Those who have followed ideological religious feminism will readily recognize several familiar elements.  There is the special use of language for the purpose of covering up rather than revealing true intentions.  There is the refrain for full “autonomy” of the human person, characteristic of Women for Reproductive Choice, which, of course, includes the right to kill the unborn baby.  There is the charge repeated over and over again that women are not treated as “full persons,” a charge never specified but which, despite frequent denials, usually reflects a secular materialist notion of equality with a specific notation for women religious of demanding the right to priestly ordination as proof of such equality within the Church.  Finally, there is the contemporary demand for “legitimate dissent” from moral norms exemplified in the recent “Curran affair.”

These three features go hand in hand, explaining the natural alliance of dissenting theologians, religious feminists and women for ordination.  All three demand a radically different Church from the one founded by Christ.  All three appeal to an ecumenism interpreted to suit their purpose.  All three resent Rome and fight it with every weapon at their command.  All three look upon pro-life and the battle for traditional standards of sexual and family morality with a measure of derision.  And all three, even though the numbers of their adherents may be relatively few, exert a profound influence in the war of words and propaganda, the language of deceit, employed by those desiring to substitute secular ideas for religious concepts.