The beginning of the end of the Catholic Church

from JoeUser Forums
For those who know... all I need to say is this.. it is the beginning of the end..
blogging
5,817 views 32 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
The link/image thing won't load on this end. What's your evidence for such a complicated analytical fact? Oh and the end of what? Of the existence of the Catholic Church? Doubtful, but if lots of good Catholics suddenly disappear it may be due to the rapture. But who knows?
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
The new pope is 78. They didn't pick him to make changes or preserve the status quo, they picked him as a transitional pope. If anyone expects this to be the beginning or the end I think they have read too much into the choice.
DeskScapes - Bring your desktop background to life.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top

Reiki - Seeing you ask for facts to back up an assertion gave me a huge laugh this morning. Thanks man!

Well I don't know about Benedict being the end, but when more than 60% of Catholics want to allow women to become priests (CNN and FOX both had that) he does seem to be a pick out of step witht he congregation (not that religion is supposed to be democratic mind you).

Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Im not saying that he is the end..but the beginning of the end.. The Catholic church at this crucial time needs to move with the times and it will not do so with this Pope. Humanity is no longer in the dark ages or the age of the crusades, therefore this institution needs to upgrade in order to stay ontop.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
Im not saying that he is the end..but the beginning of the end.. The Catholic church at this crucial time needs to move with the times and it will not do so with this Pope.


If the Catholic Church (or any organization) starts to make its decisions based on what it thinks is the "popular" thing to do, that will be the beginning of the end.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
make its decisions based on what it thinks is the "popular" thing to do, that will be the beginning of the end.


It isnt to do what is popular, it is about realising that humanity has evolved from the dark ages, and we need to move with the times not with popularity but with the greater understanding of what it means to be a human on this planet today.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top

People aren't forced to be Catholic. If they want to live in a way that isn't allowed by Catholicism, they can be something else. I can't understand why people insist that private organizations of any kind have to be forced to change against their will.

No offense intended, but the ideals you espouse have nothing to do with what it means to be a human on this planet to day. People have lived just fine without them for tens of thousands of years. They are demonstrative of the feelings of part of the world's population, sure, but just because you deem them to be more evolved doesn't mean the process of evolution will deem them to be.

Given that far more people adhere to Catholicism than adhere to many religions that have already adopted the changes you speak of, I tend to think the human race has yet to make up its mind.

Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
It isnt to do what is popular, it is about realising that humanity has evolved from the dark ages, and we need to move with the times not with popularity but with the greater understanding of what it means to be a human on this planet today.


"Moving with the times" is not the purpose of spiritual leadership. If the leaders of the Catholic Church must choose between God or "what it means to be a human on this planet today", which do you think they should choose?
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top

Im not saying that he is the end..but the beginning of the end.. The Catholic church at this crucial time needs to move with the times and it will not do so with this Pope

And you would be wrong.  The Church does not have to move with the times, and indeed that is the definition of the church.  While people use situational ethics in their daily lives by necessity (I am told), the Church does not.  The church does not change based upon the politics or whims of the day. IN that, it can appear to be anachronistic, but in truth it is a stabalizing force for all those who believe.

I find it very disturbing that before the Pope has said one thing, so many people are piling on and foretelling doom and gloom. I also find the harping on this man to be petty and vindictive. He has harmed no one, and yet we are to already toss him out with the trash.

Sad, Very sad.

Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top

It isnt to do what is popular, it is about realising that humanity has evolved from the dark ages, and we need to move with the times not with popularity but with the greater understanding of what it means to be a human on this planet today.

The Catholic Church, more so than most men of today, fully realizes that.  Indeed, the Catholic church is well aware of the hedonistic attitudes that man has adopted, and it will not change to suit your conscious.  Man, while living longer, and healthier and (for the most part) safer than they did in the middle ages, is still the same man, and the Church realizes that.

Contrary to what you say, if the church were to become situational, it would lose its moral and ethical standing and become nothing more than a cult.

You may not like the teachings or direction of the church, but do not confuse your desire for validation of your situational ethics with the need for the church to adopt the same attitude.

Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
From what I understand there are two factions in the Church, the progressives and the conservatives.. I guess much like the current left and right wing in the various governments.

There are those that believe that the Church needs to move forward with the times, for example allowing women to become priests, supporting contraception due to the increase in STI's and unwanted pregnancies. I know I am speaking here mostly with people who believe that these things should not be put into place, but we need to be realistic.

From what I understand the Church in the past has changed its views on many issues, wouldnt we still be thinking that the earth was flat and the centre of the Universe, and anyone who thought different was a heretic and put to death? So it is time for the Church to take a step forward and move with the times on various issues. Im not saying that the Church should change its basis on the teachings of Jesus which is that of love thy neighbour, do unto others as you would want them to do to you, non judgemental, compassionate and loving teachings, (remember Jesus was seen as a wicked priest and revolutionary in his time. He walked around with lepers and prostitutes and beggers)

Our hearts and consciousness has evolved and the Church needs to realise this. Although my firm belief is that it may well be good to be born into a religion but not to die in one.

Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
From what I understand the Church in the past has changed its views on many issues,


Yes, all churches change at times, and yes, there are many within the leadership of the Catholic Church who would like to see it take a more "progressive" stance on some issues. However, the decision is solely that of the Pope (for the Catholics at least) and his decisions should be based on the spiritual well-being of Catholic people, not the temporary whims of popular culture or opinion.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
his decisions should be based on the spiritual well-being of Catholic people, not the temporary whims of popular culture or opinion.


Without the sheep that are in the flock there would be no shepherd
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
While I disagree with the Catholic Church, (I'm baptist) there's a simple rule if you are a Christian. God is God, and I am not.

He's always right, by definition. Therefore, if I or others disagree with what he says, I am wrong.

I can understand if you have an argument over the interpretation of the Word, or the theology between intercessors between man in God, or the infallibility of the pope as God's spokesperson.

However this is an argument over how God is supposed to be served according to His word, not a suggestion to change with the times. God does not change.

If the Church changes it's beliefs to become another non-denominational,politically correct, humanist movement, it would no longer be the Church. It exists to serve God, not Man.

Natch, if some of you are reading this and not believers, than all this seems silly to you, but then, it wouldn't be your worry either, right?
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
Phoenixboi--while I don't know if this will be the beginning of the end, I do have to admit that as a Catholic, I was disappointed by the choice. But as I was informed--the Catholic Church doesn't care much what it's American women members think

As Catholics (and Christians) we are told to love our neighbor, not to judge, and to live our life in a way that is pleasing to God. I can not imagine that God is pleased by watching the Catholic church turn its back on His sons and daughters who are gay, or watching His sons and daughters die in Africa as a result of STDs (and it is not as simple as telling them to abstain-sexual violence dominates these regions), or by watching the Vatican protect priests who used His church to perpetrate the most heinous acts against young children.

But I am a still a Catholic. I don't have to agree with everything the church says or does--in fact, my cathecism taught me that if I have a moral objection to a teaching of the church, I am meant to stand by my morals.

If the church didn't change with the times, it would still be allowing slavery. It is not a valid argument to say that the church must forever remain the way it once was--I don't think it needs to back away from its tenets--but it needs to move toward more fully upholding "The Word"--and that means remenbering that we are all God's children.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
However this is an argument over how God is supposed to be served according to His word, not a suggestion to change with the times. God does not change.


SNS--I'm not 100% sure that I am understanding what you are saying, so forgive me in advance if I completely misrepresent your position (it is not intention, I assure you). I agree that God does not change--but surely the church can. It was not that long ago (in terms of church history) that one could use bible verses to support slavery, or keeping women silent. I believe that the Word can be misinterpreted, and believe that it has been many times over.

I mean, if women are not meant to be leaders of the Church, clearly other christian churches are misinformed, right?
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'd rather have the Catholic Church lose a few members than to modernize to be "hip and cool" for the kids. If the Catholic Church were to treasure PC-dom more than scripture, then I would have no respect for it.
If you guys want a religion that's all "Happy happy joy joy love peace and candy land" then why don't you join one of those other Christian churches that don't think of anything as a sin (unless of course things they dislike).
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top

If the church didn't change with the times, it would still be allowing slavery. It is not a valid argument to say that the church must forever remain the way it once was--I don't think it needs to back away from its tenets--but it needs to move toward more fully upholding "The Word"--and that means remenbering that we are all God's children.

I am not sure the Church ever supported slavery.  They may have, as they did with other issues, turned a blind eye to it, but I dont think they actually condoned it.

That being said, the rules of the church are not the same as the teachings and tenets of the Church.  Thus, they can easily allow the ordination of women (and in time I beleive they will), without compromising their tenets.  That was an administrative decision born of the male dominated society of the middle ages as there use to be Women priests and probably will again.  The same with Married priests.  But that is a harder subject as the Church is a hard task master and demands a lot from its officials.

Yes, Pope Benedict XVI is very conservative, but as Baker said, he was not chosen to be an innovator, but to be a transitioner. By the time the next Pope is chosen, we may have a lot more Bishops and Cardinals like Walter Sullivan, than Joseph Ratzinger.

Your time will come eventually.  The only problem with that sentiment is that 'eventually, we all are dead'.  But the Church will continue, even beyond us.

Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
Thanks Shades for understanding what I am trying to say.

Although I firmly believe that the Church as an institution needs to radically change in order to move with the times, I believe that the consciousness of Humanity will come to realise that it no longer needs these institutions in order live a life inspired by God.

Therefore through these times of great change we will come to the conclusion that we are the masters of our destinies and no institution or priest or pope needs to intercede between us and God.
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
I'd rather have the Catholic Church lose a few members than to modernize to be "hip and cool" for the kids. If the Catholic Church were to treasure PC-dom more than scripture, then I would have no respect for it.
If you guys want a religion that's all "Happy happy joy joy love peace and candy land" then why don't you join one of those other Christian churches that don't think of anything as a sin (unless of course things they dislike).


EJ--it is not our job to judge sinners. Everyone sins, and no sin is any better or worse than any other--God calls me to love my brothers and sisters, and while I might not be perfect in doing this, I think the Church needs to set an example for its followers. I'm not talking about "hip and cool," I'm talking about more accurately following the Word of God.

What I find funny is that so many people who think that Europe shouldn't be telling the US what to do, think that they, as non-Catholics, get to tell the Church what to do. If Catholics want the church modernized, or even if they don't, I don't think that the non-Catholic opinion is going to play into the debate much.

I am not sure the Church ever supported slavery. They may have, as they did with other issues, turned a blind eye to it, but I dont think they actually condoned it.


Sins of omission are just as bad as sins of submission.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top

Sins of omission are just as bad as sins of submission.

No, one is active and the other passive. To see someone get mugged and not shoot the perp is not the same as condoning mugging.

What I find funny is that so many people who think that Europe shouldn't be telling the US what to do, think that they, as non-Catholics, get to tell the Church what to do. If Catholics want the church modernized, or even if they don't, I don't think that the non-Catholic opinion is going to play into the debate much.

I fully concur, and before Pope John Paul II, I doubt that any non-catholics would have cared or voiced an opinion.  So at least in that, I find it encouraging that others are vocal, even if as you say, it will not make a difference.

Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
No, one is active and the other passive. To see someone get mugged and not shoot the perp is not the same as condoning mugging.


Last time I checked, a sin was a sin. There is no heirarchy in God's eyes--or did I miss some new Church teaching?

Dante wrote(and I concur), "the hottest places in hell are reserved for those, who in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality."
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
Some of the major issues that face the Catholic Church are a lack of priests and how it addresses the pedophiles and homosexuality within the church. The issue of celibacy is not based in Scripture and for the first 1100 years priests were allowed to marry. The issue is one of having enough priests to run the churches not of whether it's a sin for priests to marry. The issue of mistreating children and homosexuality is against the will of the Creator per every Christian religion I've ever seen as well as Judaism. If the new pope ignores the need for more priests and doesn't deal more effectively with homosexuality and pedophiles in the church, it will be the church that suffers. celibacy is not something that was ordained by Christ however mistreatment of children was very much condemned by our Lord.
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
True, ColGene, many of the practices of the Catholic Church are merely traditions, others are based on hard doctrine. The Bible is also like that, there are examples of cultural traditions of the day, and there is hard doctrine. The leadership of the Catholic Church is looked to by their members to identify the differences, and preach accordingly.

I don't know enough about the Catholic church to be able to say what is based on tradition and what is based on doctrine, but from the outside looking in, I'd say the pedophile problem is much more pressing for them than the whether or not priests should be able to marry. You do make a good point about maybe they would have more willing to enter the priesthood, if they could marry.
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
Last time I checked, a sin was a sin. There is no heirarchy in God's eyes--or did I miss some new Church teaching?


A sin is a sin. But not shooting the mugger is not the same as endorsing the mugger. The latter is a sin, the former is not.