastical jurisdiction over men. So, to say that the concept of a cardinalate for women does not contradict ecclesiastical and even apostolic tradition is simply wrong.

In the history of the Church, there have been Abbesses, but they only had authority over the nuns/religious women who were placed under their obedience, and not over men.