Sunday, January 20, 2013

Redemptorist Priest Vets the Vatican. Ongoing Crusade-Inquisition Mindset Opposes. Cheer the Rev. Tony Flannery's Dissent

The Drive to Vet Continues, and Within Venerable Institutions
Watch the Response:  The Drive to Force Conformity, 
as in Crusading and Inquisition times, also continues.

Heresy, oh, my. 

If Father Flannery prevails, will the Albigensians be reinstated as theologically respectable? 

Priests vet their dogma.  Response:  Inquisition for heresy, or Open the Vatican Library?

1. Open the Vatican Library.  Open the sources. Allow the copying and dissemination of any and all document and shards.  How else to vet how institutions arrive at dogma, dogma that then has been used for millenia to define whose relationship to a a deity and beliefs are acceptable, and whoever disagrees shall be persecuted as deviant. 

2.  Modern dissenter. One Tony Flannery, The Rev. Tony Flannery, now age 66, has done his own research and voiced his dissent as to official Roman Catholic institutional tenets for years, and relatively freely, until now.  He is a Catholic priest in Dublin, who is now being hounded by the Vatican's dogma enforcement unit, for refusing to sign a statement that included matters in which Father Flannery does not believe:  including that women should "never be ordained" as priests, and that he would adhere to church orthodoxy.  See

Father Flannery is a "Redemptorist" priest.  What is that?  It is a missionary society within the Catholic church, founded in 1732, and its adherents work among the poor.  See the history at

3.  Institutional response calcified through centuries: Compelled conformity. Will that, however, address the issue of truth, the role of factual basis for dogma. It never has before.  It cannot further productive discussion now.

Look at what is asked of Father Flannery:  The priest is asked to agree that, as a matter of fact, the priesthood as we know it now, originated directly from Jesus, and a special group of his followers were also designated priests.  Father Flannery suggests no:  "It is more likely that some time after Jesus, a select and privileged group within the community who had abrogated power and authority to themselves, interpreted the occasion of the Last Supper in a manner that suited their own agenda. "  See 

Question dogma at your peril. 

As in politics, those with loser policies focus on improving their means of persuasion, using force, groupthink, fanning anger with flawed fact-free conclusions;  and not on merit of the policy itself.  The new alchemy:  turn ignorance into belligerence.

4.  Issues that will not go away, scripture and women and gays.  Oh, my. On with the silly excommunications, laicization of clergy, and other ways of killing the spirit, or trying to. This entire site, our Vetting Roots, delights in vetting old texts, histories, trying to find whether what we are told to believe is somebody's else's wishful thinking to entrench evolved power and might; or is "inspired." Dogma does not survive such vetting. Does that make the vetter heretic or unreligious? Not necessarily.  Vetting merely lets ride what facts cannot resolve. And that may be a deeper spirituality than lock-step parroting of forced words.

Institutions chant: is this so?

Don't think.  Keep brain dumb.
Not through this door, will it come.
Hide the ink, wreck the pen.
Keep the power. Amen.

Back to Father Flannery. 

Questioning factual bases for later-adopted institutional dogma is not to be an atheist.  By way of later update, this 1.22.2013, religious agnosticism or religious atheism, both are alive and well, and healthy in a mosaic world, see Gary Gutting, The Way of the Agnostic, at