Month: April 2012

Married priests vs. female priests

I, Bowman in Wed. Journal today.  Married priesthood first, women’s second, for strategic reasons if nothing else:

The married priest is more likely to see the woman’s viewpoint, and a married priesthood is a much more realistic goal.

Respondeth one John Butch Murtagh from Oak Park to the first part:

Nice try Jim, but if marriage is the key to understand[ing] the other sex, why are there so many divorces?

To which I, Bowman:

Nice try, John, but if divorce demonstrates misogynism and/or misandry, why for so many does remarriage signal the triumph of hope over experience, as The Great Cham said long ago?

Steve Chapman madder than hell and will take it no longer

Conservatives who raise dire alarms about what will happen in Barack Obama’s second term face a similar problem. They need him to lose so their predictions will not be exposed as products of raging paranoia.

That’s from Chi Trib’s resident conservative editorial board member and columnist.  Is he mad at people who say mean things about Obama, or isn’t he?  Dispeptic? [Oops, dyspeptic]

via Obama’s second term: Fraudulent fears of Obama’s second term – Chicago Tribune.

Leave this guy alone, will you?Cropped version of File:Official portrait of B...
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Making sure you are not misunderstood

Wondering about the situation or plight of ecumenism in these perilous days, Martin Marty as expected touches all bases, including the objection to his worried tone that I had right off, as he heard from a friend,

“What are Christians in mainline and moderate and (gulp!) liberal styles griping about. They won!”

I note the “gulp!” insertion.  It’s the obligatory understated distancing himself from this concern or at least the “liberal” part.  It’s what you do when giving heed to those who are not like him and his followers, lest anyone think he’s weakening on the point.  Lots of people do this.  I have.