“This gathering is not called by a bishop”

[manualman]

…

1. I am not so sure. If you are talking many children that make up most of a Sunday morning mass, but not most adults. Most who have gone through CCD know that term. The laity is not as ignorant as you think.

…

Obviously we disagree rather severely on items #1 and #2. Personally, I think the core issue revolves around issue #3 here, so I’ll just address that. I spent a month doing junior high and high school retreats all around your Winona Diocese. Most of them were preconfirmation retreats. These were kids almost entirely done with CCD/RE. Part of the retreat schedule involved breaking into small groups for discussion of the large group talks and one-on-one prayer time. Less than 1 in 5 of those kids about to be confirmed could tell me what Pentecost was. My opinions about the state of laity education are based on personal interaction with thousands of young people in 6 states over 9 months of giving retreats in 1993-94. These are today’s young adults and the vast majority of them haven’t had a lick of catholic education since confirmation. Trust me, the ignorance problem is larger than ever (at least since widespread literacy became the norm).

 

[LRThunder]

It is off topic, but yes I do.

Traditions change over time, the Vatican moves slowly, but in a few decades it will have caught up to our time. The Church moves forward, and this is what this group is doing, creating discussion points for future parts of the Church to refer back to as real world examples to see there is nothing to fear from change.

The Catholic Church cannot and will not recognize homosexual “marriages” or women priests anymore than we can recognize men as giving birth. It’s not possible.

The Church has spoken: women cannot be ordained and marriage is between a man and a woman. If God had meant for homosexual relations to be included, he would’ve made Steve and not Eve.

And catching up to our time isn’t always a good thing. For example, we have more destructive weapons in our time than we did in the 1500’s. That’s not a good thing.

 

[bellesjoy]

It is off topic, but yes I do.
Traditions change over time, the Vatican moves slowly, but in a few decades it will have caught up to our time. The Church moves forward, and this is what this group is doing, creating discussion points for future parts of the Church to refer back to as real world examples to see there is nothing to fear from change.

If you do not agree with the Church in regard to being unable to ordain women to the priesthood, you are in dissent. This does not show a more educated view, just a personal view that is in conflict with what Catholics are called to believe.

A Catholic is defined as one who believes, accepts and strives to live according to Catholic doctrine. The Church is not a democracy. It was established for us by Christ Himself. It is lead by the Holy Spirit and through the infallibility of the Pope, not by dissident groups that get together to try to get a consensus that reflects their personal opinions.

If the changes sought by these people are opposed to the morality held in doctrine, then anyone who finds themselves a part of it should indeed be fearful; fearful for their immortal souls. Do these folks really believe their thoughts are original or that they are ahead of the curve where the Holy Spirit is concerned?

Speaking to the ordination of women: John Paul II in Ordinatio Sacerdotialis, 1994 “I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”

This was clarified by then Cardinal Ratzinger (Responsum as Dubium, 1995) stating that the Church has taught infallibly on this doctrinal matter. (Doctrine is not changeable.)

If you choose to be Catholic, you believe in the doctrines of the Church. If you don’t then be honest enough to not call yourself a Catholic. It is not like saying you’re Irish or black or tall; it is a decision, a commitment, a choice to live as Catholics are called to live.

Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. John Paul II reminds us that the faithful are called to hand on the treasure that is the deposit of our faith to generations that follow. He does not say that we should adjust it to our personal thinking and pass on whatever we decide is okay with us. The cafeteria is closed.

 

[Scottgun]

How’s this a hypothetical?

Really. I bet there is more than one person in the world who shows up at Mass and considers themselves Catholic and denies the divinity of Christ, which is denial of the Trinity. Even if it is purely hypothetical, it’s a *reductio ad absurdum *to show that the there’s-no-such-thing-as-dissent position is silly.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Really. I bet there is more than one person in the world who shows up at Mass and considers themselves Catholic and denies the divinity of Christ, which is denial of the Trinity. Even if it is purely hypothetical, it’s a *reductio ad absurdum *to show that the there’s-no-such-thing-as-dissent position is silly.

I’ve met a Catholic who didn’t believe in God at all. She went to church because she liked singing in the choir and considered herself Catholic.

 

[Catholic29]

I’ve met a Catholic who didn’t believe in God at all. She went to church because she liked singing in the choir and considered herself Catholic.

Shocking, but sadly not that surprising considering the dismal state of catechesis in many dioceses today, along with a good many priests who aren’t theologically formed the best themselves.

 

[brockmac]

Dissenting Catholics? How about Protestants masquerading as Catholics. If someone does not accept the teaching of the Church on the Sacraments of Marriage and Holy Orders, I’m not sure they can call themselves Catholic.

Some complain that the Church moves to slowly. On matters of dogma the Church does not, should not, and indeed cannot move at all. The Church can only teach what she has received from Christ through the apostles and their successors through the ages.

A disagreement with the current Church teaching on marriage or orders is disagreement with what has been passed on from the earliest days of the Church. The Church is supposed to be salt and light and change the culture, not be changed by the culture.

I agree that today’s laity is different from previous generations. They are no better educated in Church teaching than previous generations. However, they do tend to be better educated in a secular sense. They are also subjected to a constant barrage from the media that continually assaults the teachings of the Church. When you combine these factors with an American understanding of democracy, it is suprising that dissent is at an all time high. These dissenters are just as guilty as Luther in assuming that their understanding of Scripture and Tradition is better than that of hundreds of years of popes, bishops, and theologians.

 

[Scottgun]

I agree that today’s laity is different from previous generations. They are no better educated in Church teaching than previous generations. However, they do tend to be better educated in a secular sense.

Absolutely. Or to quote Star Wars: “I should think that you Jedi would have more respect for the difference between knowledge and wisdom.” That is, for all our increase in knowlege, there has been a precipitous drop in understanding. By embracing consequentialism and the cult of ignorance in relativism, many have become the smartest fools in history.

 

[v3orb]

Traditions change over time, the Vatican moves slowly, but in a few decades it will have caught up to our time. The Church moves forward, and this is what this group is doing, creating discussion points for future parts of the Church to refer back to as real world examples to see there is nothing to fear from change.

Dogma doesn’t change, but the Church does grow in knowledge, if that is what you mean.

anyway, point is, a synod called by the congregation is a clear and complete sign of infidelity, and of protestantism. we don’t get to pick and choose which parts of the church we agree with.