Nevermind clerical abuse, what’s an ‘unfit’ nun doing wearing priestly regalia?

HOW nice to see the Cat-licks coming to grips with some really important issues.

On the day I received links to the latest horrors emerging from the Australian inquiry into priestly paedophilia, I discovered that a bit of kerfuffle had erupted over a picture of a Carthusian nun, wearing a stole and maniple, posted on the New Liturgical Movement site.

The picture is linked to these words from Catholic Encyclopedia:

The Carthusian nuns have retained the privilege of the consecration of virgins, which they have inherited from the nuns of Prébayon. The consecration, which is given four years after the vows are taken, can only be conferred by the diocesan. The rite differs but slightly from that given in the ‘Pontifical’. The nun is invested with a crown, ring, stole and maniple, the last being worn on the right arm. These ornaments the nun only wears again on the day of her monastic jubilee, and after her death on her bier. It is a consecrated nun who sings the Epistle at the conventual Mass, though without wearing the maniple.

In short, the nuns only get to wear the fancy frock and the accessories three times – the last when she’s a CORPSE!

Well, this too much to a commenter called “Peter”. He demanded to know:

What’s a woman doing wearing vestments that symbolize the priestly office? She is clearly unfit for such an office. I’m surprised the Church made such provisions.

Someone called “Daisy” then jumped in with:

Unfit? The greatest saint in Heaven is a woman. A Cathusian nun on her profession day, jubilee and death is not playing priest. She’s wearing the mantle of her Divine Spouse. Our Lord was Man so only men can be Alter Cristus. However, the word, unfit just isn’t’ the right one in this context.

And, hilariously:

One of the great things about being Catholic is that there’s always more to learn.

Yeah, like one in 20 Catholic priests are kiddie-fiddlers, although the REAL figure is probably one in 15!

According to this report, RMIT professor Des Cahill told the Victorian Parliamentary child abuse inquiry that his figures, based on analysing conviction rates of priests ordained from Melbourne’s Corpus Christi College, closely matched a much larger American analysis of 105,000 priests which found that 4362 were child sex offenders.

Professor Cahill said that 14 of 378 Corpus Christi priests graduating between 1940 and 1966 were convicted of child sexual abuse, and church authorities had admitted that another four who had died were also abusers, a rate of 4.76 per cent.

A cartoon that accompanied the report in The Age

But the actual figure was much higher when under-reporting was taken into account, along with cases dealt with in secret by the Catholic Church.

One in 20 is a minimum. It might be one in 15, perhaps not as high as one in 10.

He suggested that, though the Church tried to “fudge the figures” by including other church workers, Catholic priests offended at a much higher rate than other men. If the general male population now over 65 offended at the same rate, there would be 65,614 men living in Australia who had been convicted of child sex abuse — very far from the case.

The intercultural studies professor also told the inquiry that the Catholic Church was incapable of reforming itself because of its internal culture, and described the Church as “a holy and unholy mess, except where religious sisters or laypeople are in charge, for example schools and welfare agencies.

Hat tip: Tim Davies and Bill Murray (abuse inquiry)

11 responses to “Nevermind clerical abuse, what’s an ‘unfit’ nun doing wearing priestly regalia?”

  1. Robster says:

    We must be to the point that clerics, whether catholic or any other flavour (but, it seems mostly catlik) are by default, pedophiles. The Victorian inquiry has revealed a real taste for 11-12 year old boys by the catholic pedophiles. 11-12 year olds, that’s got to be healthy. No wonder the RCC his having huge difficulty attracting men to join their crazy little party, they know they’ll be tarred by the same brush as kiddy fiddlers the moment they emerge for the seminary. Good, if you’re silly enough to want to indulge in selling the nonsense, you deserve to be labelled as a pedophile and an idiot.

  2. JohnMWhite says:

    “a holy and unholy mess, except where religious sisters or laypeople are in charge, for example schools and welfare agencies.”

    Honestly, schools aren’t much better. One of our gym teachers was known for years to be interested in young boys (it was a high school so at least they were at or approaching puberty, but still) and it was basically a running joke. He had the boys shower after sports, which none of the other teachers required, and wandered back and forth between the curtain-less stalls talking to the students. He was eventually arrested when a complaint was made against him by a student at another school where he had previously worked, but his blatant behaviour had been tolerated for years. The irony is he was one of the far nicer teachers, he wasn’t dogmatic about rules and didn’t scream in people’s faces constantly like so many of the other bullies in charge of the place. But stopping the abuse of young people was never as important as intimidating young people into wearing the correct colour of socks as far as the management of the school was concerned. They were lay people, but they were just as ambitious, authoritarian and cowardly as the clergy who have sat on their hands for decades over the abuse allegations. Their attitude was that bullying built character and it was shameful to ever complain about anything a teacher or student did to you. It is the root of Catholicism that essentially might makes right, and perception is far more important than how you actually treat other people.

    Anyway, the (at best) 5% figure should be pretty damning. 5% of the general population are not abusing children, not even close, and one would think a holy institution ordained and inspired by a divine being would not wind up so corrupt. There is something rotten in the state of the Vatican. Catholicism is far from alone, it appears that the abuse of children appears in most places where adults are put in power over them, but the church is far and away the most egregious offender and has developed a systematic response to the issue that is, at every single step, designed to harm the victim and create more of them.

  3. Groover says:

    I want a womaniple on my right arm!!

  4. Marky Mark says:

    (On the day I received links to the latest horrors emerging from the Australian inquiry into priestly paedophilia)

    OT but wondering if you heard about the aussie case of “The Dingo Got my Baby” ?

    The woman Lindy was finally cleared this year after thirty years of suspected guilt.
    And religion, abuse of government power, and corruption all played a part in that case. Especially since Lindy, still a christian, but was not apart of the popular christian faith, was accused of murder. So this minor disagreement in faith gave the Christians the right to say she sacrificed her baby and the Dingo story a cover…while ignoring all the scientific evidence that said a dingo DID take her baby, including other eye witnesses.

    This is what comes from the christian mentality that they are right no matter what the facts say…and no matter how prosperous their theory.

    I encourage all to research this case as it is most interesting and heartbreaking at the same time. And one will find themselves pulling for Lindy…though a christian, but that belief had nothing to do with this crime. It proves the Christians will go after their own when it is to their advantage…and screw the facts!

  5. barriejohn says:

    This business about being “married to Jesus” is seriously spooky, especially when it applies to butch, male, married Christians. There is a video somewhere of a deluded Catholic woman whose entire apartment has been transformed into a shrine to Jesus, whom she is “in love with”, but I can’t find it now. Does anyone else recall it? Meanwhile, this offering from The Gaithers (who else) will amuse you – especially the dodgy wigs and other cranial arrangements!

  6. barriejohn says:

    PS Would you really want to spend the whole of eternity with that shower?

  7. barriejohn says:

    This little film cip is deeply disturbing:

  8. Brummie says:

    @ Robster. I think you spelt Seminary wrong. It should be Semen-ary.

  9. Matt Westwood says:

    I point you towards the guffaw-inducing Christian Woman by Type O Negative. Never fails to crack me up.

  10. RabbitOnAStick says:

    if she had a knitted balaclava she’d be in Pussy Riot.