Thursday, July 24, 2008

To One of the Lady Priests I Wrote, and No Response to Date.

The following letter was written and forwarded Monday, July 21, 2008, via email to one of the women recently "ordained" in Boston:

Dear Ms. Carpeneto:

Having noted with interest, that three women were ordained as claimed as Roman Catholic priests, on your website, it states that the Roman Catholic Womenpriests reject the penalty of excommunication issued by the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith on May 29, 2008 stating that the “women priests and the bishops who ordain them would be excommunicated latae sententiae.”

As an attorney in American civil law, I observe one cannot declare that the law does not apply to themselves. In other words, a person cannot declare a law not applicable to himself or herself just because they do not agree with the law. An obvious example is the criminal law that is applicable to all of society. Assuredly, there are those who would reject any law against use of illegal drugs as they may wish to use them, and I have seen and heard the protest of those who advocate against such laws.

Of course, a declarant that states a law has no effect upon him or her, does not truly change the law’s effect. It is the law. It seems oddly out of order to state that the women “reject the law” when that law is applicable to you. It does not void the law or its impact on you. In other words, if what the Catholic Church teaches is true, and that it speaks on behalf of St. Peter, who was granted law giving authority, then you are excommunicated. Period. No response from you is relevant except for repentance. The excommunication is a judgment on your soul regardless of your own words and the judgment is instantly executed until otherwise satisfied. Why risk the ultimate sanction of condemnation?

The alternative question is, if what the Catholic Church teaches is not true, why did you attempt ordination in the Catholic Church?

I don’t want to offend you, but it seems you have set up an untenable contradiction here and care for your soul should be of great concern.

Thanks kindly,

John Keenan, J.D.


  1. If they don't accept the Pope's word for it that women can't be ordained in the first place, then why should they accept the sentence of latae sententiae excommunication for attempting ordination? Here we see the spirit of Luther and his progeny at work: do whatever you want, and (try to) force the Holy Spirit to take the credit for it.

    Of course, as you say, the law is the law, whatever the womyn think, just like 2+2=4, however much we might wish it was 5.

  2. 4? I sincerely held, believed, cried, judged, danced, clapped, and sang in belief that all along, it was 5! Now you tell me it is 4. Can't be. Mathematics are not applicable to me. Period. My joy is complete in knowing that it is 5. Don't tell me or anyone else to the contrary because as I declare in word what it is, that is what it is: 5. Period. So there you go.

  3. I'd have to say your email put a pointy little point on the subject.

    And really - if believing 2 + 2 = 4 affirms your life vision, well who are we to dispute your conclusion?

    I always thought 2+2 = 6 'cause I hate numbers that are not even. So in my world there are no odd numbers.

  4. Hmm....I only have a puny BA degree in CJ, yet I see flaws and am reminded why I considered going on for a Law degree...because most of the world is insane. Especially womenpriests.

    Here is my similie:

    I can stand in the garden for weeks with my toes and plantar warts in the dirt. I can either use good tanning lotion or maybe housepaint to make me orange. I can stand at orans with my palms outward as green leaves, and I can be redder than any red-orange hue you've ever seen.

    I can call myself a tomato. I can find a Gardener to "ordain" me a tomatoe according to my terms, whether the Gardener agrees with me or not.

    But somehow, the words and actions don't make it so.


    Oh, and keep praying for us here in far nuthin...I'm not giving up...