B
- Status
W
water
Guest
You said too little.
Could you bring up some points that you are not so much agreed with Fr. McBrien?
P
puzzleannie
Guest
he certainly writes too much
B
bones_IV
Guest
Let’s begin with the historical timeline that pertains to McBrien’s piece:You said too little.
ca. 1531 - 1961 [430 years]
1961 - 1981 (from V2 to Ratzinger named as prefect of the CDF)
1981 - today [26 years]
Then he says, "“With the Second Vatican Council, however, and with the ecumenical movement which the council and the popes had endorsed, it became practically impossible to present the Catholic Church any longer as ‘the one, true Church’ and all other denominations as awash in error and falsehoods. And so the traditional apologetical tactics — ‘demonstrating’ that Catholicism alone is right, while Protestantism is completely wrong — were generally abandoned. If Protestants became Catholics in the late 1960s or in the '70s and early '80s, it was mainly for family reasons, or because they intended to marry a Catholic, or because they had grown familiar and spiritually comfortable with Catholic worship.”
Using this kind of logic we might as well deny the divinity of Christ.
B
bones_IV
Guest
He needs our prayers.
C
Contarini
Guest
Nothing of the sort. He doesn’t think half enough, in my opinion. He just spouts cliches.
Much like many of the people on this board–just different cliches. Probably you’ll all be locked up together in a room in Purgatory.
And given my arrogant attitude towards cliche-spouters on both sides, probably I’ll be in that room as well
Edwin
T
Teflon93
Guest
Isn’t “spouting cliches”----a cliche?Nothing of the sort. He doesn’t think half enough, in my opinion. He just spouts cliches.
Much like many of the people on this board–just different cliches. Probably you’ll all be locked up together in a room in Purgatory.
And given my arrogant attitude towards cliche-spouters on both sides, probably I’ll be in that room as well
Edwin
C
chris_molter
Guest
oops
J
jburgherr
Guest
I would love to be “locked up in a room in purgatory”…that means that I’m going to heaven!!!
:harp:
:harp:
G
Greg27
Guest
I’m not quite sure what the objection here is. There are no doubt many reasons people leave Catholicism and also convert to Catholicism. As the writer of the article suggested, many no doubt find the relative conservatism and stability of the Church in doctrine and teaching attractive in comparison to the chaotic pluralism which can exist elsewhere. There also appeared to be a suggestion many Catholics left the Church because of the reforms of Vatican II which made the church more liberal.
I think a more realistic perspective is this. The CC has lost a lot of members, both disgruntled conservative Catholics who disliked Vatican II or Vatican I (or they have moved into more conservative sections such as the Secadventist movement or Pope Pius society) and also disillusioned Catholics who don’t agree with certain conservative teachings on controversial issues (abortion, contraception, infallibility, ordination of women, homosexual marriage and rights, etc) and also no doubt new converts who become disillusioned at the church for one reason or another. However, at the same time the CC has gained many converts, especially with its more welcoming approach to converts, increasing acceptance of interfaith marriage, the institution of the RCIA and evangelisations to lasped Catholics, and also the attraction the solid traditions give to those of a more conservative mindset. All in all the church is clearly in a state of rapid and accelerating change, as the rest of the world is, and the Vatican is trying to maintain a degree of unity and control over the church as it becomes global without losing its identity and traditions and heritage. Clearly John Paul II and Benedict are trying to steer the church on a steady keel through these turbulent and uncertain times by more strongly affirming some traditions against calls for reform, while at the same time trying to allow the reforms of Vatican II to take proper effect and modernise the Church properly for the 21st century.
In my view the process of reform needs to be increased, and the church needs to make a better response to several key issues, and make itself more transparent to criticism and accountability to and from its lay stakeholders. In the 21st century, many people are turning from monarchical or authoritarian models of organisation structure in favour of a more horizontal structure where people are encouraged to be entrepenurial and intelligent managers of their lives and choices consonant with a greater emphasis on personal autonomy and harmony with a pluralistic world and society. The Vatican then in my view should cede some more autonomy and power to its Bishops, clergy and laity, as it has done in Vatican II, continue to reform so the laity perform a more active role in the church and also missions, particularly in light of the priest shortage, and also consider at least making celibacy in the clergy optional. Clearly any organisation cannot totally be without a heirarchy of some sort so a Peterine ministry led by a Bishop of Rome is still needed, as is a degree of centralisation and authority, and it remains to be seen how Benedict and his successor(s) will update the CC so it manages to face the challenges of the 21st century and beyond.
I think a more realistic perspective is this. The CC has lost a lot of members, both disgruntled conservative Catholics who disliked Vatican II or Vatican I (or they have moved into more conservative sections such as the Secadventist movement or Pope Pius society) and also disillusioned Catholics who don’t agree with certain conservative teachings on controversial issues (abortion, contraception, infallibility, ordination of women, homosexual marriage and rights, etc) and also no doubt new converts who become disillusioned at the church for one reason or another. However, at the same time the CC has gained many converts, especially with its more welcoming approach to converts, increasing acceptance of interfaith marriage, the institution of the RCIA and evangelisations to lasped Catholics, and also the attraction the solid traditions give to those of a more conservative mindset. All in all the church is clearly in a state of rapid and accelerating change, as the rest of the world is, and the Vatican is trying to maintain a degree of unity and control over the church as it becomes global without losing its identity and traditions and heritage. Clearly John Paul II and Benedict are trying to steer the church on a steady keel through these turbulent and uncertain times by more strongly affirming some traditions against calls for reform, while at the same time trying to allow the reforms of Vatican II to take proper effect and modernise the Church properly for the 21st century.
In my view the process of reform needs to be increased, and the church needs to make a better response to several key issues, and make itself more transparent to criticism and accountability to and from its lay stakeholders. In the 21st century, many people are turning from monarchical or authoritarian models of organisation structure in favour of a more horizontal structure where people are encouraged to be entrepenurial and intelligent managers of their lives and choices consonant with a greater emphasis on personal autonomy and harmony with a pluralistic world and society. The Vatican then in my view should cede some more autonomy and power to its Bishops, clergy and laity, as it has done in Vatican II, continue to reform so the laity perform a more active role in the church and also missions, particularly in light of the priest shortage, and also consider at least making celibacy in the clergy optional. Clearly any organisation cannot totally be without a heirarchy of some sort so a Peterine ministry led by a Bishop of Rome is still needed, as is a degree of centralisation and authority, and it remains to be seen how Benedict and his successor(s) will update the CC so it manages to face the challenges of the 21st century and beyond.
G
Gratias_Grace
Guest
Oh, Greg ! :bigyikes:
To make celibacy an option, will only make more people leaving the Church. The good celibate priests (and there is many of them), is the best example to us that we have to give up something to follow Christ. " and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me" (Mt 10:38). If Christ’s servants are not willing to give up something for him, how shall they be able to be good shepherds to us?
The Church is of God (founded on the first Pentecost). It is the Holy Spirit that shall enlighten the Church, not the people. It was God who created us, not the other way around. If people don’t want to obey God, it’s their choice, But they don’t have to try to change the Church to fit the world.
G.G.
I have to disagree with you! :knight1: It was too much autonomy to Bishops and clergy that perhaps made the priest-sex-scandal that was uncovered in 2002.
To make celibacy an option, will only make more people leaving the Church. The good celibate priests (and there is many of them), is the best example to us that we have to give up something to follow Christ. " and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me" (Mt 10:38). If Christ’s servants are not willing to give up something for him, how shall they be able to be good shepherds to us?
The Church is of God (founded on the first Pentecost). It is the Holy Spirit that shall enlighten the Church, not the people. It was God who created us, not the other way around. If people don’t want to obey God, it’s their choice, But they don’t have to try to change the Church to fit the world.
G.G.
F
frnate
Guest
R
RCCDefender
Guest
Is this the same Father McBrien who wrote Catholicism? If so then I don’t give much thought to anything he writes.
W
Wolseley
Guest
Oh, dear…I see Richie’s gone off his medication again.
- Status