Thread: The Roman Catholic Church 100 years from now Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=025179

---

Posted by moron (# 206) on :
 
Maybe I'm conflating his take on truth generally with the RCC but whatever - I enjoy Chesterton:

quote:

---

It is always easy to let the age have its head; the difficult thing is to keep one’s own.

It is always easy to be a modernist; as it is easy to be a snob. To have fallen into any of those open traps of error and exaggeration which fashion after fashion and sect after sect set along the historic path of Christendom—that would indeed have been simple.

It is always simple to fall; there are an infinity of angles at which one falls, only one at which one stands. To have fallen into any one of the fads from Gnosticism to Christian Science would indeed have been obvious and tame.

But to have avoided them all has been one whirling adventure; and in my vision the heavenly chariot flies thundering through the ages, the dull heresies sprawling and prostrate, the wild truth reeling but erect.

---

So: what will the Roman Catholic Church be in 100 years?

TIA for any thoughts.
 

---

Posted by Desert Daughter (# 13635) on :
 
We will all have become Tibetan Buddhists

Believing in the Dalai Lama to reincarnate might look just as outlandish to a rationalist as believing that the Holy Spirit guides a conclave. But at least the Chattering Classes treat Buddhists with respect, because they are... cute

But seriously, tendencies in all faiths unfortunately go to either oblivion or fundamentalism. I fear that our Church will see some schisms within the next 100 years. We will get trad-caths on one side (Opus Dei & their friends), and modernists (who will accept priests who are married and even female , make sure vwe all hold hands durin the consecration of the Host ) and otherwise will look quite a bit like low-church CofE on the other.

And a forlorn bunch in between who like Bells & Smells, still wrestle with Christology (no happy-clappy Jesus-people here!) , don't think the whole woman business is all that important (they will first push for women to become diacons and the ordination of senior nuns, then see what happens)and wished they'd been born Orthodox (sorry, flippant again...)

Third World Catholicism will radicalise and become more and more Evangelical. Some interesting theological thought likely to emerge from India and Japan, which will be way too abstract to get any significant press which really is a big shame.

What will be lost forever (in a way it already is) is the wonderful fact that as a Catholic you can push the door of any church anywhere in the world and regardless of language you will feel at home.
 

---

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 
The RCC will have remained the largest religious group in the world, and will probably have grown somewhat faster than world population (with world population starting to decrease). Most RCs will live in the "South" and "East", and her presence in the "North" and "West" will have been further reduced. However, her numbers there will have stabilized and typically will have held up significantly better than those of "classical" Protestant churches. In spite of this changed distribution of her lay members and potentially a good number of Southerners and Easterners high in the hierarchy (including the papacy), the "head" of the Church will have remained firmly in the North/West, with no major influence on universal theology or liturgy apparent (yet).

The remaining RCC in the North/West will be considerably more conservative than she is now, doctrinally. The "Reform of the Reform" also will be in full swing in matters liturgical. Most likely there will however not be some sort of "re-unification" with the extraordinary form of the Mass. Instead, this "double usage" will mark the beginning of a considerable diversification (again! to pre-Trent status quo) of the liturgy. This trend will not be as opposed centrally as one might expect, because it proves so convenient for inculturation in the growth zones of the faith.

There will have been a period of a sudden "exodus" of cultural RCs as the increasingly orthodox outlook of the Church crossed a psychological threshold of pain among dissenters. Quite possibly this will have given a final but transient lease of life to some "classical" Protestant denominations. If this exodus has not yet occurred, then it is about to occur. (The later it happens, the less impact on other denominations.)

With regards to the secular setting in the North/West, the RCC will have lost essentially all remaining status. RCs will be roughly in the same position that conservative Muslims are in now, i.e., in an uneasy truce that oscillates between ghetto formation and occasional culture skirmishes. Indeed, one of the difficult issues for Rome will be to maintain at the same time both the pressure on Islam in the growth zones of the faith, and the "brothers in arms" cooperation with Islam in the secular part of the world. In general however, Islam will not have grown as threat as much as a simple extrapolation would suggest now, as a range of factors will reduce its ability to compete.

The one potential modifier to all this will be Pentecostalism. If it continues to be highly successful, then the RCC may at this stage be well on her way to a counter-Pentecostalism, just as once a counter-Reformation was necessary. This will not mean a wholesale adoption though, but rather a combination of both accommodation and new combat strategies. Major innovations in liturgy, doctrine and to a more limited degree even in doctrine may come from this angle, rather than from the simple increase in numbers in the South/East.

There will have been no major reunifications with other denominations. But the Eastern Orthodox will be in all sorts of trouble, both external (secular hostility) and internal (rapid balkanization), and the unthinkable may have become rather thinkable among some of them. And to make a final daring prediction: Buddhism will not have continued its growth in the North/West, and will have resumed dying out slowly.
 

---

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :
 
I posit that some time around 3013AD the Orthodox will start to think about having their services entirely in English for those in the english speaking world. By around 4013AD the liturgy should be complete in its translation and the RC church in the West will quake at the sound of its surging.
 

---

Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on :
 
The entire church will be 'triumphant'. Christ can't wait much longer, surely!

Maranatha!
 

---

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 
2113: The term Roman is dropped, since the church no longer has a centre. The description Catholic usually appears together with Pentecostal.

2103: Translocal congregations become the norm for most worshippers. They are invariably multi-denominational.

2093: Women priests outnumber men by three to one.

2083: Post-colonial theologies prove popular in the economically restructured West. Numbers of worshippers rise strongly.

2073: The church becomes a significant force in global politics by the simple expedient of becoming the most reliable international newsgathering organisation on the planet.

2063: In common with most other denominations, the Roman Catholic church stops holding any financial assets except locally and at very low levels (monthly income x6).

2053: The first women bishops are appointed directly from the laity.

2043: Third and First world dioceses exchange bishops.

2033: Seminaries' theological resources are directed to the laity.

2023: A formal and global process of listening to congregations begins.

2013: The conclave of March 2013 declines to elect a pope.
 

---

Posted by Drewthealexander (# 16660) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
I posit that some time around 3013AD the Orthodox will start to think about having their services entirely in English for those in the english speaking world. By around 4013AD the liturgy should be complete in its translation and the RC church in the West will quake at the sound of its surging.

---

quote:

---

Well bugger me! The left behind series was right all along.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
My guess is that three quarters of all churches in the West, of all denominations, will be closed. Maybe even more.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hatless:
2013: The conclave of March 2013 declines to elect a pope.

---

And then you woke up.
 

---

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Weber:

quote:

---

Originally posted by hatless:
2013: The conclave of March 2013 declines to elect a pope.

---

And then you woke up.

---

quote:

---

moron: So: what will the Roman Catholic Church be in 100 years?

---

quote:

---

Jon in the Nati: And Rome will still be at the heart of the church, even if its body is Africa and Asia.

---

quote:

---

Jon in the Nati: There will continue to be tons of Catholics in South America, but the growth won't be there like it is in Africa and Asia.

---

I agree, but I also admit that I find it strangely telling that in most discussions I hear about the future of the RCC, people talk almost exclusively about Africa and Asia. I admit that I'm probably more sensitive to this because I live in Latin America, but this emphasis on growth (as opposed to absolute numbers) seems a bit odd sometimes.
 

---

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :
 
I agree with others who feel that we tend to forget South America quite a bit, but perrhaps this is because I am sitting in Argentina as I type.

Other posters have mentioned the protestantizing in stylistic terms of the RCs, and that very much jibes with my observations of the RCC in western Europe and North America, where quite a few of my evangelical friends would have trouble not fitting in. The emphasis on hymns, scripture readings, and increased lay participation suggest that this is a strong grass-roots trend, and one which the hierarchy is only vaguely beginning to grasp.

So I would guess that the future RCC will not be technically really different-- rules and practices will be the same, but more so. I expect that we will have proportionally fewer priests, large numbers of married deacons (Rio alone has 124) doing much of the admin and non-Mass work, and likely more bureaucratized structures. I still think that they will end up with a restricted married priesthood (the viri probati approach). The RCC, being fairly hard-headed, will expend much ecumenical energy on the Orthodox and the Pentecostals, with serious attention only paid to the Anglicans and Lutherans in the warm parts of the world.

I imagine, as well, that we will have some extraterrestrial ecclesiastical jurisdiction and I have some practical ideas on that, should my thoughts be called upon.
 

---

Posted by Pancho (# 13533) on :
 
I'm gonna look foolish in a hundred years. Heck, I'll look foolish now but I'll give it a go:

The Catholic Church remains the largest single religious body in the world. A period of ferment and renewal occurs over the next 100 years across the Church similar to that which occured in the aftermath of the Council of Trent. Catholics will look back and see the "New Springtime" of the Church which they couldn't see at the time. The explosive growth in Africa is followed by substantial growth in Asia. The number of number of faithful, bishops, priests, deacons, seminarians, and faithful continues to grow worldwide as it does today.


After bottoming out in the next decade the number of male and female "religous" (nuns, monks, etc.) stabilizes and begins to grow again albeit slowly at first.

New religious movements and orders are founded including some cooperative-type communities for lay-folk, especially ones suited for a large aging population. Semi-monastic fraternities appear for Catholic men living in the world (okay, that one is wishful thinking) and contemplative orders of monks and nuns continue to find creative ways to engage the world and evangelize from behind monastery walls while staying true to the law and spirit of their orders.

The medieval scriptorium is now a room full of computers, internet sales continue the support of monasteries with food and crafts, and the world rejoices at the ever-increasing availability of nunish and monkish cake, cheese, wine and beer.

In Asia:

The Philippines becomes even more Catholic than it is now due to a revival in the local church (helped by English language apologetics material being churned out from the U.S.) and growth in formerly Muslim areas of the South disillusioned by armed conflict, as well as the reception of former members of various local, independent churches. Increased visibility worldwide due to influential hierarchs, continued immigration to the rest of the world and increased contacts with Spain and Latin America following a small but influential revival of the Spanish language.

South Korea now has a Christian majority and the Catholic Church remains important and influential. Native Korean orders and missionaries have now spread across the world.

Vietnam is now over a third Catholic. There are areas with a Catholic majority, especially in the South.

Slow but steady growth in Indonesia, especially among tribal and Chinese minorities. East Timor does its part.

Christianity continues to spread in Mainland China by both Catholics and Protestants despite persecution from Communist authorities.

Slow but steady growth in India with spurts in the historic heartlands of Goa and Kerala and notable gains in Orissa, site of the persecutions of 2008. By the end of the century there is a memorial of the Martyrs of Orissa on the calendar.

Iran turns towards the West after the fall of the Islamic regime. While Evangelical churches see some rapid growth the local Armenian, Chaldean, and Latin Catholic Churches also see some growth.

The population of Christians in the Middle-East stabilizes. Chaldean Catholics remain the majority of Christians in Iraq and Maronites have renewed influence in Lebanon. Aramaic is saved from extinction and experiences a small revival among Christians, both among native Middle Easterners and among trendy Westerners taking up the language Jesus spoke.

Decades after the Arab Spring the Coptic Church has reasserted itself. The much smaller Coptic Catholic Church also shows some vigor and from time to time it and the Latin Church attracts a trickle of middle-class Egyptians. It enjoys good relations with its much larger Oriental Orthodox counterpart.

In the rest of North Africa there begin to be signs of growth, especially in certain Berber communities: partly influenced by relatives who immigrated to Europe and became Catholic and partly influenced by the prayers of the Monks of Tibhirine and the now saint Charles de Foucauld. These Catholic Berbers embrace the ancient African saints (Augustine, Monica, Perpetua, Felicity, etc.) as their ancestors in the faith.

The explosive growth in Africa continues. Africans now hold key posts throughout the Church. Africans are teaching in European and North American seminaries and are influential in the sacred arts and become known as spiritual writers. The growth in Francophone Africa has rippling effects in France, Quebec, and the Caribbean.

The Church in Europe stabilizes. The dissenters neither effect change in doctrine nor do they cause schisms (except for small congregations that ocasionaly break off amid fanfare from the media). Like old soldiers, they just fade away. People remember the JPII priests but they forget about the JPII laity. They and their children and their children's children increasingly make up the majority of peeps in the pews, even in Europe.The Church gets its mojo back in Ireland, UK, Spain and Italy with an assist from Poles in Ireland and the Uk and a (smaller) assist from Latin Americans in Spain.

John Henry Newman is declared a saint and a Doctor of the Church. GK Chesterton and Katherine of Aragon are declared Blessed and Venerable, respectively. J.R.R. Tolkien and his mother are declared Servants of God.

The most notable news is a surprising revival of the Church in France spurred by the challenge of the Lefebvrists, the infusion of energy from Francophone Africa, and the founding of some very influential religious orders towards the end of the 20th century such as the Fraternités Monastiques de Jérusalem and Community of St. John. The French bishops gather at Montmartre to once again consecrate the country to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

The SSPX (Lefebvrists) becomes a niche-church in limbo after rejecting offers of reconciliation one-too-many times. Followers begin to slowly trickle away into diocese-approved traditionalist communities, leaving the hard-core members behind.

(I got carried away and I'm tired. To be continued....)
 

---

Posted by Mary LA (# 17040) on :
 
While I was in Luanda last month, I was thinking about this, attending Mass at the Cathedral of the Holy Saviour built in 1628. All Sunday Masses packed and overflowing.

Roman Catholicism in 100 years time? Definitely a more hierarchical and conservative Catholic Church in Africa as the eroded and attenuated 'human rights' culture from the West loses traction and we see the rise of Islamic theocratic states.

A slowed trajectory of secularism in Europe and the United States owing to the African diaspora and influence of migrant communities from Latin America (where Pentecostalism will continue to exert considerable influence, less so in Africa or Asia).

And perhaps a increase in significant Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant minorities in unexpected places. Christianity is on the rise in the Middle East -- Juan Cole in his blog Informed Comment commenting on Christian influence in the Middle East notes "About 5% of the French electorate is Muslims, the largest proportion in Europe. But Christians are 10 percent of Egypt, Jordan and Syria, and 22 percent of Lebanon." He sees a more organised and politically outspoken alliance of Christians able to counter the declining Middle East dictatorships.

More persecution, certainly, in the Roman Catholic Church of the 3013 Third World and a corrective to any smug triumphalism. A growing Church, a Church of martyrs, a Church with her back to the wall. And as Chesterton predicted, still the wild truth reeling and erect.
 

---

Posted by Desert Daughter (# 13635) on :
 
I agree that there will be a strong move towards "grassroots" churches and the great masses will find the pentecostal-style more appealing.

What the RC church will lose is its mysticism. I have been, for better or worse, much exposed to Indian philosophy (n.b. Philosophy!! Not some woolly new age pseudo guru ashram thingy) and since then have my doubts about the primacy of the judaeo-greek thinking model and its glorious outcrops (neo-scholasticism anyone?). I agree that a lot has gone terribly wrong in our church recently.

But the alternative offered to the masses today is low-brow happy-clappy with a big dose of "spirit" (speaking in tongues ) thrown in for good measure. People love to 'socialise', and so in church the 'community' aspect becomes ever more important. What is a moment of worship becomes (under the guise of "communal" worship) a social event.

But the masses are not the truth. A church is not a political party and not a fashion. We, raised in a world very much influenced (tainted!?) by Habermasian discourse "ethics" refuse to, or simply cannot, see it.

Yes, the RCC has massive problems in 2013. But what we need is a church that is more pastoral, but not one that is more democratic.

You cannot approach church, and faith, in the same way many of us approach the rest of life. Otherwise, what's next? Saint Marc (Zuckerberg, not the other guy!) as a Father of the Church because he introduced Vatican governance and doctrinal issues to be decided by "Like" buttons from the masses held in an ever stronger spell by ever more low-brow media?

This is not a popularity contest. The Vatican is not Loft Story. And the masses need a caring shepherd, not more democracy on issues they ultimately know little about.

I know what I just said flies against the Zeitgeist and is profoundly undemocratic. Sorry for causing offense to anyone.
 

---

Posted by PeteC (# 10422) on :
 
"Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and tomorrow" Hebrews 13:8

I think that, at the beginning of his papacy, Benedict XVI postulated that the Church might be smaller in numbers but would prevail.

Given that I am unlikely to be around 100 years from now, it remains postulation.
 

---

Posted by Ronald Binge (# 9002) on :
 
I think, after reading the above, that what will happen is that individual Catholics will do what they have always done and simply get on with life and their belief and faith in God, and engage with their friends and neighbours as always.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
As a non-RC I'm finding this thread fascinating.

I suspect that Chesterton was right in that there'll be a steely and resilient continuation despite all the vicissitudes - when have there never been vicissitudes?

This might sound odd, but as a Protestant I would be inclined to take a fairly positive view of the increasing 'Protestantisation' of the RC Church - provided, and it's a big proviso, a very big proviso - that the RCs learn from our mistakes and don't repeat them.

I'm saddened to hear that one poster believes that the Mystical element might be lost. I don't know a great deal about that side but it strikes me as a vital component - if I can put it in such mechanistic terms.

I'd love to see more lay-involvement, grass-roots development and all the rest - but such things that draw at the same time from the vast resources imbedded within the tradition itself - rather than borrowings from elsewhere.

I think there has been a softer 'catholic' influence that is permeating the fluffier end of the Protestant spectrum - a greater emphasis on Patristics (at least at seminary level), contemplative prayer, spiritual direction, social engagement, the arts etc.

I suspect though, that its the shadow of the Vatican and an inherent suspicion (rightly or wrongly) of the RC heirarchy that prevents the rest of us (including the Orthodox as well as Protestants) from going in a more Romeward direction.

If Romeward means homeward, then the RC Church is going to have to put out a few more cushions ... whether it can do that without altering the internal decor beyond recognition is the moot point.

I would have thought, though, that the best RC 'strategy' ecumenically for the RCs would be to demonstrate the wisdom and efficacy of their own tradition to the rest of us. A lot of spring cleaning to do. We all have shit in our Augean Stables.
 

---

Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :
 
Mary LA:

quote:

---

While I was in Luanda last month, I was thinking about this, attending Mass at the Cathedral of the Holy Saviour built in 1628. All Sunday Masses packed and overflowing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
My guess is that three quarters of all churches in the West, of all denominations, will be closed. Maybe even more.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hawk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
My guess is that three quarters of all churches in the West, of all denominations, will be closed. Maybe even more.

---

And replaced, maybe even more than 1:1, by free evangelical churches.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

And replaced, maybe even more than 1:1, by free evangelical churches.

---

I think free evangelical churches will find that, without mainline denominations to cannibalize anymore, they will succumb to the same trends as every else.

Indeed, that is what they are already finding.

---

I think this is correct. Evangelical megachurchianity may still be the big whipping boy of Christianity (at least for many on this Ship, myself included), but as a percentage of the Christian population the growth of evangelicalism ended in the late 1990s. The movement may be huge and extremely visible, but it isn't really growing anymore. Even many evangelicals are fairly pessimistic about the matter.
 

---

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :
 
Don't take that the wrong way- pretty much all of these "predications" are more along the lines of "brazen fantasizing." Maybe I'm just more pessimistic than everyone else.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
I might get jumped on for saying so, but Hawk and others who are optimistic about a more congregational evangelical future need to consider the history.

Congregationalism, in and of itself, like presbyterianism is no guarantor of orthodoxy. You read any of the accounts/journals of revivalists like the Baptist Christmas Evans in Wales and the various Methodist 'circuit-riders' and lay-preachers and so on and you'll find that they spent a great deal of their time combating Socinianism, Sabellianism and all manner of other isms.

Great swathes of the non-conformity of the 17th and 18th centuries fell into Deism or Unitarianism of one form or other - even some of the big name revivalist chaps also succumbed to this pressure at one time or other - before returning to a more orthodox position.

Obviously, it could just as easily be said that an Episcopal system doesn't, in and of itself, guarantee orthodoxy either - there were Deist and Latitudinarian Anglican bishops back in the day and, from a conservative perspective, it's not as if today's liberals are having their wings clipped by the Anglican episcopacy.

But this idea that all you have to do is rid yourselves of heirarchy in order to march forward into some bright, new, democratic future is bunkum.

Left to their own devices and without the 'wider church' or wider Christendom to draw reference points from the independent congregations are more likely to veer either into extreme fundamentalism or else lose the plot and veer away into doctrinal cloud-cuckoo land. We are seeing this already in 'developing countries.'

I was roundly shouted down by some of the evangelicals on these Boards when I suggested - using facts and figures and statistics - that much of the much-vaunted church growth in China (for instance) came from groups that would be regarded as heretical or skewed by most (if not all) evangelicals.

It might be a creative tension thing, but from what I'm picking up indigenous Christianities in developing countries are developing in a direction that most evangelicals would deplore - only they haven't quite woken up to that yet.

At the same time, I would posit that even more doctrinally 'correct' independent settings are at risk from fads and emphases that threaten to derail or dilute what orthodoxy they possess and retain. Again, I don't believe they've quite woken up to that yet either. Or, if they have, they've reacted by becoming all stringent and even more marginalised.

So, no, I don't believe that the future is rosy for congregationalism per se. It might be flavour of the month, it may fit the zeitgeist but if you are wedded to the spirit of the age you will be widowed to it in the next.

You mark my words.
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Saying that, and this may appear contradictory, I also think that the future for Christianity (of all stripes) in the West lies in the small unit and the grass-root base-community model.

Andrew Walker, the academic sociologist and theologian (Pentecostal turned Russian Orthodox) said this some years ago - but I think he was right. We need 'plausibility structures' to maintain the faith through the decline of Christendom and just as the monastery performed this function during the 'Dark Ages', a more 'sectarian' or 'gathered' model could well provide the right model this time round.

Self-selecting groups are, arguably, naturally conservative. They aim to preserve their distinctives. It's no accident, I feel, that an Orthodox priest who used to post regularly here (remember him? let the reader understand) once observed (in private conversation not here) that he was finding more 'orthodoxy' among groups like the Church of the Nazarene and the Assemblies of God than he was among Anglicans, Methodists and other more 'mainstream' denominations.

It's the comparative isolation of these groups, he felt, that had preserved them in some kind of Zoar as the white-heat of radical liberalism passed over in a cloud of hot ash and flames ...



It all depends on the perspective, of course, where you're coming from.

Liberals are also quite gleeful at any potential implosion or creaking collapse of heirarchy and privilege. At least the ones I know are.

I'm not saying that's right or wrong. Simply suggesting that a more fluid situation is likely to throw up all manner of flotsam and jetsam and some of it quite messy and not at all along the lines that Hawk and people like him would wish.

That said, I believe in God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit and in his ability to keep things 'on track' and to carve some kind of order out of chaos. But I still believe we need reference points and I'd suggest that, however flawed we may feel it to be, some of those reference points are to be found among the RCs, the Orthodox and others who have preserved and passed on the faith - often at great cost - and often, it has to be said, by dodgy means.
 

---

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:

It might be a creative tension thing, but from what I'm picking up indigenous Christianities in developing countries are developing in a direction that most evangelicals would deplore - only they haven't quite woken up to that yet.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
But this idea that all you have to do is rid yourselves of heirarchy in order to march forward into some bright, new, democratic future is bunkum.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
But this idea that all you have to do is rid yourselves of heirarchy in order to march forward into some bright, new, democratic future is bunkum.

---

Unfortunately it is a view which is gaining some traction even within the Clergy of the Anglican Church. Whilst attending an ArchDeaconary meeeting, whilst I wont exaggerate and say many, there were at least 3 persons (of which two were clergy and one lay) who stood up and advocated (or agreed with the sentiment) that a destruction of the Episcopal system would be a means to growth and renewal.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
They don't have much of a choice in the matter, do they? If there's a shortage of priests, and a huge increase in the size of parishes, then it makes no sense to just to struggle on until the whole thing completely collapses.

Necessity needs to become a virtue.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
They don't have much of a choice in the matter, do they? If there's a shortage of priests, and a huge increase in the size of parishes, then it makes no sense to just to struggle on until the whole thing completely collapses.

Necessity needs to become a virtue.

---

To me it is a gross misunderstanding about the history, nature and role of the Episcopate in the church, and for Clergy of an Anglican Church to come out with it shows a complete lack of understanding about the system in which they are ordained, and a complete lack of denominational identity. Necessity does not trump everything, if a particular Church is to go to the wall, I'm not beyond believing that it is part of God's will, but in efforts to avoid this I don't believe that the fundamentals should be given up to a system alien to the understanding of Catholicity and truth within the Anglican church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by BulldogSacristan:
And is it really so much a shortage of good men and women who want to be priests as it is a lack of people to pay them and be ministered to by them?

In dioceses I've been in in the Episcopal Church (I know this isn't the case for all dioceses), the discernment apparatuses regularly turn away well over half of all aspirants.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:


At least with the RCC, it seems perfectly respectable for the laity to critise the hierarchical set-up while still thinking of themselves as good Catholics. This attitude doesn't seem to work for the CofE, for some reason. It's almost as if these critics are traitors, betraying the authenticity of the church....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hatless:
2063: In common with most other denominations, the Roman Catholic church stops holding any financial assets except locally and at very low levels (monthly income x6).

---

What other denominations (that fits this bill)? The Church of England? The Episcopal Church? The Church of Norway? The Evangelical-Lutheran Church of America? Willow Creek?
 

---

Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on :
 
Any hierarchy among bishops is merely an administrative convenience. That goes for the ancient patriarchies too.
 

---

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by k-mann:

quote:

---

Originally posted by hatless:
2063: In common with most other denominations, the Roman Catholic church stops holding any financial assets except locally and at very low levels (monthly income x6).

---

What other denominations (that fits this bill)? The Church of England? The Episcopal Church? The Church of Norway? The Evangelical-Lutheran Church of America? Willow Creek?

---

Yes, I expect so, but we'll just have to wait and see for the definitive answer, won't we?
 

---

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Any hierarchy among bishops is merely an administrative convenience. That goes for the ancient patriarchies too.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hatless:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Any hierarchy among bishops is merely an administrative convenience. That goes for the ancient patriarchies too.

---

I would have thought that the pope advancing O'Brien's resignation showed a distinct difference in power and status.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Drewthealexander:
Given the trends in global demography, will there be an English speaking world in 3013?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:

quote:

---

Originally posted by BulldogSacristan:
And is it really so much a shortage of good men and women who want to be priests as it is a lack of people to pay them and be ministered to by them?

In dioceses I've been in in the Episcopal Church (I know this isn't the case for all dioceses), the discernment apparatuses regularly turn away well over half of all aspirants.

---

More like three quarters, in my diocese anyhow.

---

quote:

---

The human race, to which so many of my readers belong, has been playing at children's games from the beginning, and will probably do it till the end, which is a nuisance for the few people who grow up. And one of the games to which it is most attached is called, "Keep to-morrow dark," and which is also named (by the rustics in Shropshire, I have no doubt) "Cheat the Prophet." The players listen very carefully and respectfully to all that the clever men have to say about what is to happen in the next generation. The players then wait until all the clever men are dead, and bury them nicely. They then go and do something else.

---

quote:

---

Mary LA: While I was in Luanda last month, I was thinking about this, attending Mass at the Cathedral of the Holy Saviour built in 1628. All Sunday Masses packed and overflowing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Drewthealexander:
Given the trends in global demography, will there be an English speaking world in 3013?

---

Of course if there is a language called "English" in a thousand years time it would almost certainly be almost unintelligble to us, just as the Enligsh of a thousand years ago is all but unintelligble. Normal processes of language change seem to take about three to five hundred years to alter speech into mutual unintelligibilty.

Short of some apocalyptic destruction killing billions of people, the chances are that in a thousand years time there will be a number of mutually untintelligble languages all descended from English. Just as with the Latin languages nowaqdays. And that the one spoken in Britain will still be called English. Maybe North American English will have fragmented into a number of mutually unintelligble kinds of speech sharing one written form - just like Chinese and Arabic today.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
Anyone who thinks that the Catholic Church will ordain women in 100 years, or a 1,000, or anytime between now and the end of the world, fundamentally doesn't understand the Catholic Church at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
Anyone who thinks that the Catholic Church will ordain women in 100 years, or a 1,000, or anytime between now and the end of the world, fundamentally doesn't understand the Catholic Church at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Perhaps someone ought to start a thread about the future of the Anglican communion (if there hasn't been one already) or Pentecostalism ... how can we expect that to morph and develop?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
Anyone who thinks that the Catholic Church will ordain women in 100 years, or a 1,000, or anytime between now and the end of the world, fundamentally doesn't understand the Catholic Church at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gildas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
Anyone who thinks that the Catholic Church will ordain women in 100 years, or a 1,000, or anytime between now and the end of the world, fundamentally doesn't understand the Catholic Church at all.

---

Frankly, if the Pope can pray at a Mosque in Holy Byzantium anything is possible. I think that Pope Urban or, indeed, Pope Pius XII would have fervently denied that possibility. It happened. Vicars in knickers are as nothing compared to acknowledging the Mohammedans as our new best mates.

---

Yes, that caused scandal across the Christian world sowing the seeds of confusion amongst the faithful to the delight of those already on the edge of apostasy. Mind you, Pius XII was an archreformer too.
 

---

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :
 

 

---

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Porridge:
100 years from now, a substantial subset of U.S. Catholics (led by the nuns from the Women's Leadership thingie, whatever it's called) will have split from the rest of the (select prefix of choice) Catholic Church.

In this new group, much of traditional Catholic teaching will disappear. Abortion policy will be liberalized, women and gays will be able to become priests, and priests will be able to marry.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
Anyone who thinks that the Catholic Church will ordain women in 100 years, or a 1,000, or anytime between now and the end of the world, fundamentally doesn't understand the Catholic Church at all.

---

All the same, charity demands that we hope.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gildas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
Anyone who thinks that the Catholic Church will ordain women in 100 years, or a 1,000, or anytime between now and the end of the world, fundamentally doesn't understand the Catholic Church at all.

---

Frankly, if the Pope can pray at a Mosque in Holy Byzantium anything is possible. I think that Pope Urban or, indeed, Pope Pius XII would have fervently denied that possibility. It happened. Vicars in knickers are as nothing compared to acknowledging the Mohammedans as our new best mates.

---

quote:

---

Gamaliel: Because I suspect that this is how Hawk and other conservative evangelicals in the UK see these things and that they fondly imagine that the spread of evangelicalism worldwide is creating more Christians in their own image. I'm suggesting that it won't and that it can't.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by marsupial.:
- That said, I get worried about the line of thought which seems to be complacent about the idea that the Catholic Church will be completely marginalized in Europe and elsewhere in the developed world and yet somehow remain the Catholic Church. The risk here is that the the RCC (or "The Catholic Church", if you prefer) will essentially disappear in the west and devolve into a collection of autonomous entities elsewhere in the world with nothing in common except a historical relationship with the RCC as it once was.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by marsupial.:
- I suspect that to move forward (i.e., not devolve as per the plan above) the RCC is going to have think hard about a number of issues including issues relating to sexuality which often seem to be ultimately issues about authority. I'm not nearly as tuned in to the Catholic world as I was 10 or 20 years ago, but my sense then was strongly to the effect that the magisterium was fundamentally unwilling even to think about issues in sexual ethics lest the entire RC teaching about gender, sex, and the like come unraveled, with a consequent unraveling of the theory of the teaching authority of the magisterium. Yet it seems obvious to many relatively objective observers that this teaching is incorrect as a matter of theoretical accuracy with unfortunate results as a matter of practice.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by marsupial.:
- The RCC needs to think hard about its relationship with Western culture. At its best the relationship between the Church and western culture seems to be one of creative tension. But as I said above, I doubt the RCC can simply walk away from western culture (as it has developed through the ages) while remaining the RCC.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rosa Winkel:

---

The thread is crumbling into sectarian viciousness, which probably shouldn't surprise anyone too much.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gildas:

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
Anyone who thinks that the Catholic Church will ordain women in 100 years, or a 1,000, or anytime between now and the end of the world, fundamentally doesn't understand the Catholic Church at all.

---

Frankly, if the Pope can pray at a Mosque in Holy Byzantium anything is possible. I think that Pope Urban or, indeed, Pope Pius XII would have fervently denied that possibility. It happened. Vicars in knickers are as nothing compared to acknowledging the Mohammedans as our new best mates.

---

What a bizarre strawman. Are you seriously suggesting Benedict was praying to the Mohammedan's Allah rather than the Christian God?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:


Complete bullshit. The "relative objective" observers are anything but.

---

quote:

---

Rather, Western culture cannot simply walk away from the RCC (as she has developed through the ages) while remaining Western culture. But only one of them will last till the end of time, and it is not Western culture.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bad man:
Sir Diarmaid MacCulloch, Professor of the History of the Church at Oxford, has an interesting video essay about the future of the Roman Catholic Church out today. Link is http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/video/2013/feb/28/pope-benedict-diarmaid-macculloch-video

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Porridge:
100 years from now, a substantial subset of U.S. Catholics (led by the nuns from the Women's Leadership thingie, whatever it's called) will have split from the rest of the (select prefix of choice) Catholic Church.

In this new group, much of traditional Catholic teaching will disappear. Abortion policy will be liberalized, women and gays will be able to become priests, and priests will be able to marry.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thurible:
I can't remember whether or not he's a communicant but he's a reasonably regular (couple of times a year) worshipper at a parish church near here. Sings in the choir.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by bad man:
Sir Diarmaid MacCulloch, Professor of the History of the Church at Oxford, has an interesting video essay about the future of the Roman Catholic Church out today. Link is http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/video/2013/feb/28/pope-benedict-diarmaid-macculloch-video

---

Well, that video gets my vote for the dumbest five minutes of soundbites I've heard on the topic yet. Let's see, that sort of bollocks sure sounds a lot like ... google ... yep, he's a gay, liberal, ex-Anglican atheist (agnostic?).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by bad man:
Sir Diarmaid MacCulloch, Professor of the History of the Church at Oxford, has an interesting video essay about the future of the Roman Catholic Church out today. Link is http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/video/2013/feb/28/pope-benedict-diarmaid-macculloch-video

---

Well, that video gets my vote for the dumbest five minutes of soundbites I've heard on the topic yet. Let's see, that sort of bollocks sure sounds a lot like ... google ... yep, he's a gay, liberal, ex-Anglican atheist (agnostic?).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hawk:
I don't know about his personal faith, but MacCulloch is a very respected and well-studied historian of Christianity, and his knowledge of historical processes and trends of development and change within Christianity is therefore extremely good.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hawk:
His argument that centralisation has been a fatal flaw in modern Roman religion is a good one, and I agree that the RCC stands a good chance of prospering if it can restore its traditional decentralised power structures of the pre-19th century.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bad man:
First of all, I don't agree that a personal attack on the piety of the learned Professor is a substitute for reasoned engagement with his factual analysis.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bad man:
So he obviously identifies as a member of the Church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by bad man:
As for him being gay, what is the relevance of that? His analysis doesn't deal with homosexuality at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
There is a numbers game afoot, certainly in Northern Europe, which suggests that there will be at least some sort of "give" in the makeup of the priesthood, the responsibilities of deacons, and lay involvement.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I suspect that in 100 years time, there may be some major changes in understanding, fueled at least to some extent by this practical sharing of the priesthood. People need time to adjust.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
IngoB

Thanks for the post. I'm afraid the second link didn't work for me, even after I used Google to try to access the root website. Also used Chrome, Firefox and Internet Explorer.


Anyone else having this problem?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
IngoB, you might not like what he says, but one doesn't get appointed Professor of Church History at the University of Oxford by being a complete dullard about said Church, and caring solely about one's media image.

---

• Suffolk and the Tudors (1986)
• The Later Reformation in England (1990)
• Henry VIII: Politics, Policy, and Piety (1995)
• Thomas Cranmer: A Life (1996)
• Tudor Church Militant: Edward VI and the Protestant Reformation (1999)
• Reformation: Europe's House Divided 1490–1700 (2003)

quote:

---

Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
Would you contest, for example, his implication that widespread Ultramontanism is a more recent development in the RC Church?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by iamchristianhearmeroar:
IngoB, you might not like what he says, but one doesn't get appointed Professor of Church History at the University of Oxford by being a complete dullard about said Church, and caring solely about one's media image.

Would you contest, for example, his implication that widespread Ultramontanism is a more recent development in the RC Church?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Comper's Child:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
IngoB Thanks for the post. I'm afraid the second link didn't work for me, even after I used Google to try to access the root website. Also used Chrome, Firefox and Internet Explorer. Anyone else having this problem?

---

Yes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
Well, that video gets my vote for the dumbest five minutes of soundbites I've heard on the topic yet. Let's see, that sort of bollocks sure sounds a lot like ... google ... yep, he's a gay, liberal, ex-Anglican atheist (agnostic?).

---

You must've thought all your Christmases had come at once, IngoB, when you read that rap sheet of Catholic bete-noirs. What a shame he wasn't a woman, too. You would've had a full house .

One of my favourite OT stories is from 2 Kings 7.

There's the city full of God's chosen people, and their king. Starving to death because they're under seige from the enemy. But that's okay, isn't it - because they're God's people, so something's gonna turn up, isn't it?

At the city gates are the outcasts of God's chosen people - the lepers; because outside the city is the place these chosen people put their unwanted human rubbish, the people who aren't to be reckoned as up to much, worth the effort etc. Their human condition makes them too 'imperfect' lawfully to be permitted to share the approval of the holy community or its God.

The lepers decide their best chance of staying alive is with not their own people, but the enemy, the Arameans. So they hike off to throw themselves on the mercy, not of God's chosen people, but of the enemy of God's chosen people - to the Aramean camp.

Funnily enough God does something unexpected. He must've given himself permission to go off and be merciful and godly outside of the walls of the city of his special people. And before the lepers arrive, he scares off the enemy, so the lepers have food, drink and riches at their disposal. Wasn't that nice of God? He didn't do that for the beseiged city full of his chosen people.

Astonishly, the lepers say to themselves 'we're not doing the right thing. This is good news and we're keeping it to ourselves. Let's go to the city and tell them.' They turn their own good fortune - given them direct from God's own hand - into a blessing for those who rejected them.

So the lepers give the good news to the king in the city. And the people are relieved from their famine. The rejects, the unworthies, have brought the good news of what God has done - to the people of God, who were blissfully unaware, unconscious of what God was doing. Isn't it as well they could be bothered to listen?

Every Church community/communion needs to listen to the outside voice - because that is just as often where God is. From many posts on this thread the message seems to be that not only must any 'outside' voice be ignored or silenced, but even if God were to be acknowledged as working beyond the walls of the holy city, it can only be in a way which is somehow not doctrinally or dogmatically licit.

So if that is so, then the Roman Catholic Church in a hundred years time will certainly still be the city full of God's chosen people - but starving, beseiged by imaginary enemies, and apparently ignoring the 'good news' of the outsiders telling them that God has been at work, and would they like to share in that new freedom?

Please don't see this as getting at Rome, however! This is also the case, imo, for the Anglican communion, too. And for any Church that structures God so tightly we become unable to see beyond the edges of our own theology to where God is equally active. And where licitness lies not in the approval of doctrine or orthodoxy, but with the fruit of the Spirit.
 

---

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Thanks, IngoB, works for me. Will post tomorrow, need to do a bit of digging.

But I take your points; given the global scope of the Catholic Church, there are probably lots of regional variations.

By developed western standards one priest to several thousand faithful sounds very strange. I suppose the reaction I got at Santiago de Compostella were based on relative change away from what folks were used to. The global stats seem to provide a different perspective.

Maybe it's yet another example of global inequity of "supply/availability"? More later.
 

---

Posted by Edgeman (# 12867) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
What I see in this thread is a lot of wish fulfilment fantasies that the Church will either wither into irrelevance or capitulate to the liberal Zeitgeist. It will do neither. It will do what it has always done; endure.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
Every Church community/communion needs to listen to the outside voice - because that is just as often where God is. From many posts on this thread the message seems to be that not only must any 'outside' voice be ignored or silenced, but even if God were to be acknowledged as working beyond the walls of the holy city, it can only be in a way which is somehow not doctrinally or dogmatically licit.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Edgeman:
I am certain that as some point in the future ether both Roman Missals will be combined into one new missal, or both will be revised. There are admitted problems in both missals, and Rome has already spoken of the possibility of revising the missal and breviary of Paul VI. The existence of two forms of the Roman rite is sort of an odd thing, and I don't see it as a long term solution to the problems that plague Catholic liturgy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hawk:

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by bad man:
Sir Diarmaid MacCulloch, Professor of the History of the Church at Oxford, has an interesting video essay about the future of the Roman Catholic Church out today. Link is http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/video/2013/feb/28/pope-benedict-diarmaid-macculloch-video

---

Well, that video gets my vote for the dumbest five minutes of soundbites I've heard on the topic yet. Let's see, that sort of bollocks sure sounds a lot like ... google ... yep, he's a gay, liberal, ex-Anglican atheist (agnostic?).

---

I don't know about his personal faith, but MacCulloch is a very respected and well-studied historian of Christianity, and his knowledge of historical processes and trends of development and change within Christianity is therefore extremely good. His opinion is well-grounded in historical facts and so I think he's got a good handle on what may happen in the future.

His argument that centralisation has been a fatal flaw in modern Roman religion is a good one, and I agree that the RCC stands a good chance of prospering if it can restore its traditional decentralised power structures of the pre-19th century. I don't think this will happen though. Throughout history the centralisation of power mainly continues into stronger and stronger forms of autocracy until it is either violently overthrown, or dies.

---

My beef was certainly with his analysis of the centralised structure of the Catholic and its future, rather than about his personal faith. The centralisation of the Catholic is an issue that is being addressed and will be addressed. However, who in their right mind thinks that a return to secular rulers exercising power in the church is a good thing?

Other historians and commentators have pointed to the rise and centralisation of the papacy as a protection against the interference of secular rulers in the church. If this development has been exaggerated, the answer is not a return to the situation pre-19th Century but to a greater collegiality between bishops and greater representation of lay apostolates.

Or if you want to see an example of what Diarmaid MacCulloch is advocating witness Patriarch Kirill and Putin.
 

---

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
IngoB, yes, I did notice that that big word beginning with E and ending with lisha, was Elisha. Just as I managed to read and understand the literal meaning as you have, so usefully - though forgive my saying so, so needlessly - given in your first paragraph.

I'm a bit sorry you didn't believe the bit you did on interpreting that passage in another way. I would've respected your opinion and admitted there was certainly merit in it. But I see it was just a 'silly' game to you, as you put it. It really wasn't for me. I do think there is some truth in the concept of God's use of the apparent profane to speak to the apparent religious. The rejected, to the rejectors (if that's a word.) And I think this is a point which applies to Church institutions. Such as your Church and mine.

So honestly you don't have to create or quote eisegesis for me to prove you can play silly games with the Bible. If you tell me you can, I certainly believe you.

The 'silly' eisegesis, by the way, was originally Walter Brueggemann's. Given in a lecture in Lichfield round about 1999 or so. In his application of it at that time, he thought it likely the prophetic outsider voice would be the gay voice that the Church refused to listen to. But, of course, as a theologian who doesn't agree with you, naturally he would be a very 'silly' theologian! Along with all the others. And there must be so many others.
 

---

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
I would've respected your opinion and admitted there was certainly merit in it.

---

Sigh. Yes, that's what it all is about. You say one thing, I say something completely different. Then we respect each other's opinion, and live happily ever after in disagreement. I tell you where and when that works. It works if it doesn't matter anyway. Maybe you consider arbitrary meaninglessness to be the hallmark of faith, but I don't. I respect your faith enough to consider it wrong.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
So honestly you don't have to create or quote eisegesis for me to prove you can play silly games with the Bible. If you tell me you can, I certainly believe you.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
The 'silly' eisegesis, by the way, was originally Walter Brueggemann's. Given in a lecture in Lichfield round about 1999 or so. In his application of it at that time, he thought it likely the prophetic outsider voice would be the gay voice that the Church refused to listen to.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
You're right in saying it's odd that two different forms of the the Roman liturgy exist side-by-side. It will have to be resolved. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Edgeman:
I am certain that as some point in the future ether both Roman Missals will be combined into one new missal, or both will be revised. There are admitted problems in both missals, and Rome has already spoken of the possibility of revising the missal and breviary of Paul VI. The existence of two forms of the Roman rite is sort of an odd thing, and I don't see it as a long term solution to the problems that plague Catholic liturgy.

---

You're right in saying it's odd that two different forms of the the Roman liturgy exist side-by-side. It will have to be resolved. I sincerely hope they're not merged. You're also right in saying that there are problems with both though if I were to keep one it would be the older. This subject would make for an interesting discussion as it is a personal interest of mine, or at least used to be when I was still an RC. Related to this is also the problem of ultramontanism.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Why is this a problem? In our communion, most provinces have their own liturgies. There are plenty of problems in the communion, which get debated frequently on the ship, but that isn't one of them.

Having or not having more than one form of liturgy is not going to win the apostate multitudes back into the kingdom. They have got better things to worry about.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Edgeman:
I am certain that as some point in the future ether both Roman Missals will be combined into one new missal, or both will be revised. There are admitted problems in both missals, and Rome has already spoken of the possibility of revising the missal and breviary of Paul VI. The existence of two forms of the Roman rite is sort of an odd thing, and I don't see it as a long term solution to the problems that plague Catholic liturgy.

---

You're right in saying it's odd that two different forms of the the Roman liturgy exist side-by-side. It will have to be resolved. I sincerely hope they're not merged. You're also right in saying that there are problems with both though if I were to keep one it would be the older. This subject would make for an interesting discussion as it is a personal interest of mine, or at least used to be when I was still an RC. Related to this is also the problem of ultramontanism.

---

They won't be merged. The Pauline Missal will be gradually be revised out of existence. The Johannine Missal will see restorations of pre-1955 elements, incorporation of one or two positive elements of the PM and will be made available substantially in the vernacular along the lines of the English Missal/1965 Interim Roman Missal. There will be more widespread use of Latin too I believe.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
One might even argue that they teach two different faiths.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
One might even argue that they teach two different faiths.

---

An extreme view (par for the course among Sedevacantists; see Fr Anthony Cekada) but not without merit. The PM is "serviceable" when done strictly in accordance with the (meagre) rubrics and in Latin. Doing otherwise results in a mess, so unfortunately a mess is what one usually gets.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Edgeman:
I am certain that as some point in the future ether both Roman Missals will be combined into one new missal, or both will be revised. There are admitted problems in both missals, and Rome has already spoken of the possibility of revising the missal and breviary of Paul VI. The existence of two forms of the Roman rite is sort of an odd thing, and I don't see it as a long term solution to the problems that plague Catholic liturgy.

---

You're right in saying it's odd that two different forms of the the Roman liturgy exist side-by-side. It will have to be resolved. I sincerely hope they're not merged. You're also right in saying that there are problems with both though if I were to keep one it would be the older. This subject would make for an interesting discussion as it is a personal interest of mine, or at least used to be when I was still an RC. Related to this is also the problem of ultramontanism.

---

They won't be merged. The Pauline Missal will be gradually be revised out of existence. The Johannine Missal will see restorations of pre-1955 elements, incorporation of one or two positive elements of the PM and will be made available substantially in the vernacular along the lines of the English Missal/1965 Interim Roman Missal. There will be more widespread use of Latin too I believe.

---

Let's hope so. Barring a few bits here and there I think you're speaking my language. Another thing that needs to be addressed is papal interference in the liturgy of which two good examples are Pius X's reform of the breviary Psalter and Pius XII's Holy Week reforms which gave a precedent for the VII reformers.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
Many, including Fr John Hunwicke, trace todays problems as far back as Urban VIII's buggering up of the Divine Office in 1632 by inserting a bunch of faux Horatian hymns into the Breviary hymnal.

---

quote:

---

IngoB: Mexico and Brazil, with one priest for 8,441 and 8,630 faithful, respectively. Or in the Philippines with one per 9,493. (...) Clearly, one can run a Catholic church with far fewer priests than we are accustomed to, without major innovations.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
You're right in saying it's odd that two different forms of the the Roman liturgy exist side-by-side. It will have to be resolved. ...

---

Having or not having more than one form of liturgy is not going to win the apostate multitudes back into the kingdom. They have got better things to worry about.

---

I would disagree completely, knowing many converts from irreligion whose experience with certain liturgies was a huge thing that sparked their conversions, myself included. If I had not experienced reverent catholic liturgy as I did when I was 15, I would not even be a Christian.

Remember that the dismantling of the liturgy as most Catholics experienced it during and after Vatican II led to a lot of disaffected Catholics leaving the church and many others to become so distraught and confused that they simply gave up. It wasn't all candy and roses. I have known some, including myself, whose experience of the way that most RC parishes celebrate the liturgy lead to thoughts of "They don't even really believe any of it, why should I bother?"

I don't want to stray too far into Ecclesiantics territory, but the Liturgy is supposed to be the Church's way of publicly worshiping God and proclaiming her faith, if we can't even get that much right there's a lot more we're going to screw up.
 

---

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
IngoB. You respecting my faith, enough to consider it wrong? What do you know of my faith? You may have a good knowledge of the Church Communion to which I belong, and I know pretty well how much that is respected by you - which is barely at all, if past posts are anything to go by! Certainly, there must be many wrong things about my understanding of God and matters of faith. But my faith, itself? I wonder, genuinelly, if you could even come close to knowing what that word means to me.

However, if by 'faith' you mean the particular method one employs to worship God; I certainly do think the Church to which you prefer to be affiliated is often wrong. Much as I admire it and respect it in many other ways. As for whether your faith is wrong or not. That's between you and the Almighty.

And please don't tell me I'm playing silly games when I know I'm not. I wasn't playing anything when I made that post. Again, you don't know me or my faith well enough to make that judgement call. All you know is that I've favoured a particular interpretation of scripture - which may be wrong or right - with reference to a particular application for this thread. And you don't like it. Just because you have the smarts to play silly games yourself, doesn't mean other people want to. I didn't want to, and I wasn't. I was serious. And if that's worth your ridicule of my abilities, and an incorrect dig at a sola scriptura position I'm supposed to have, I reckon I can live with that. Please feel free to bolster your intellectual superiority at my expense!

Though, thank you for the entirely predictable response to Brueggemann. If I'd run a book on it, I could be a rich woman!
 

---

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
You respecting my faith, enough to consider it wrong? ... I wonder, genuinelly, if you could even come close to knowing what that word means to me.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
And please don't tell me I'm playing silly games when I know I'm not. I wasn't playing anything when I made that post.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
Though, thank you for the entirely predictable response to Brueggemann.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:

---

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Anselmina:
Though, thank you for the entirely predictable response to Brueggemann.

---

Well, I have to admit that I'm feeling a bit smug about having detected the typical fudge even though the original gay agenda had been carefully stripped away. A test for my spider senses, and they sure did tingle...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
They won't be merged. The Pauline Missal will be gradually be revised out of existence. The Johannine Missal will see restorations of pre-1955 elements, incorporation of one or two positive elements of the PM and will be made available substantially in the vernacular along the lines of the English Missal/1965 Interim Roman Missal. There will be more widespread use of Latin too I believe.

---

quote:

---

This year just 12 students entered Maynooth to study for the priesthood. None of them is from a western diocese. That must be something of a record. In my first year in Maynooth I was one of 20 students from the western dioceses and there were 84 altogether in my class. In all now there are 64 students in Maynooth studying for the priesthood. In my time the total number of students was around 400.
It’s not a happy picture. And of course the same applies across the developed world: Britain, Germany, Italy, USA. France is even worse, of course, a template of the future. The Church has virtually disappeared in vast areas of rural France as aged priests struggle to cope with a multiplicity of parishes. The future of the Catholic Church in Ireland looks like France, I’m afraid.

---

quote:

---

So what’s going to happen? The trajectory will be something like this. As priests age and die out, lay ministers will hold week-day Communion Services in situations where priests are not available. It will start with Communion Services conducted by laymen and women in parishes where there used to be Mass and now there’s no priest to say it. Gradually this practice will extend to weekend Masses. People will either opt to travel to some more populated centre for Mass or stay in their home parish for a Communion Service. In all probability parishes will not be amalgamated or churches closed – as that would cause a lot of bother – but effectively parishes will become paper entities and churches will become dilapidated and eventually close. And like in Liverpool, a series of specific ministries (like Funeral Ministers) will be introduced to fill in for a declining and aged remnant of priests.

---

quote:

---

Don’t mention the war. Don’t mention it. I won’t tell a soul.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Rather depends upon how one views liturgy. Your use of the term "worship styles" says it all, whereas I would take a much more patristic view. Lex orandi lex credendi!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ronald Binge:
I have other far more important stuff in real life to deal with right now but I won't let that bit of smartarsery on Anselmina pass without comment.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
IngoB

As promised, a considered response to your "numbers" post.

To make things easier, I'm going to repeat the other link I made in my "Santiago" post. This one, from the Irish Association of Catholic Priests.

So far as numbers go, here is the excerpt which encouraged me to link it.

quote:

---

This year just 12 students entered Maynooth to study for the priesthood. None of them is from a western diocese. That must be something of a record. In my first year in Maynooth I was one of 20 students from the western dioceses and there were 84 altogether in my class. In all now there are 64 students in Maynooth studying for the priesthood. In my time the total number of students was around 400.
It’s not a happy picture. And of course the same applies across the developed world: Britain, Germany, Italy, USA. France is even worse, of course, a template of the future. The Church has virtually disappeared in vast areas of rural France as aged priests struggle to cope with a multiplicity of parishes. The future of the Catholic Church in Ireland looks like France, I’m afraid.

---

The Maynooth picture was strikingly similar to the historical trends of numbers in training at Santiago de Compostella and the comment about aged priests coping with a multiplicity of parishes was very similar to a comment by the Catholic tour guide.

On the numerical question, have you found more detailed tables showing the trends of priests in training in the developed world? Repeating your earlier link, it does show a short term decline in Europe, but the impression I get from the ACP link (and from the Santiago de C experience) is that numbers in training, certainly in Ireland and Spain, and possibly in general in Europe, have been in long term decline. Is that wrong?

The ACP article shows ways in which priestly duties are in practice being more "shared out" - and that's a good thing. It also hints at discussions re the celebration of the Mass and the distribution of the Host by those other than priests, (I'm reminded of the "reserved elements" approach within the C of E which enables communion in rural parishes to be distributed by Readers and Deacons) And there are some poignant words about funerals as well.

I suppose this may be a "local difficulty" when viewed in global terms, but it appears to be causing stress and distress. And gloomy predictions. Like this

quote:

---

So what’s going to happen? The trajectory will be something like this. As priests age and die out, lay ministers will hold week-day Communion Services in situations where priests are not available. It will start with Communion Services conducted by laymen and women in parishes where there used to be Mass and now there’s no priest to say it. Gradually this practice will extend to weekend Masses. People will either opt to travel to some more populated centre for Mass or stay in their home parish for a Communion Service. In all probability parishes will not be amalgamated or churches closed – as that would cause a lot of bother – but effectively parishes will become paper entities and churches will become dilapidated and eventually close. And like in Liverpool, a series of specific ministries (like Funeral Ministers) will be introduced to fill in for a declining and aged remnant of priests.

---

This is "insider" talk. Is the author talking out of his hat? (BTW I presume Weekday Communion is some secondary distribution of the Host, but I'm not clear on that)

I accept that my earlier argument (essentially that a greater sharing out of priestly duties is likely to lead to long term change) is predicated on such info I had about long term decline in numbers in training. The overall global picture does look better, and so it may only be Europe (or parts of Europe anyway) that have major causes of concern.

But there is another way of looking at the numbers Table you provided. Given the comparative ratios of priest to population, is it really fair for Europe to see the "importing" of priests from the developing world as fair to the developing world? Some of that will be fine and cross-fertilisation is always a good thing, but if it becomes a pattern it also feels like a subsidy of the comparatively less needy by the comparatively more needy.

And to judge from the Irish link (and comments) the needs of the "comparatively less needy" are pretty serious. The "insiders" foresee substantial changes in parish life. I was impressed by the final sentence.

quote:

---

Don’t mention the war. Don’t mention it. I won’t tell a soul.

---

This is "coalface" feedback from Ireland and has something to say about elsewhere in Europe. How do you, and other Catholic contributors here, assess it? Just a whinge? Or a siren voice? Or what?

---

quote:

---

But there is another way of looking at the numbers Table you provided. Given the comparative ratios of priest to population, is it really fair for Europe to see the "importing" of priests from the developing world as fair to the developing world? Some of that will be fine and cross-fertilisation is always a good thing, but if it becomes a pattern it also feels like a subsidy of the comparatively less needy by the comparatively more needy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
I was still mostly responding to Anselmina, who talked about "the particular method one employs to worship God". As for "lex orandi, lex credendi" ("the law of prayer is the law of belief") - indeed, that's precisely why I suspect your comment of heresy and schism. While we are doing the Patristic boogie on the liturgical minefield, does "Roma locuta est, causa finita est" ("Rome has spoken, the case is closed") ring a bell?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Concerning primacy even the most grandiose language of the Fathers cannot be reconciled with the claims made in Pastor Aeternus. The Petrine ministry is, I would argue the Great Lie of the post schism Roman Church (though the rot started even earlier). Primacy as it existed in the Early Church is not something we would deny but if the bishop of Rome wants to discuss it the position of Orthodoxy remains the same: first confess the orthodox faith.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Lyda*Rose

I get that and I would never argue against anyone following a call from wherever to wherever. Just as long as there isn't a strategic assumption that "importing" will be used to alleviate the European shortage.

CL

Of course I recognised the possibility of some kind of group bias, which is why I asked the question. But I'm trying to avoid Bulverising witnesses here.

Are the concerns voiced in the ACP link unfounded? The fact that from some folks' POV "they would say that" - maybe because those folks see some kind of agenda at work - does not set aside the possibility that at least some of their concerns may be justified.

On long term decline of Catholic ordinands in Europe, that's a matter of fact which can be resolved by detailed data. If it is happening, it needs a considered, serious, strategic response.

I read the ACP link as providing evidence of need which would not exist if there were more priests. Is that just about inefficiency, or laziness, amongst those who are in office? Or is the "struggling to cope without getting much by way of help" the underlying source of the discontent?

I don't automatically take the side of protesters, don't automatically assume that they are groaning under the weight of complacent, top down, management just telling them to "get on with it". But I don't automatically dismiss their voices either. People also protest for good and objective reasons, not just because they have problems with submission and authority and perseverance.

Are there good, objective reasons behind a proper cause for concern here? If so, what do they imply for the longer term? These seem valid questions in the context of this thread.

---

quote:

---

Rosa Winkel wrote: I've heard people stridently saying that churches should "modernise" in order to gain people back to church. I've also read here people stridently putting the blame of less people in church at the feet of "modernists".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
To make things easier, I'm going to repeat the other link I made in my "Santiago" post. This one, from the Irish Association of Catholic Priests.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
numbers in training, certainly in Ireland and Spain, and possibly in general in Europe, have been in long term decline. Is that wrong?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
This is "insider" talk. Is the author talking out of his hat?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
But there is another way of looking at the numbers Table you provided. Given the comparative ratios of priest to population, is it really fair for Europe to see the "importing" of priests from the developing world as fair to the developing world? Some of that will be fine and cross-fertilisation is always a good thing, but if it becomes a pattern it also feels like a subsidy of the comparatively less needy by the comparatively more needy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
This is "coalface" feedback from Ireland and has something to say about elsewhere in Europe. How do you, and other Catholic contributors here, assess it? Just a whinge? Or a siren voice? Or what?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I suspect that if folks polarise about the reasons for the emptier seminaries, they will also polarise about what might be done to "re-stock" them. Which might limit progress over remedial action. In any case, it takes time to make good on a longer term "supply deficit".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rosa Winkel: We can all give examples of the Father who wants Latin masses and daily fasting and the female Priest who sings songs about lesbians being loved by God being a success/having less parishioners. It proves nothing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jon in the Nati:
When I was in undergrad I got more than my fill of modern/postmodern bullshit from my professors; thank God I didn't have to hear it from my local pulpit as well.

---

Excellent !!

@ Ad Orientem: I take your point on the SSPX and agree. There is also a tendency for new Catholics to be rather conservative. You say you are based in Finland. I lived in Helsinki for 5 years in the late 90s/early 2000s and those were testing times for the small local RC community. Roman Catholicism is not at all rooted in Finland; the Helsinki Parish consisted of either embassy personnel and expats like myself, or of converts. And these converts were very, very conservative indeed. Their zeal was frightening and worrying. They were converts and they practised their new faith with furrowed brows and deadly seriousness. The Parish was run by Opus Dei priests and an archconservative Bishop from Poland. And by "conservative" I do not mean liturgically conservative. We (the born-and bred Catholics of a mostly not very Ultramontanist conviction) felt quite homeless in that parish. Personally, I literally took to the woods, attending mass at a remote Carmelite hermitage in the forests far from town.

So a tendency for a strengthening of "right-wing" catholicism in the future is quite possible in countries where there are many converts.
The Lesbian-hugging, guitar-playing lets-all-stand-around-the-altar-and-hold-hands- type of Catholicism will remain the preserve of Europe and North America. Where Catholicism is dying out.
 

---

Posted by Rosa Winkel (# 11424) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I very much doubt that the people talking about "modernising" churches are thinking in terms of "modernism" or "post modernism". They are more likely talking in terms of language and liturgy that people can understand.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CL:
What they fail to say is that it is their particular "Spirit of Vatican II" nonsense that is responsible for the empty seminaries. They desacralised the priesthood, the sacraments and the Church and now wonder why no one wants to be a priest. If they don't believe in what they are supposed to be selling, why the Hell would anyone else bother?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
If there's any truth in the observation that the RC church spent the 19th century in reaction against democracy and the 20th century in reaction against the emancipation of women, then the obvious question is what aspect of modern life it will be most obviously in reaction against during the 21st century.

Environmentalism ? Internationalism / cultural pluralism ? My bet is on neither of these, but on various forms of technology - genetic medicine, man/machine interfaces etc. Google Glass is just the beginning, and it won't be far down that road before the anathemas start flying...

In other words there will continue to be tensions between those who would make the Church a refuge from modern life, and those who want it to be relevant to modern life.

And through it all, God will continue to work, showing Himself in those who love their enemies...

Best wishes,

Russ

---

 

---

Posted by malik3000 (# 11437) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russ:
If there's any truth in the observation that the RC church spent the 19th century in reaction against democracy and the 20th century in reaction against the emancipation of women, then the obvious question is what aspect of modern life it will be most obviously in reaction against during the 21st century.

Environmentalism ? Internationalism / cultural pluralism ? My bet is on neither of these, but on various forms of technology - genetic medicine, man/machine interfaces etc. Google Glass is just the beginning, and it won't be far down that road before the anathemas start flying...

In other words there will continue to be tensions between those who would make the Church a refuge from modern life, and those who want it to be relevant to modern life.

And through it all, God will continue to work, showing Himself in those who love their enemies...

Best wishes,

Russ

---

 

---

Posted by Gildas (# 525) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
What one might more historically consider is that the hierarchy in both Rome and Nova Roma became highly politicised following imperial recognition and eventual Christianisation of the Western and Eastern empires; and that both bishoprics would understandably have been engaged in a sort of sibling rivalry from their respective imperial capitals -- the crumbling old seat of empire on the one hand, and Constantine's vigorous new imperial capital built up on the site of an old fishing village. Excessive and OTT claims, pretenses, and precipitous action would hardly be surprising in such circumstances.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
Pius XII, obviously. I am on my iPhone and after just going to correct the embarrassing typo, I found that iPhone autocorrect wanted to turn His Late Holiness into a 13th once again -- not sure why.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Aye, that too. I used to read Fr. Hunwicke's blog. He had a lot of good, interesting things to say on liturgical issues.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
The bee that was buzzing around my bonnet, IngoB, was the mixture of idealism (re family limitation in accordance with church guidelines) and pragmatism (re importing priests from growth areas to make good the decline in ordinands in Europe/US.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Of course I can see the "cash cow" argument you advanced and as a bit of pragmatism I can see that it works.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
But isn't there a certain irony to be found here? The high minded preservation of the priestly celibacy principle (which I don't agree with but understand) leads to an inequitable "import/export market" in priests. Is priestly celibacy more important than equity?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
... Is priestly celibacy more important than equity?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
If only some of the 20th century popes had maintained these "pretensions". Imagine if Pius XII had invoked Article 27 of Dictatus Papae and had "absolved subjects from their fealty to wicked men".

---

quote:

---

9. That of the pope alone all princes shall kiss the feet.

---

quote:

---

27. That he may absolve subjects from their fealty to wicked men.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:

There will have been no major reunifications with other denominations. But the Eastern Orthodox will be in all sorts of trouble, both external (secular hostility) and internal (rapid balkanization), and the unthinkable may have become rather thinkable among some of them. And to make a final daring prediction: Buddhism will not have continued its growth in the North/West, and will have resumed dying out slowly.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Desert Daughter:
We will all have become Tibetan Buddhists

Believing in the Dalai Lama to reincarnate might look just as outlandish to a rationalist as believing that the Holy Spirit guides a conclave. But at least the Chattering Classes treat Buddhists with respect, because they are... cute

But seriously…

---

I don’t speak for the cute Tibetans but you should get along to one of our gatherings in some of the darker recesses of east London sometime. Stripped of the afore-mentioned trappings of tourist Buddhism, a lot of us have perfect faces for a visually anonymous internet message board.
 

---

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by kankucho:
So I’ll see your prediction and raise you. Buddhism will not only survive but also influence the development of the Catholic Church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by IngoB:
The true question for me is in a discernment of spirits. Why are we doing any of this? If it is merely a desperate clinging to the status quo of the Church in our part of the world, then indeed that is to be condemned and doomed. But just because we are shrewd in our worldly arrangements doesn't mean that we have lost our way. We must be wise as serpents and innocent as doves (Matt 10:16), unshakeable ideals supported by ruthless pragmatism. Maybe we can't beat the Serpent at his own game in this world, but we sure shouldn't lose on purpose just to keep ourselves "pure". If one works in the vineyard, one is going to be sweaty and dirty at the end of the day.

---

quote:

---

Envoy: The mission I am on overrides all personal debts and loyalties

Inhabitant: (with fierce certainty) If so, it is an immoral mission

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by fletcher christian:
Sorry if this has been covered up-thread, but I read back a bit and didn't see it. Is the Pope a Bishop among Bishops (ie, equal), or is the Pope a sort of Bishop to the Bishops? I've never actually thought about it before and always assumed that he was big chief, but wandered what the official line was.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Equity be b*****d.

---

quote:

---

Is it more important than being able to provide pastoral and sacramental care for the faithful?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Second post

quote:

---

Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
If only some of the 20th century popes had maintained these "pretensions". Imagine if Pius XII had invoked Article 27 of Dictatus Papae and had "absolved subjects from their fealty to wicked men".

---

I've never seen or heard of this document before. Against it, the only surprising thing is that it took so long for the Reformation to arrive. Surely it is not still good theology, or part of even the most obscurantist 'more Catholic than the Pope' group's theological claims.

Three thoughts:-

1. There doesn't seem to be much about love in this, yet alone loving ones enemies.

2.

quote:

---

9. That of the pope alone all princes shall kiss the feet.

---

Not much either of this dodgy stuff about servanthood or washing the disciples' feet.

3.

quote:

---

27. That he may absolve subjects from their fealty to wicked men.

---

Does that mean that it was (or is still) official teaching that unless the Pope has absolved the subject of his or her duty to a wicked ruler, the defence 'I was just obeying orders' is a good one even for the worst offences against humanity?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
Equity be b*****d.

---

You can't bugger equity without buggering a central value of the Kingdom of God. See my post to IngoB. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
My reading of both scripture and Tradition is that equity is seen as a central Christian principle. From its prophetic foreshadowings (eg Amos 1-5, Isaiah 4,)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
through Mary's song (Magnificat - Luke 1),

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
the announcement of Jesus' ministry (Luke 4), many of the moral challenges in the teaching and example of Jesus,

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
the "all things in common" of the early church (Acts 2),

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
the "God shows no partiality" (Peter and Cornelius, Acts 10), the "all are one in Christ Jesus" (Gal:28-9),

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
there is a consistent indication that equity is a central value. Of the Kingdom which is and is to come.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barnabas62:
So I hope that in a hundred years time, the Catholic Church is not seen to have lost its way over the need for such wisdom over equity.

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0