Nuns, Put the Habits Back on.

If anyone thinks the current leadership of the Catholic Church intends to consider women as equals, they are in for a disappointment.  A  group of nuns called, “Leadership Conference of Women Religious,” is finding that out.

A four-year study funded by the Vatican found Women Religious did not adequately demonize  the Vatican’s favorite villains, abortion and gay marriage.  From now on, the Vatican will supervise Women Religious, placing under a microscope who is invited to their conferences and what topics they discuss.

The Vatican found Women Religious was spending just too much time discussing topics the old men found revolting, ordination of women and ministering to gays.  After all, the Vatican’s report said, it is the Catholic Bishops who are the authentic teachers of faith and morals.  Women are not qualified to discuss moral topics that might interest them.

One has to remember it was Eve, not Adam, who was responsible for the original sin.  How, then, could her gender be trusted to separate good morals from bad?

The male Catholic hierarchy knows how to put the hammer down.  Nuns who have the backbone to stand up against this ancient form of discrimination are mostly an older generation.  As they age and die off, the Old Men’s Club is replacing them with women who will wear the habit and behave.

The proportion of nuns who wear habits and do not discuss female priesthood are growing.  The Catholic clergy is making sure its future is secure.

 

Avatar of Jon Lindgren

About Jon Lindgren

I am a former President of the Red River Freethinkers in Fargo, ND, a retired NDSU economics professor and was Mayor of Fargo for 16 years. There is more about me at Wikipedia.com.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Nuns, Put the Habits Back on.

  1. Henry says:

    Jon: “Nuns, Put the Habits Back on.”

    Now Jon is demonizing hat choices made by women in their personal commitments.

  2. Sean says:

    I remember when I bashed the Catholic Church when in fact I don’t know anything about the Church, its teachings, and its reasoning behind those teachings because I get my information from some biased, Protestant source. I’ve talked to numerous women, all of them Catholic, a few of them nuns, who completely agree with what the Church is doing with this group.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Sean 1:50 Thanks for the first time comment. I have no reason to doubt many women agree with the males hierarchy. Private corporations do not permit employees to be “off message” either.

      The part that seem like ancient logic, was comtemporary when the Bible was written and its writers thought the earth was flat, is the part where men decide only men have the power to figure out what God wants done.

    • Stan says:

      I know all those radical nuns are chained to the wall in the dungeons of the convents. THAT’S why they can just leave the Church and find a home more accepting. (sarc).

      We have free will Jon, no one is forcing them to remain Catholic.

  3. Bob says:

    No, but their minds were chained by having been brainwashed as children, Stan 4:41
    Hello! They’ve been indoctrinated! And so have you Stan.

    • Stan says:

      Not a cradle Catholic, came to Christ at 50 after much experimentation with anything from EST to OBE. Could explain where I was indoctrinated?

      • Bob says:

        I don’t know where and when and how exactly you were indoctrinated Stan 5:21, but to me at least, if you believe that you’re going to hell if you don’t “give” or “surrender” yourself to a god, I assume yours is Jesus, then, I believe somewhere, somehow along the line, you’ve been majorly indoctrinated. Duped, more likely actually.

  4. Doubtful says:

    This doesn’t fit this particular post that well but I think many people here will enjoy it. http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2012/04/23/science-will-never-explain-why-theres-something-rather-than-nothing/

    • entech says:

      Very interesting, Horgon has been a clown of the first order for decades. Still got a couple of his books somewhere, half read.
      I don’t know about something from nothing, I do know I have never seen nothing, I was born into a world of something and can’t imagine nothing except as the state you get when something is removed. If you say a chocolate box is empty, has nothing in it, it is only because all the chocolates, where did this nothing come from. have been removed or never put into it in the first place. The question would makes as much sense in reverse.

      • Doubtful says:

        Start with a personal attack and then try to pass your ignorance off as the writers ignorance. That is one truly nonsensical reply. Horgan obviously knows more about science than you do as demonstrated by your remark about nothing.

        • entech says:

          Yes, I agree I was tending to be personal, I really meant that I have tried to read his books and have found the content and style unsatisfactory.
          You possibly like the book review because it is anti Krause and Dawkins.
          Tell me more about nothing, where does it come from, is it more than the absence of something? You like to use the word ignorant a lot, perhaps you could elucidate? Tell me about something rather than complaining about nothing.

  5. Bob says:

    What? Stan 7:04? Where did that come from.

    • Stan says:

      “I believe somewhere, somehow along the line, you’ve been majorly indoctrinated. Duped, more likely actually.”

      Translation: I am so much smarter then Stan. Since he disagrees with me he is stupid, superstitious and so much less intellectual then I am.

      • Bob says:

        My god, Stan 5:18, why would you admit to that?

        But seriously, I will tell you straight out, I’m not any smarter or anything than you Stan. Except perhaps, just more curious?

        • Stan says:

          Let me assure you Bob that the curiosity never stops. I read several non-fiction books a week and hundreds of articles. Some of the greatest mind in the world were religious people. You know some of the names. St Augustine of Hippo, St Francis of Assisi, Georges Lemaître, Father of the Big Bang. To assume that just because we believe in Christ means that we stop thinking is insulting and intellectually lazy.

          Again, you assume greater powers of thought then people of faith on no more evidence then your own opinion.

          • Bob says:

            Those are interesting reads, Stan 12:40. But, for curiousitie’s sake, I wouldn’t stop with them. I’d read or watch Richard Feynman on youtube, and Carl Sagan, and so on.

          • Stan says:

            Did Sagan years ago….when I wasn’t a Christian. A man in love with himself. I have read Siddhartha, Darwin and even some Freud when dream interpretation was still discussed. Aurthur C Clarke, Asimov and Heinlein in the realm of science fiction. The Re-reading of “Stranger in a Strange Land” I did two years was very interesting. The first time I didn’t realize the title was Bionically based, now that I am living that condition it made the book a lot more understandable.

            G K Chesterton and C S Lewis are still my number 1 re-read right now. Once is not enough. As I mature in my faith my understanding of their works increases.

          • Stan says:

            Biblically based….spell check and no glasses :)

  6. Avatar of Demosthenes Demosthenes says:

    Poor girls, forced to “Tow the Party Line”. Do I hear dissension in the ranks?

    Way to go Catholic Bishops, keep up with the misogyny.

    • entech says:

      Yes, all these demands for recognition is the work of the devil, The idea of women as clergy is worse than pedophilia, or so the bosses said.

  7. Bob says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4R4VMMTyGc

    This is too funny, had to share. lol

    • entech says:

      Quite funny, just the sought of confusion you get when you somehow convert the Jewish Rabbi called Yeshua into something else. something which in Greek becomes Jesus Christ.

  8. Bob says:

    Stan 5:11 Didn’t mention you’ve checked out Richard Feynman. He is excellent; I hope you do.

  9. Bob says:

    And Stan, did you watch Bob 10:06 video? I hope you do, it is hilarious, and true.

    • Stan says:

      yeah hilarious (yawn). The gentleman needs a little more gentle technique. Not someone I would have at one of my retreats.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>