Frank Bruni’s critique, in Time Magazine, of Roman Catholicism as being sexist is testament to the fact that he has no understanding of reality.
There are two parts to this article:
One cannot possibly understand Roman Catholicism unless one first observes what is obvious in nature.
Men and women are different, just as cats and dogs are different, sky and sea is different, food and water is different. In spite of what liberals believe, difference does not mean unequal and unequal does not mean “better than” or “more important than”but some people confuse the two. Equality is only logically possible when things are the same.
Take the concept of quantity for example. The quantity of 5 is greater than the quantity of 4. They are unequal quantities. 5 will never be equal to 4. It’s not possible.
However does this “inequality” mean that the quantity 5 is “better and more important than” the quantity of 4?
No it doesn’t, it doesn’t mean that at all.
Liberals mix up the concepts of equality, sameness, differentness, better than, more important than, and complementarity, by meshing one or more of them together in which the result is using a single word to talk about several very different, distinct, and independent concepts.
Liberals, by making this erroneous conceptual oversight, base this portion of their ideology on falsely informed logic, and that false logic is exactly what leads the complete collapse of their arguments because their own logic destroys itself as a result of its own internal inconsistency and contradiction.
That’s their right. It’s sad that folks are falsely informed this way, but that’s their right. All we can do is continue to try and show them what we see.
Now, for whatever reason, liberals want so badly to believe that women and men are the same. I don’t understand why they wish this to be true, and I don’t entirely know that a regular run of the mill liberal would have analyzed that completely, and be able to answer my question, but based on everything I see, it seems that they really want women and men to be the same. Perhaps we may get an answer from a learned liberal who loves the debate at some point in the future.
Nevertheless, this desire for a reality that is inconsistent with nature appears to be the fundamental driving force that informs their desire to shout, pronounce, and declare that sex and gender are fluid and can be changed arbitrarily when desired.
With that kind of fundamental misunderstanding of nature, it makes perfect sense why they believe what they do about men and women and the Roman Catholic Church. With that misunderstanding of nature, it also makes perfect sense why they hold the views they hold about homosexuality, transgender topics, and a whole range of other subjects surrounding sexuality and gender.
If sex and gender are fluid, and are not different and deeper in terms of their connection to the human soul than a human arm or a leg is, and men and women are the same because sex and gender are simply a physical appendage to their body, then consistency of logic would also require men to be upset and demand that they must be able to get pregnant and bear children.
Nature proves to us that women and men are different. Nature also proves that sexuality is a very complex and all-encompassing system that is also connected to many other physical, psychological, and spiritual components within the human body.
The all-encompassing nature of something, is the very proof that the differences attributed to it are also all encompassing.
However different is not the same as unequal, or “better than”, or “more important than”, and that’s what liberals get so wrong.
Is a husband equal to his wife? No.
They are different. Their roles are different and because of the differences talk of equal or unequal makes no sense.
The only place equality comes into play are where sameness occurs. A husband and wife are the same in the sense that they are both human, and because of that shared sameness the natural result is that they are both equal in dignity, importance, objective value, and objective worth, but that’s common sense.
Since the dawn of man, societies have placed various social values on actions and tasks. This is an anthropological function and has throughout history been based on survival.
Many times, society has placed greater social value on actions performed by men.
This is what liberals completely miss. The value society places on an action or a person has nothing to do with the real value of the action, the man, or the women, it is merely something that a particular society chooses to ascribe value to. So the value is perceived. Its subjective. It was arrived at by consensus based usually on on anthropological reasons and differs from society to society.
An example of this is that in some societies, the participants place a greater social value on a man going out to make money, than they place on woman staying at home to raise children. However, there are other cultures and societies that place a greater social value on a woman caring for her children as opposed to her placing her child in the care of others while she goes out and earns money and food. Yet other societies place grater value on the number of children a family has.
Each of these things are values that society places on actions and people.
Liberals ignore this fact, and try to combat the problem by re-enforcing it and giving up to it.
In essence, liberals are the ultimate form of the high school kid who does whatever he has to in order to follow the cool crowd and get their approval.
Instead of a liberal saying, “the current societal value you place on certain actions and people is wrong”. And then picking up their battle horn and going out to change society so that it removes the perceived value of actions and adopts more accurate view of the objective value of people, they choose to bow down and follow it, they give up to it. And in giving up to it, they say society placed these messed up and inaccurate social values on certain things and we the liberals want to make sure all people have a chance to participate in this messed up and false value system because we’d rather conform to it than fight it.
What a solution!? Huh? Feed the beast! Give up and accept what is wrong, and join in with it, become part of it, and participate fully in it so you can expand its false cause.
That’s exactly the opposite of what the Catholic Church does.
Since liberals refuse to understand or fight against the real enemy of false and artificial value that societies (often for anthropological reasons) place on actions and roles, they will never be able to understand the Roman Catholic Church, or conservatives of faith.
More sadly than that, however, is that without taking off their blindfolds and emerging from the darkness, liberals will continue to serve and further empower the very false value system that is the root cause and real source of the problem they are seeking to fix, and they have no idea it even exists.
How sad it is to unwittingly serve and strengthen the power of your enemy, all while thinking that you are actually serving to forward your cause.
The problem will never be solved, because liberals are fixated on a false root cause.
However, let me return to the main point of this article.
Catholics (Men and Women) believe that Jesus Christ did everything deliberately and for good reason.
Jesus Christ chose 12 men to be his apostles. Women were not part of his closest circle of advisors and confidants.
The Purpose of the Roman Catholic Church is to continue to implement and push forward those things Jesus did and told the apostles to continue.
If the Church follows other things exactly as Jesus has done or said, why would the Priesthood be any different?
The fact that some societies or groups of people mistakenly place a greater social value or social prominence on a group of men serving in the priesthood, than those same societies or groups of people place on women who serve as nuns is testament as to the Objective and Critical Importance of the Roman Catholic Church. The church is the only institution that has a consistent record of identifying and fighting the real enemy.
The fact that the priesthood is a role reserved for participation by men is not the issue.
The issue is that certain groups of people falsely and mistakenly ascribe a greater social value to those men than they do to the women who serve God as nuns in a different but equally important role. People want to keep up with the joneses. If the false concept of the jones was shattered, the entire paradigm would change.
Instead of joining in, contributing to, and participating in the falsehood of human perception and societal value assignment like the misinformed liberals do, the Roman Catholic Church transcends that and continues to fight against the forces of darkness by identifying and exposing the subtle lies of the destroyer, while it continues to implement the mission of Jesus Christ on earth.
Bruni has it all wrong. He is fixated on a detail that flows naturally out from the root cause, as a result. He doesn’t go anywhere near the root cause. And unless you attack the root cause you will never solve the problem.