Another Example of Inverted Pneumatology

I’ve criticized a distorted theology of the Holy Spirit I’ve called “inverted pneumatology,” which pretends that today the Holy Spirit primarily speaks not to the world from the Church but rather teaches the Church from a secularized world.

Writing in the National Catholic Reporter (I call it Distorter), Christine Schenk weighs in on the endless pressure campaign to ordain women to the diaconate (see here). Schenk’s argument poses a rhetorical question: “Is the Holy Spirit telling us that female exclusion from ordained ministry and church decision-making is no longer acceptable and that something needs to be done about it?

Answer: No, He isn’t telling us that. But plenty of Catholics are growing fed up with the constant impressment of the “Spirit” as dummy ventriloquist for their agendas.

More Thoughts on “Christian Ownership Maximalism”

I recently recommended (here) Timothy Reichert’s seminal article advocating ownership of productive assets as essential to the Church’s ministry in the world today. Here I’ll add some additional observations.

When Pope Leo XIII affirmed in Rerum Novarum the right to private property, it was in part because without some part of material goods of the world, people — incarnate beings — lack the share of material things prerequisite to some degree of independence and security. It was the same reason the papacy objected to Italian unification: it deprived it of the Papal States. From 1870-1929, five popes sulked in the Apostolic Palace as self-described “prisoners of the Vatican,” not breaking their self-imposed moratorium until the Lateran Treaty restored papal territorial integrity in the form of the State of the Vatican City. They rightly recognized that even the Holy See required some piece of this planet to assure its sovereign independence.

My point: The Church recognizes how ownership is essential to independent action. Which ought to make Reichert’s arguments — and not the perennial paeans to poverty in recent vogue — persuasive. And which calls into question the American trend of selling off ecclesiastical property, promoted by many bishops under the Orwellian euphemism of “renewal of the local church.” Anybody who doubts this need only consider how the Archdiocese of New York announced this week a sell-off of “significant real estate assets, including the sale of the former archdiocesan headquarters” — prime real estate — and personnel layoffs to raise $300 million to pay for buggering priests. That should hardly be the primary mission we have to figure out how to fund.

When Will They Ever Learn?

Two things happened on December 9, past and present day. In 1946, the “doctor’s trial” — the prosecution of Nazi physicians for promoting the fascist euthanasia program — began in Nuremberg. In 2025, the New York Times ran a feature (here) asking whether doctors should be facilitating patients’ suicides. As Peter, Paul, and Mary asked, “When will they ever learn?” Or, following Santayana, do we rather prefer reliving history than learning from it?

The Abortion Pill

In its mania to advance abortion, the “Catholic” Biden administration loosened restrictions on the abortion pill. Under previous practice, that drug could not be prescribed to a woman without a prior in-person doctor visit, something Biden’s activists rescinded. Part of that came from the general promotion of “telehealth,” but in this case it was also part of that administration’s effort to defend abortion against those states that would enact protective pro-life legislation. Why not immunize abortionists in pro-abortion states against states that protect life, either when they perform abortions (and botch them, but enjoy immunity for their malpractice) or when they mail abortion drugs in violation of the Comstock Act?

As Ryan Anderson points out (here), the in-person doctor visit ensured a woman’s freedom from being pressured into an abortion. Anderson notes that “[w]e already have seen women coercively poisoned by boyfriends to kill their unborn babies.” Why should we be surprised? Young women are already warned against predatory men slipping them “roofies” — drugs — to knock them out prior to sexual assault. That men might slip young women abortion drugs to eliminate the consequences should surprise no one. And this would be a no-brainer absent the distortive impact of “choice” ideology promoted by those who profit from abortion. The abortion pill is promoted today as a “magic bullet,” not unlike another “Pill” celebrated 60-some years ago. Both make evil less visible.