True to some extent, but if they are not willing to obey legitimate authority until they decide if they fully agree or not then the question arises…are they truely Catholic? Or have they become Protestant in fact if not in law.
It’s a reasonable question of concern, and indeed one which ought be asked. At the same time, what is the alternative answer? To take action which may push them even further away rather than draw them closer?
It’s not problem to ask questions or debate things, but the first step is implement what is required and then discuss.
Perhaps. But, then, if conscience is supreme they must struggle with the question honestly before they can be expected to assent.
Just because they are intellectuals doesn’t give them license to dissent.
True. But they do retain the right to question and disagree within reason. There is the principle of what some would call “faithful dissent”, which (while seeming to be an oxymoron) gives a certain sense of credence and lends legitimacy to standing in opposition (or at least disagreement and objection) while trying to be truly faithful.
I would consider myself, probably yourself and many people on this board to be intellectual but you don’t see us demanding that we agree with the Holy Father and the Church before we follow.
Well, thank you (I think) for considering me an intelluctual. That is far more than many (including the self appointed intellectuals) would likely do. I’m not so sure that your statement stands true about a lot of people (even on this board), though, who really do want to shoehorn the Church’s beliefs into their own comfortable fit.
Back to the issue of Bishops and the USCCB…I still question its theological usefulness. Their actions as a body tend to dilute the understanding of authority in the Church. Not everything is up for endless debate and years of wrangling before implementing.
That, I consider a fair observation in some ways, though it could be argued that it has the potential to show greater strength if they stand together. Now, the fact that they rarely do probably proves otherwise, given.
If Christ wanted the Church to be on a democratic or parlimentary model, He wouldn’t have instituted the Papacy and the Church.
True… to some extent. The bishops do exist and function in college first and foremost, not just in individual administration. I also think that we have perhaps focused too much on the “top down” idea of direction which isn’t absolute. Collaboration with each other and with laity is a good thing. Though, the larger issue of fatherly leadership and witness is certainly a matter of concern in our day. But I think this is, perhaps, a distinct matter.
Too often we the people and the USCCB forget that the Church is not a man-made institution whose teachings and directives can be accepted or rejected at whim. Part of the Catholic faith is to believe what the Church teaches and obey its legitimate authority. And in a divinely instituted hierarchy, that means we listen first and foremost to Rome and the Holy Father. Only bishops who teach in union with him are on the right track.
As long as we understand what that truly means and don’t get distracted by a certain papal-centric view of everything which elevates the intended role to something of directed lordship in and of itself. Such a hyper emphasis is actually something which may not be healthy.
