Monday, January 4, 2021


 A minister said a prayer at a congressional meeting this weekend. He concluded with Amen and Awoman.

No wonder religion is no longer taken seriously.

In light of that, this makes sense:


rcg said...

What if he was making a comment the correct form of marriage?

Anonymous said...

Yet there are bishops and priests who vote for the enemy of religion - the Abortion Party - the main reason why many Catholics no longer take the Church seriously. Why would you when your “spiritual” leaders vote for the party supporting intrinsic evil?

Anonymous said...

Nearly as bad was the Republican who painstakingly explained that it was not a gendered word, but was instead Latin for "so be it"...

Ignorance is ignorance....the prayer also invoked pagan gods...

Anonymous said...

Full closing text, invoking Hindu polytheistic god as coequal with the monotheistic Jewish/Christian/Islamic deity.
As an fyi, it was a PA Republican rep who stated Amen is a Latin word.
Stupid is as stupid does, and shows many can wear the name Emanuel quite unworthily. And the Methodists can also create unworthy ministers. His seminary is a community college run by the United Methodists, but is non-denominational (they will take anybody's money and will grant a degree to them).

Now may the God who created the world and everything in it bless us and keep us. May the Lord make his face to shine upon us and be gracious unto us. May the Lord lift up the light of his countenance upon us and give us peace — peace in our families, peace across this land and, dare I ask, oh Lord — peace even in this chamber, now and ever more. We ask it in the name of the monotheistic god, Brahma, and god known by many names by many different faiths. Amen and A-Woman.

johnnyc said...

rcg said...
What if he was making a comment the correct form of marriage?

New House gender rules says don't think so lol

Christian families in big trouble. This is going to be forced and they will go after homeschooling also. Pope say anything against this? Don't expect that he would because hey it's about the climate baby!

John Nolan said...

We've had 'herstory' for some time now - I always took it to be a play on words alluding to women's history, not an etymological howler.

'Amen' may be borrowed from Hebrew, but it is still a Latin word, and as such has the stress on the first syllable. 'Baptisma' and 'baptizare' are also Latin words, borrowed in this case from Greek.

French Catholics traditionally ended vernacular prayers with 'Ainsi soit-il'.

TJM said...

Anonymous K at 8:09 PM and 9:27 PM,

I suspect you were not a Latin scholar and here is a textbook definition of "Amen:"

Amen is commonly used after a prayer, creed, or other formal statement. It is spoken to express solemn ratification or agreement. It means “it is so” or “so it be.” Amen is derived from the Hebrew āmēn, which means “certainty,” “truth,” and “verily.”.

Anonymous said...

That’s Clericalism !!!!!!!! The minister presided over a congregation that consisted of two political ideologies and the preacher used THEIR position to advance the ideology They are most closely aligned to even though the prayer doesn’t typically address either ideology. Clericalism !! Later that day the gender neutral Pelosi lays down the new house rules that require gender neutral language be used in that house assembly. But this weisenheimer thinks “but what about Romance languages? Their words are masculine and feminine, and that goes against the official party doctrine “

Anonymous said...

When a word is named as of a certain origin, that does not include, and quite specifically excludes, words borrowed from other languages.

The implication is quite clear in statements regarding "amen" ane Latin in that it is originally a Latin word.

Which is entirely incorrect. By that semantically freewheeling definition, they should be saying it is an English word, since we have borrowed it, too, and did so later than Latin.

Anonymous said...

If Anonymous K had said "Amen" was a Latin word, you would all be telling him what an idiot he is and correcting him on it. You only come to the defense of the person mentioned earlier because he is a Republican and therefore perceived as being "good" and on your side.

Being right and being liked are two different things, and half of the commenters here have absolutely no idea how to tell the difference.

John Nolan said...

English borrowed heavily from Latin after the 14th century. Unbelievable and incredible have the same meaning and are both English words. Prefixes like super, sub, extra, inter, among many others are Latin prepositions. Yet they belong to the English language through adoption, as indeed does 'amen'.

'Arena' is the Latin word for 'sand' but it is also a commonly used English word.

'When a word is named as of a certain origin, that does not include, and quite specifically excludes, words borrowed from other languages'. I'm not sure what is meant by this sentence, if indeed it means anything at all, so it would help if you could provide at least one example.

Anonymous said...

Bee here:

Oh boy! I hope we don't have to add the variant of every word that has the three letters "men" in it. That is NOT going to be convenient!

Mention becomes womention.
Mental becomes womental.
Commendation becomes comwomendation.
Argumentative becomes arguwomentative.

And I suppose were also going to have to do this for all words or phrases containing other sensitive combinations of letters, such as "black." I don't know how we inoculate those...

Black Friday
Black Hole

I know the thought police will soon tell us though. I can't wait for the latest "Approved and Banned English Words and Phrases" manual comes out from the Conscientious Correct Politically organization (also known as the CCP), of course, published in China.

God bless.

Anonymous said...

I’ll attempt to summarise a Woke/leftist student activist’s explanation for you (that was given to me) :
Bee, you must understand that language does not really describe reality as it in fact constructs reality. What people can and can’t say must at times be regulated in an authoritarian manner; racist, sexist and homophobic language must be suppressed because language and discourse (how we talk about things) , to repeat, really does construct reality.
Bee, you must realise how past power elites in the West, ie white, heterosexual males, have repeatedly for centuries used the slipperiness of language to foist their construction of the “truth” on to women and racial and sexual minorities.
You have to realise that today when an individual accidentally makes use of non politically correct speech, eg uses the wrong pronouns for a transsexual person, that person is not simply making a mistake but that individual is an agent of oppression.

Bee, given a chance such a person will go on to explain to you, that reason, logic and evidence-based arguments, and even science itself are all white, western, heterosexual male ways of knowing ( and often are themselves tools of oppression) and by embracing Wokeness one will come to see that the emotions and lived experiences of oppressed minorities are equally important ways of knowing .....equally important sources of knowledge.

(By the way, it is incredible in the past 2 decades how an increasing number of people in the USA and the UK etc working in the arts, media and education, high school and universities have embraced the above assertions as key, fundamental truths to pass on to the public and our children and grandchildren....)

Anonymous said...

Pelosi’s latest bright idea - Forbidding the use of gender-specific language in the House.

By the way, what would a modern translation of the Bible look like that forbid the use of gender-specific language?

Anonymous said...

Which do you prefer:

Creator, Redeemer and Sustainer.
Mother, Lover and Friend.
Abba, Servant and Paraclete.
Source, Word and Spirit.
Parent, Child and Love
Fountain, Offspring, Wellspring.
Of Whom, Through Whom, In Whom.

Some believe something must be done about all the pronouns used in the Bible for God that are almost exclusively he/him/his; and all those many metaphors for God in the Bible that are rooted in masculine imagery.

Where would I be without "Catholic" articles?

Also, so great to discover today that Peter's dream in Acts 10-15 actually relates to LGBTQ+ Christians !

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

All of that was being implemented in my 1970’s seminary 45 years ago. Silliness and will not gain progressives but will alienate orthodox.

John Nolan said...

One of the reasons for the 1998 Sacramentary getting the boot was its clumsy attempts to do away with masculine pronouns, as in:

'May the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands, to the praise and glory of God's name ...' which suggests that 'the Lord' and 'God' are separate entities.

Anonymous said...

Bee here:

To Anonymous at January 6, 2021 at 2:36 AM:

Oh, Anonymous, thank you SO much for enlightening me. How foolish I have been, not to realize the use of words are actually oppressing others, negating their lived experiences and not allowing that reality to be.

I have so much to learn. For instance, I don't know how it is the white, male, heterosexual worldview came to dominate all the others. Was it by physical force? Was it by brutality? I suppose it could never be because this worldview proved itself to be superior to all the others over the test of time, allowing the progress of mankind even to the development of indoor plumbing and refrigeration, not to mention central heating, air conditioning, and telecommunications. It's hard for me to knock these advancements which I attribute to the white, male, heterosexual way of doing things, because I really like them and would hate to give them up.

And if the words we use really do literally construct reality, then how could anyone experience anything outside the reality those words construct? For instance, if it's the words used that construct a reality that says women are inferior to men, then how could any woman experience herself as anything BUT inferior to men? What could cause her to come to the conclusion that reality is not true, because the only reality anyone would know was the one constructed by the words used? See how ignorant I am? I can't understand this.

Another thing I can't understand is if all the various suppressed groups really had a better way of seeing things, why wouldn't that triumph automatically, without the dominant group having to curtail it's language? For instance, if the transsexual lifestyle really had some great positive to offer that was superlative to heterosexuality, why would it be oppressed? It seems pretty clear to me people move toward things that offer advantages to themselves. But it's also true that through lived experiences and learning passed down through generations, people transmit warnings about lifestyles and choices that lead to unhappy outcomes. And generally, they're not wrong. Who doesn't want their kid to live a happy, productive life, and who doesn't want to clue them into what works and what doesn't?

What's funny to me is that the "woke" group actually believes reality consists of what they think is true. But they never admit the fact that if you're in the middle of the Arctic, you will still freeze to death outside even if you think and really believe you're in Hawaii.

God bless.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 2.36am here again,
I think you misunderstood me. Some years ago, I instinctively believed Wokeness (and post structuralism and applied postmodernism etc) involved bad ideas with bad social consequences and after I have had the so-called intellectual foundations of Wokeness etc explained to me I still believe they are bad, flawed ideas with bad social consequences. But such an ideology would not have become so dominant in our era and flourished in our era among so many student and scholar activists (and seeped out of universities to mainstream culture) if they did not have some insights to offer.

I think many can acknowledge that humans can find it very hard to be objective and rational; most of us as individuals and as social/ethnic/racial/religious groups have been guilty of reconstructing our own histories in a way that makes us the hero and the other party as the villain; and there have been many instances in which so-called historical, philosophical and even scientific truths have turned out to be heavily distorted; and power elites in EVERY society and every era have used the slipperiness of language to to try and foist their construction of The Truth on to minorities.........there is SOME truth, I believe, in all that BUT the hard Left Woke take these some reasonable insights to such EXTREME and at times insane lengths to claim that there can never be any objective truths and that most, if not all, Western history, literature, religion and philosophy are basically sources of biased sexist and racist information. I believe, for example, it is almost madness to deny, as they do, that great Western writers - the so-called Dead White Males - can still speak to us across the ages and offer us wisdom and insights into our common human nature.

By the way, what recently astounded me was to find that Woke ideology (eg intersectional feminism and critical race theory etc) is now playing a part in the intellectual formation of significant numbers of students studying and preparing to be Protestant ministers, even in formerly conservative southern Protestant institutions......I imagine it will shortly find its way too to “progressive” Catholic institutions including progressive seminaries, if it hasn’t already.

Anonymous said...

A paragraph from an article at Crisis magazine:

“Because we have substituted truth for power we have arrived at a place where we cannot even use the word amen or refer to others as husband, wife, mother and father. We are on the verge of slipping into nothingness, surrounded on all sides by the irrational and contradictory claims of a culture that is only concerned with having the ‘liberty’ to craft their own version of reality, rather than living in the truth of the reality in which they find themselves.”

Craft your own version of reality. That was the temptation for our First Parents by the Enemy.

Sophia said...

Sophia here: Thanks Bee! As always, you nailed the topic-in this instance, "wokeness"! Your disdain for this dangerous rubbish was charmingly expressed. It was delicious! I thoroughly enjoyed it!
And lest Public School students (and likely Private School students before very long) should be deprived of an opportunity to excel in this and similar life skills curriculum without which they cannot lead successful lives-forget about the three "R's" - there is this to look forward to: