
Catholic women release pink smoke near Vatican to protest male domination
Had the activists taken their Wednesday protest – a nod to the black and white smoke used by the Holy See to announce voting results – to the Vatican, they believe a similar fate would have awaited them.
'Whenever we go down to St Peter's Square, we are detained by the police ... and we are certainly not invited to go into the conclave,' Duignan said.
'The only women that those 133 men will see in the next few days will be nuns who are cleaning their rooms and serving them food and tidying up after them.'
The cardinals meeting on Wednesday behind closed doors in the Sistine Chapel will not hear any female opinions during deliberations expected to last days, with multiple rounds of voting.
The only women they will see before white smoke rises to announce their decision will be the nuns who cook, clean and serve them in the Santa Marta guesthouse.
In the global church as a whole, women have begun to take some senior lay roles, a process that accelerated a little under Pope Francis' papacy.
But even those who have studied theology and church ministry are excluded from the priesthood, and only priests hold the most senior leadership roles.
'Yes, Pope Francis elevated and promoted a few women into roles of responsibility, but they are always lower in status and authority than a man,' said Duignan.
'Even the youngest priest in the room is the boss of the oldest, more experienced woman.'
A sin and a scandal
The campaigners say women took equal roles in worship in the early Church, before medieval reforms, and, in Duignan's words, 'the men who are going into the Sistine Chapel this afternoon know that, and they don't want everyone else to know that'.
Kate McElwee, executive director of the Women's Ordination Conference campaign group, described this as an injustice and a 'crisis' for the Church.
'While the world may wait for white smoke or black smoke, we send up pink smoke as our hope that the Church may someday welcome women as equals,' she said.
French activist Gabrielle Fidelin called it 'a sin and a scandal that women are kept out of priesthood and the conclave'.
According to Duignan, even after Francis' relatively reformist 12-year pontificate, only one of the 133 cardinal electors to be sequestered in conclave has taken a positive stance on women's ordination.
And she was reluctant to identify him by name, in case he found himself expelled from the gathering.
This despite the once taboo issue being given an airing in the Synod – an assembly of clergy, clerics and laypeople – which under Francis has included female members.
In October last year, a report was issued after Francis approved a working party to look into the idea of allowing women to become deacons – a step before the priesthood.
It acknowledged that 'the question of women's access to diaconal ministry remains open' but concluded that it was too soon to make a decision.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Scoop
4 hours ago
- Scoop
French Overseas Minister In New Caledonia To Save Bougival Deal
, Correspondent French Pacific Desk French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls is once again in New Caledonia for a four-day visit aimed at maintaining dialogue, despite strong rejection from a significant part of the pro-independence camp. He touched down at the Nouméa-La Tontouta Airport on Tuesday evening (local time), his fourth trip to New Caledonia since he took office late 2024. For the past eight months, he has made significant headways by managing to get all political parties to sit together again around the same table and discuss an inclusive, consensual way forward for the French Pacific territory, where deadly riots have erupted in May 2024, causing 14 deaths and over €2 billion in material damage. On 12 July, during a meeting in Bougival (West of Paris), some 19 delegates from parties across the political spectrum signed a 13-page document, the Bougival Accord, sketching what is supposed to pave the way for New Caledonia's political future. The document, labelled a "project" and described as "historic", envisages the creation of a "State" of New Caledonia, a dual New Caledonia-French citizenship and the transfer of key powers such as foreign affairs from France to New Caledonia. The document also envisions a wide range of political reforms, more powers for each of the three provinces and enlarging the controversial list of eligible citizens allowed to vote at the crucial local provincial elections. When they signed the text mid-July, all parties (represented by 18 politicians) at the time pledged to go along the new lines and defend the contents, based on the notion of a "bet on trust". But since the deal was signed at the eleventh hour in Bougival, after a solid ten days of tense negotiations, one of the main components of the pro-independence camp, the FLNKS, has pronounced a "block rejection" of the deal. FLNKS said their delegates and negotiators (five politicians), even though they had signed the document, had no mandate to do so because it was incompatible with the pro-independence movement's aims and struggle. FLNKS rejection of Bougival The FLNKS and its majority component, Union Calédonienne, said from now on, while maintaining dialogue with France, they would refuse to talk further about the Bougival text or any related subject. They also claim they are the only pro-independence legitimate representative of the indigenous Kanak people. They maintain they will only accept their own timetable of negotiation, with France only (no longer including the pro-France parties) in "bilateral" mode to conclude before 24 September 2025. Later on, the negotiations for a final independence should conclude before the next French Presidential elections (April-May 2027) with the transfer of all remaining powers back to New Caledonia. The FLNKS also demands that any further talks with France should take place in New Caledonia and under the supervision of its President. It warns against any move to try and force the implementation of the Bougival text, including planned reforms of the conditions of voter eligibility for local elections (since 2007, the local "special" electoral roll has been restricted to people living in New Caledonia before 1998). During his four-day visit this week (20-24 August), Valls said he would focus on pursuing talks, sometimes in bilateral mode with FLNKS. The Minister, reacting to FLNKS's move to reject the Accord, said several times since that he did not intend to give up and that his door remained open. 'Explain and convince' He would also meet "as many (New) Caledonians as possible" to "explain and convince". Apart from party officials, Valls also plans to meet New Caledonia "Customary (chiefly) Senate", the mayors of New Caledonia, the presidents of New Caledonia's three provinces and representatives of the economic and civil society. The May-July 2024 riots have strongly impacted New Caledonia's standard of living, with thousands of jobless because of the destruction of hundreds of businesses. Health sector in crisis Valls also intends to devote a large part of his visit to meetings with public and private health workers, who also remain significantly affected by an acute shortage of staff, both in the capital Nouméa and rural areas. On Thursday, Valls plans to implement one of the later stages of the Bougival signing: the inaugural session of a "drafting committee", aimed at agreeing on how necessary documents for the implementation of the Bougival commitments should be formulated. These include working on writing a "fundamental law" for New Caledonia (a de facto constitution) and constitutional documents to make necessary amendments to the French Constitution. Elections again postponed to June 2026 Steps to defer once again the provincial elections from November 2025 to May-June 2026 were also recently taken in Paris, at the Senate, Valls said earlier this week. A Bill is tabled for debates in the Senate on 23 September 2025. In keeping with the Bougival commitments and timeline, it proposes a new deadline for provincial elections: no later than 28 June 2026. But FLNKS now demands that those elections be maintained for this year. On a tightrope again This week's visit is perceived as particularly sensitive: as Valls's trip is regarded as focusing on saving his "Bougival" deal, he is also walking on a tightrope. On one side, he wants to maintain contact and an "open-door" policy with the hard-line group of the FLNKS, even though they have now denounced his Bougival deal. On the other side, he has to pursue talks with all the other parties who have, since 12 July, kept their word and upheld the document. If Valls was perceived to concede more ground to the FLNKS, following its recent claims and rejections, parts of the pro-Bougival leaders who have signed and kept their word and commitment could well, in turn, desolidarise and denounce some kind of betrayal, thus jeopardising the whole, precarious equilibrium. The "pro-Bougival" signatories held numerous public meetings with their respective militant bases to explain the agreement and the "Bougival spirit", as well as the reasons why they had signed. This not only includes pro-France parties who oppose independence, but also two moderate pro-independence parties, the PALIKA (Kanak Liberation Party) and the UPM (Union Progressiste en Mélanésie), formed into a "UNI" platform (Union Nationale pour l'Indépendance), who have, since August 2024, distanced themselves from the FLNKS. At the same time, FLNKS took into its fold a whole new group of smaller parties, unions and pressure groups (including Union Calédonienne-created CCAT (field action coordination group dedicated to organising political campaigns on the ground) and has since taken a more radical turn. Simultaneously, Christian Téin, head of CCAT, was also elected FLNKS president in absentia, while serving a pre-trial jail term in mainland France. His pre-trial judicial control conditions were loosened in June 2025 by a panel of three judges; but he is still not allowed to return to New Caledonia. One of the moderate UNI leaders, Jean-Pierre Djaïwé (PALIKA) told his supporters and local media last week that he believed through the Bougival way, it would remain possible for New Caledonia to eventually achieve full sovereignty, but not immediately. Ruffenach: No intention to 'undo' Bougival Several pro-France components have also reacted to the FLNKS rejection by saying they did not intend to "undo" the Bougival text, simply because it is the result of months of negotiations and concessions to reach a balance between opposing aspirations from the pro-independence and pro-France camps. "Let's be reasonable. Let's get real. Let's come back to reality. Has this country ever built itself without compromise?", pro-France Le Rassemblement-LR party leader Virginie Ruffenach told Radio Rythme Bleu on Tuesday. "We have made this effort at Bougival, to find a middle way which is installing concord between those two aspirations. We have made steps, the pro-independence have made steps. And this is what allowed this agreement to be struck with its signatures". She said the FLNKS, in its "new" version, is "held hostage by (...) radicalism". "Violence will not take the future of New Caledonia and we will not give into this violence". She said all parties should now take their responsibilities and live up to their commitment, instead of applying an "empty chair" policy. No credible alternative: Valls Earlier this week, Valls repeated that he did not wish to "force" the agreement but that, in his view, "there is no credible alternative. The Bougival agreement is an extraordinary and historic opportunity". "I will not fall into the trap of words that hurt and lead to confrontation. I won't give in to threats of violence or blockades", he wrote on social networks. On Tuesday evening, as Valls was already on his way to the Pacific, FLNKS political bureau and its President, Christian Téin, criticised the "rapport de force" seemingly established by France. He also deplored that, in the view of numerous reactions following the FLNKS rejection of the Bougival text, his political group was now being "stigmatised". Ahead of the French minister's visit, the FLNKS has launched a "peaceful" campaign revolving around the slogan "No to Bougival". The FLNKS is scheduled to meet Valls on Wednesday. The inaugural session of the "drafting committee" is supposed to take place the following day on Thursday. He is scheduled to leave New Caledonia on Saturday.


Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
The (mis)management of Donald Trump
It is like one of those slapstick comedies from the early days of silent films: the Keystone Cops movies, perhaps, or Buster Keaton's various efforts. Lots of people rushing around, constant reversals of fortune and many pratfalls. Last Wednesday, on very short notice, the presidents and/or prime ministers of all the other major countries in the Nato alliance got together online to prep Donald Trump for his summit meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Saturday. He had to be coached about his newly adopted positions defending Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity because everybody knows that Trump tends to echo the views of the last person who talked to him, especially in subjects he doesn't know about (which is most subjects). So French President Emmanuel Macron, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Nato Secretary-general Mark Rutte, and sundry other European Nato notables drilled Trump on what to say and what not. Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy also got a few words in. Most importantly, they all said, Trump must insist Russia accept a ceasefire before peace negotiations started. Otherwise Putin could drag the negotiations out forever while continuing to conquer more Ukrainian territory. Trump was already quite cross about Moscow's foot-dragging on a ceasefire, so he seemed to take their advice seriously. Indeed, just before he stepped aboard Air Force One to fly to Alaska on Saturday he told reporters: "I want to see a ceasefire rapidly ... I'm not going to be happy if it's not today ... I want the killing to stop." But he was flying there to meet Putin — who would then become the last person he talked to on the subject. It's entirely possible that Putin doesn't have anything on Trump that's strong enough to blackmail him with. Lesser sexual and financial peccadilloes just slide off him like water off a duck's back. So why did "Teflon Don" applaud Putin getting off the plane in Anchorage, offer him a ride in the presidential limo, generally carry on like a bedazzled fanboy? He admires other dictators too, maybe because their absolute power intoxicates him (remember his courtship of North Korean's Kim Jong-un?), but his friendship with Putin is special. Nobody knows why. It was probably inevitable that Trump would do a U-turn as soon as he was in Putin's presence. All his promises of "severe consequences" (secondary tariffs on countries importing Russian oil) if Putin would not agree to a ceasefire went out the window. The 50-day deadline, the eight-day deadline, the tomorrow deadline — all forgotten in a moment. Flying home from Alaska, Trump wrote on Truth Social: "It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a peace agreement." Who's "all"? Trump. Property tycoon Steve Witkoff and former Florida senator Marco Rubio (total six years of foreign affairs experience) v Putin, Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrev, and foreign policy adviser Yuri Ushakov (total 133 years of foreign affairs experience). To be fair, Trump probably didn't understand this meant the Russians could go on fighting and bombing Ukraine until there was a peace settlement agreeable to Moscow — which will only be reached if and when Russian's maximal demands, amounting in practice to the subjugation of all Ukraine, have been accepted. He's not a detail man. Trump then summoned Zelenskyy to Washington to hear the bad news. Almost all the European Nato leaders who prepped him last Wednesday came along uninvited (although everybody will pretend otherwise) for a last-ditch effort to turn Trump around again. It might even work again. Even if it works this time, it's impossible to be always the last person Trump speaks to, and the effort to be that person soon degenerates into slapstick and pratfalls. The European Nato heads of government (and Canada's) will soon have to build a new Nato that does the old one's job of deterring Russia, but without the United States. They will, of course, carry on the pretence of the old Nato as long as possible, because although they have the money and the numbers to perform that task without American help there will be many shortfalls and gaps in the new alliance during a lengthy transition (three to five years). It will take a lot of hypocrisy and a massive campaign of perpetual flattery for the old Nato countries to keep Trump on side for that long while simultaneously keeping Ukraine out of Russia's hands. However, that is the task they have now set themselves, although some have yet to come fully to terms with the new strategic realities. • Gwynne Dyer is an independent London journalist.


Otago Daily Times
a day ago
- Otago Daily Times
Why are some threatened by the use of te reo?
I am 70. A Pākehā woman. I am not likely to become a fluent Māori speaker. Language learning is not my strong suit, as my French and Latin teachers, and even my 3-year-old Czech-speaking granddaughter, could attest. (She was so appalled with our practice at singing Happy Birthday in Czech for her mother she made me go solo when the cake arrived. Her mama was more generous.) But my language ineptitude and limited vocabulary does not stop me loving Māori, spoken or sung. I do not feel threatened by increasing use of it, or by the prominence of Māori for government department names, place names, on passports, or road signs. I do not understand why anyone else gets their knickers in a twist about such things. Where is the harm? Why is it scary? Why is this government hellbent on going backwards on official language use, rather than celebrating resurgence of our country's language and encouraging it at every turn, after our appalling treatment of it (and its speakers) in earlier decades? Earlier this year, after attending several school visits with my almost 5-year-old grandson, I bored anyone prepared to listen with my excitement at the way Māori language was incorporated into the start of the day. Each of the pupils was asked, in Māori, how they were as the roll was called. Some answered in English, others in Māori. It didn't matter. Several of the pupils described themselves as being ngenge (tired). That was a new word to me, but even my old brain could work out what it meant. When one pupil said he was feeling hōhā, that drew a surprised reaction from the teacher and prompted some discussion about whether he was bored or irritated. Of course I did not stay all day in that classroom, as much as I would have loved to, but I would be surprised if there were not many other occasions during the day when Māori was incorporated seamlessly into whatever was going on. It makes me wildly envious. There was none of that during my monocultural primary schooling, and my own children would have had limited exposure to te reo Māori as well. But that small experience at my grandson's school gave me hope that for my mokopuna, the Māori language will be an accepted and valued part of their lives and the education system might support them to go on to be fluent speakers. However, my optimism has been dented over the nonsensical nitpicking over the use of Māori words in early readers in the structured literacy programme. In New Zealand, adults and children use a range of Māori words in their everyday spoken language — think kia ora, whānau, mahi, wahine, tamariki, kia kaha to name a few. But our new-entrant classes have been deemed unable to cope with the inclusion of a few Māori words in reading books, even though it has been acknowledged they are likely to be familiar with these words. It seems particularly silly to be removing Māori words from a book called At the Marae . The zealotry with which Education Minister Erica Stanford is pursuing structured literacy concerns me. What she seems to be telling the world is that there is only one way children learn to read and that way must be rigidly followed. The idea that our children, like my grandson, and my already bilingual granddaughter, will struggle to read words they know in spoken language which follow a different pattern from an otherwise highly prescriptive text underestimates their flexibility and capacity for learning. Despite the protestations of Ms Stanford, this sanctioning of the removal of Māori words looks more like a feeble excuse to further undermine the language, rather than anything which would stand up to academic or even practical scrutiny. As someone who spent years as a teacher aide working with pupils who struggled with reading, and later as a literacy tutor with adults in the same position, I learned to appreciate different learning styles. I also learned not to take for granted what learners might already know or not know and to encourage them to use whatever cues they found useful. Working with subject matter which was familiar or interesting to them was vital. It worries me that lack of flexibility in the structured learning system will not serve all pupils well, but that teachers may be discouraged from using a different approach with those pupils. And when some pupils still struggle to read, and by reading I mean understanding what they read rather than just decoding words and what is called barking at text, as no doubt they will, who or what will get the blame? Teachers, parents, too many Māori words ... . It makes me want to weep. • Elspeth McLean is a Dunedin writer.