• Our Blogger

    Fr. Joseph Jenkins

  • The blog header depicts an important and yet mis-understood New Testament scene, Jesus flogging the money-changers out of the temple. I selected it because the faith that gives us consolation can also make us very uncomfortable. Both Divine Mercy and Divine Justice meet in Jesus. Priests are ministers of reconciliation, but never at the cost of truth. In or out of season, we must be courageous in preaching and living out the Gospel of Life. The title of my blog is a play on words, not Flogger Priest but Blogger Priest.

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

    Anonymous's avatarAnonymous on Ask a Priest
    forsamuraimarket's avatarforsamuraimarket on Ask a Priest
    Anonymous's avatarAnonymous on Ask a Priest
    Michael J's avatarMichael J on Ask a Priest
    Jeremy Kok's avatarJeremy Kok on Ask a Priest

Reviewing CREATED EQUAL: Forcing Women’s Ordination

The film seems oblivious to the fact that the conflict is one-and-the-same as that of the Roman empire against the early Church.  It is the question as to whether we follow Caesar or the Lord.  The courts and the world of politics have no jurisdiction over the faith of the Church.  That is where the story should have ended. However, the premise of the film is that the Catholic Church might be compelled to open the priesthood to women by intimidation of the civil legal system.  This is not the case. Whatever the state might decide, the Church would refuse to comply, even if it meant persecution and martyrdom. One is reminded of the Church of England that sought to manipulate the Church when a king demanded a divorce.  But the Church was willing to allow an entire country to evade its grasp to preserve the meaning of marital fidelity.  Like holy orders, marriage is a sacrament of the Church. The Church has the right to administer her sacraments as she feels fit. The jury in the film judges a male-only priesthood as discrimination; but this is not true because priesthood is not a job or an entitlement.  Yes, as a vocation it is a calling, but just like the nature of our saving faith, it is both personal and corporate.  Any calling from the candidate must be affirmed by the Church, notably the bishop and those placed in charge of formation.  Priesthood is a gratuity and no one can demand that gift.

The film would intimate that our religious liberty comes entirely from the state, but our founding documents merely acknowledge that such freedom comes from God, himself.  No judge and jury, particularly made up of non-Catholics and/or those unsympathetic to Catholicism have any say about the Church.  Indeed, even the laity that constitute the “sensus fidelium” must live and share the tenets of our holy religion. Pope John Paul II definitively answered the question about women’s ordination, explaining that the Church has no power to change the practice of ordaining only males.  Short of any new miraculous revelation, the Church is bound to keep the tradition.  Responding to the challenge of stereotypes, the pagan world had many priestesses and yet the new dispensation of Christ that fulfilled the promises of Judaism maintained male leadership among the apostles.  Our Lord was shown to break convention as when he spoke to the Samaritan woman at the well.  She would become a prophetess to her people, but not a priest. The Blessed Virgin Mary was the holiest woman to ever walk the earth and yet while she takes a priestly stance at the foot of the Cross, she is entrusted to the apostle John who was a sharer in Christ’s ministerial priesthood.  While all of us participate in a baptismal priesthood (given that sacrifice defines our faith and charity), the ordained priesthood is reserved to men, and not all men, but a select few.  If the state were to assume authority over our ministers, then it could just as likely demand married and divorced men and women or even overt homosexuals. But our sacraments are not subject to the fads of changing times or the capricious desires of men and women. Indeed, even if we should want to ordain women, we cannot do so.

The reasoning of the Church is clear and sound.  While the Church can mitigate disciplines like celibacy in specific cases, the matter of gender is no accidental that can be brushed aside.  The theology of the body focuses upon gender as being constitutive of our deepest identity and personhood.  Just as only a man can be a father and only a woman can be a mother, only a man can be a priest. If we should attempt to ordain females and it should prove against the will of Christ, then we would forfeit both the sacrament of holy orders and the Mass.  There would be no more Eucharistic real presence of the risen Christ. There would be no more unbloody re-presentation of the sacrifice of Calvary.  The oblation and banquet that renews our covenant with Christ would disappear with the loss of apostolic succession.   

A male-only priesthood is no injustice and not chauvinism. The house of the Church is that of a family with a given structure.  Would you allow strangers to come into your house and tell you how to run your home?  Children obey parents, not the other way around. The objective of this film would introduce dysfunction into the home of faith, the Church.  Where there was a faint promise of teaching on this subject, the film gives a simplistic and one-sided view. Even the churchmen are so terribly caricatured that they are hard for knowing believers to watch. The nun in the movie might believe but she is also a rebellious daughter.  Her journey will likely take her into Anglicanism where they have priestesses that go through the motions but a faith that compromises to secular modernity at every turn.        

A Female Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury?

https://www.cathstan.org/voices/do-catholics-have-a-theological-problem-with-a-woman-being-the-archbishop-of-canterbury?

The Anglican communion has proven itself more a daughter to secular modernity than a son of ecclesial tradition. It goes through the motions but behind the show it is hollow of substance.  Only the bare bone of the Gospel remains.  When Pope Paul VI reminded them of the perennial and constant reservation of holy orders to men, a practice that both Catholicism and the schismatic Eastern churches maintain, he was immediately rebuffed.  The demands of feminists and gays took precedence over the reservation of Jesus and the constant practice of the Church. The late Pope John Paul II would add that any effort to ordain women would threaten the validity of holy orders. Of course, Anglican orders had long since already been compromised when their prayer book denied the sacrificial nature of the Eucharist.  The definition of a priest is intimately tied up with our appreciation of the Mass. When the text was corrected, apostolic succession among the Anglicans had already been lost.

  • 1534 King Henry VIII breaks with Rome.
  • 1552 and 1662 Thomas Cranmer removes references to the Eucharist as a propitiatory sacrifice in the BOOKS OF COMMON PRAYER.
  • 1896 Pope Leo XIII in APOSTOLICAE CURAE declares Anglican orders “absolutely null and utterly void.”
  • 1994 Saint John Paul II in ORDINATIO SACERDOTALIS solemnly professes priestly ordination as reserved to men alone.

Even if there should be a few valid clergy due to Catholic defections and the presence of Old Catholics and Orthodox bishops at ordinations, the intrusion of women would be the proverbial nail in the coffin to any such sacramental lineage. Pope John Paul II professed infallibly that women cannot be ordained.  If they cannot be priests, then they most certainly cannot be bishops. Thus, they cannot ordain men to holy orders, either to the presbyterate or to the diaconate.  

Politeness will only summon further confusion. We must be blunt with the truth.  Sarah Mullally is not really the bishop of either London or Canterbury.  She may be the first woman to hold the title of “Archbishop of Canterbury” in 1,400 years, but she is only the latest of a long line of pretenders to the throne. Ordained in 2002 as a part time cleric, her background is in nursing.  She later got a degree in pastoral theology. She is a self-professed pro-choice feminist and favors the blessing and full inclusion of LGBT+ people. Of course, she is not alone as there are increasing numbers of wannabee women priests and bishops in the Anglican communion.  Indeed, the new archbishop of Wales is Bishop Cherry Vann who is openly living in a lesbian same-sex civil union.   

A female archbishop of Canterbury is problematic because of the ecumenical aspirations of the Church.  Many had long sought and prayed for reunion of the churches.  Now, except for those who have joined the ordinariate, it looks as if that will never happen. This also complicates matters of gathering because these women who dress up like priests and bishops give scandal to the Catholic faithful.  It also fuels wrongful aspirations among women with radical agendas that include women’s ordination.  Of course, with neither a valid priesthood nor Eucharist, the Anglican communion forfeits the canonical and realistic right to term itself a “church.”  Error leads to error and now this faith confession tolerates divorce, adultery, fornication, abortion, and homosexuality— even among its ministers. It is sad but true that with every step forward in ecumenical dialogue, the Anglicans have taken two steps backward. Short of a revolution among the Anglican and Episcopal faith communities, it must be proclaimed that their “church” is essentially dead. Any effort to proclaim the Good News or to expand holiness is short-circuited by the advocacy of mortal sin. 

Honey, You’re Not a Catholic Priest!

The December 29 headline in the KANSAS REFLECTOR read, “Kansan returns to the Catholic Church as the state’s first woman priest,” by Anna Kaminski. The story was published under the sectioned off heading of CIVIL RIGHTS.  All I can say is No, and No. Tina Thompson is not a Catholic priest and vocations in the faith are not entitlements in justice but gifts for service. Further, I suspect Episcopal female clergy might be offended because while Catholicism judges Anglicans orders as null-and-void, they also consider themselves priests. Arguably the more appropriate term here is “priestess,” although there are unavoidable pagan connotations.    

Thompson attempted ordination not in the Catholic Church but in a dissenting, meaning “protestant” sect called Roman Catholic Womanpriests (RCWP).  More than lacking formal recognition, this group is spurned by the Catholic Church.  Those involved with such efforts to circumvent sacramental laws are regarded as excommunicated from true faith. She says the matter is “so much bigger” than her, but it is really all about her. Along with other like-minded women, the issue is rebellion from clearly articulated teachings that stem from long-standing tradition and from Pope John Paul II’s solemn definition. She may be one of hundreds around the world but none of these ladies is a licit or valid priest of the Roman Catholic Church.  Even if a legitimate bishop (possessing apostolic succession) had sought to ordain her, she would still not be a priest as it is not the will of Christ and his Church.    

She says, “We are still the church, but we are different in that we open the tent. We want everyone to feel like they are welcome.” This is a deception. The theological definition of “church” requires both a valid priesthood and Eucharist.  She and her girlfriends have neither.  They can dress up but all they are doing is playing priest.  They are fooling themselves and would seek to do the same to others.  It is terribly sinful because it would cost the gullible both absolution from sin and the saving Eucharist. A priest is a man configured to the incarnate Christ as our high priest.  He is an icon of our Lord.  Some orders and Eastern rite congregations would even have the priest grow the accidental of a beard to help convey his ministerial unity with Jesus. A woman cannot sacramentally signify Christ at the altar. 

Estrangement from the Church for twenty years is hardly proper formation for ministry. Tina Thompson talks about her work as an artist but says next to nothing about the sacrament of Penance and the Eucharist.  She is a fake, not a priest and only tenuously a juridical Catholic because of baptism. The church in which Tina Thompson attempted ordination was not Catholic. Unity Church in Lawrence, Kansas must have rented their facility because, while led by women, it does not even claim bishops.  We read on the website for Unity Church in Lawrence, Kansas: “Unity is an open-minded, accepting spiritual community that honors all paths to God and helps people discover and live their spiritual potential and purpose. A positive alternative to negative religion, Unity seeks to apply the teachings of Jesus as well as other spiritual masters. Unity affirms the power of prayer and helps people experience a stronger connection with God every day.” They also reject the notion of heaven with the saints, asserting, “Heaven is not a place, but a state of consciousness.”  Nonsense! Ordination in such a setting further compromises any claims of Catholicity.  It is literally a NEW AGE movement that is arguably not even Christian. It might be a welcoming tent, but it is not the house that Jesus built. The ordinations are not valid despite her protestations. They have not abided by apostolic succession because while they might have satisfied form, they have substituted invalid matter. The line back to Christ is broken.     

The KANSAS CITY REFLECTOR steps away from its headline and Tina Thompson’s claims by stating: “Women priests do not perform their duties in Catholic churches, and they cannot be officially ordained in one either. They are not recognized and are often excommunicated from the Catholic Church if they are heavily involved before their ordination as Roman Catholic women priests.”

Thompson might claim to be Catholic, but she has turned away from basic truths transmitted by the faith. She does not believe in the indissolubility of marriage and accepts divorce. She also dissents in her approbation for homosexuality.  The aging women of Roman Catholic Womanpriests would redefine, not just Holy Orders, the Church and her values.  None of these imposters in the presbyterate would demand a celibate priesthood. Most would also redefine marriage. No matter what Thompson calls herself, she is a Protestant minister, pure and simple. She says that she was ordained a deacon on August 22, 2024, and a Roman Catholic Women Priest on Nov. 1, 2025. But notice that the article is silent as to who attempted to ordain her. 

After doing research online, it appears that Bishop Paula Hoeffer attempted to ordain her as a priest.  Hoeffer is a former religious sister (Sister of Notre Dame de Namur) who left the convent half a century ago for marriage.  She only became a supposed bishop, herself, in 2025. Her initiation into this fraudulent sacerdotalism was through Joan Houk, still another fake woman bishop. Houk’s elevation into this feigned episcopacy was the work of Patricia Fresen (Germany), Ida Raming (Germany) and Christine Mayr-Lumetzberger (Austria). They were three from the infamous Danube Seven ordained on a river boat in 2002 by Rómulo Antonio Braschi (a priest who defected to found the Catholic Apostolic Charismatic Church of Jesus the King) and Ferdinand Regelsberger (a former Benedictine monk that Brashi consecrated as bishop). It is not a pedigree to be proud about. 

Thompson admits herself, “We’re just a schism, as they say,” and are not in unity with Rome. The fact remains that Rome decides who is or is not a “Roman” Catholic priest. Like so many aging militant feminists, she errantly equates a “male-guided” Church with a “misguided” institution. The article observes, “Her ministry as a priest isn’t yet clear.”  That is an understatement if ever there was one. We are told that her time gravitates toward art. Does this not reduce priesthood to a side-line hobby instead of as a sacrificial vocation?