| We hope you enjoy your visit! You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Church in the Future | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Thursday, 15. December 2011, 23:15 (532 Views) | |
| Rose of York | Sunday, 18. December 2011, 22:25 Post #16 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Paul I have no idea what you are talking about. I was trying to get this topic back to the subject for which it was intended. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Deacon Robert | Sunday, 18. December 2011, 23:23 Post #17 |
|
Being as he was one of ours, most of the Deacons (who tend to be more toward the liberal side) were watching his effort to get both sides closer together. I personally, since he has passed, have not paid much attention to what his vision has become. Just reading from the url given, I think "the Catholic Common Ground Initiative" has hijacked his vision and turned it into something he was trying to prevent. |
|
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Sunday, 18. December 2011, 23:38 Post #18 |
![]()
Administrator
|
I was a bit taken aback by this "promote dialogue within the Church on a variety of theological and social issues, including the changing roles of women, human sexuality, healthcare reform, and immigration—challenges facing not just the American Catholic Church but the United States as a whole." Fair enough to have dialogue between the hierarchy and laity about social issues, but they theological ones? My doctor is trained in her profession, I trust her judgement. The clergy and trained in their role. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Gerard | Sunday, 18. December 2011, 23:57 Post #19 |
|
As a recent pope said. Sometimes the people listen to the hierarchy, sometimes the hierarchy listen to the people. Newman was unpopular in Rome because he pointed out that it was the people who held on to the divinity of Christ when the hierarchy had become Arian. The hierarchy should not be given blind trust. Blind, deferential trust is the problem. Doctors now expect to involve patients in decisions about treatment. Blind trust of doctors has gone. It needs to be gone with the hierarchy too. Gerry |
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| Deacon Robert | Monday, 19. December 2011, 00:04 Post #20 |
|
Rose, even theological issues need to be discussed. In the least people need to understand the "why" of the church's teaching. We all need to know and understand what we believe and the "why" we believe before we can begin to evangalize or meet a challenge facing the US or the whole world.the Catholic Common Ground Initiative does not appear to do this |
|
The burden of life is from ourselves, its lightness from the grace of Christ and the love of God. - William Bernard Ullanthorne | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Monday, 19. December 2011, 00:59 Post #21 |
![]()
Administrator
|
I agree the we need to know the reasons for all that the Church teaches, I had not realised Catholic Common Ground Initiative does not appear to do this. When people ask me (for example) why we believe in the Virgin Birth it is good to know WHY. It isprobably we have lost a lot of people from the Church because they were told "you must believe this that and the other" but their questions went unanswered. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| OsullivanB | Monday, 19. December 2011, 01:15 Post #22 |
|
The questions we should be equipped to deal with at least include these two: 1) Why do you believe this? 2) Why does this matter? |
| "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer | |
![]() |
|
| Ned | Monday, 19. December 2011, 13:47 Post #23 |
|
And to add two more - 3) Is this particular thing something that you must believe? 4) What are the implications if you don't? |
![]() |
|
| Ned | Monday, 19. December 2011, 14:21 Post #24 |
|
Clergymen of other denominations are able to have open discussions, and disagreements, about theological issues. Here's an example: a 28 minute public discussion between two CofE clergymen, a rector and one of his curates following on from some sermons - http://vimeo.com/33734835 - there's no picture for the first five minutes. Can you imagine Catholic priests having a similar friendly discussion about Marian apparitions or Charismatic services - or one of them likening preachers to Vomit Bags. Edited by Ned, Monday, 19. December 2011, 14:22.
|
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | Monday, 19. December 2011, 14:53 Post #25 |
|
Deleted User
|
Having a democratic approach to the nuts and bolts of running the parish eg finance would be a very fair start. However, the lay/clerical gap will increase in the way forecast by the Prologue marts quotes unless the laity are encouraged to debate doctrine and theological issues without fear of someone throwing labels like heresy about. Take the ongoing problems around the Church's approach to the artificial contraception problem. Who decided this was a theological issue and not a practical one? And even if we do concede that it is theo;ogical, surely it is an area where lay opinion is vital to the Church's stance. There are other examples. There are still far too many of us ready to say "The Church says so, so it must be true and it's sinful to say otherwise". We don't do ourselves or the Church any favours by this attitude and it is not a mature approach to belief ,in my view John |
|
|
| Ned | Monday, 19. December 2011, 17:33 Post #26 |
|
I'm sorry, John, but I think it would be a disaster unless parishes are to be much larger than they are today; and there would have to be definite and rigid rules set down regarding the sort of people who were fit and proper persons to be members of the finance committee. It would be more realistic to put priests onto set salaries, and control finances at a diocesan or national level. |
![]() |
|
| Gerard | Monday, 19. December 2011, 17:47 Post #27 |
|
On Consulting the Faithful on Matters of Doctrine |
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| Ned | Monday, 19. December 2011, 22:41 Post #28 |
|
Hullo Gerard, I'm looking at http://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/NEWMNLAY.HTM - NEWMAN ON THE LAITY by Rev. Michael Sharkey and http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=12465 - An article in The American magazine "A Conspiracy of Bishops and Faithful" If the laity are to be consulted then which of of the laity, and how? Regards Ned |
![]() |
|
| Gerard | Monday, 19. December 2011, 22:53 Post #29 |
|
Ned, I think the idea is that of a majority of the laity, perhaps an overwhelming majority. A couple of doctrine contenders today might be; 1. Family planning via artificial birth control 2. Married priests Gerry Edited by Gerard, Tuesday, 20. December 2011, 15:54.
|
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Friday, 30. December 2011, 15:06 Post #30 |
|
From another thread:
We are actually supposed to have that sort of democratic approach in our Church though the voting is restricted to bishops. I don't actually have an issue with that, I don't think it's appropriate to decide things by plebiscite among the rank and file of our Church - for starters, how would you identify somebody as a catholic entitled to vote? I would like to see priests involved in the procedure but, despite the problems we have experienced with our bishops in recent years, I still trust them collectively to get Church teaching right and would be happy for them to take charge if they would actually get on with it. They don't do that, however; collegiality was arguably the most important change to come out of Vatican II but it has never ever been implemented. Almost immediately following the last session of Vatican II, the Roman Curia re-established their stranglehold on the Church, effectively pushing the bishops into the role of onlookers. John asks about a vote on women priests, not only do our bishops have no say in the matter, Pope John Paul II unilaterally forbade them to even talk about it - how's that for collegiality in action? The Roman Curia, however, have ended up strangling themselves. As Oscar Wilde said "The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about". In my experience, what "Rome" thinks or says is very far down the list of issues that most Catholics take into account in making decisions about their lives; the Curia have put themselves into that most dreadful of positions - simply being ignored. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic » |







3:43 PM Jul 11