The whole history of the Church is cyclical, marked by periods of degeneration/corruption followed by periods of regeneration/renewal. My intuition is that we are on the tail end of the former now and are moving towards the latter. So, if you are genuinely disturbed by what you see in the Church today (“filth” as Cardinal Ratzinger described it, when he was still Cardinal Ratzinger), pray hard and do penance.
You must be strong. What he did was wrong theirs no denying that, but in no way shape of form should it strain your faith. These occurrences happen in a lot of religions. Unfortunately, the Church always has the cameras pointed at her for every move.
I was thinking, possibly Cardinal O’Brien’s resignation and non-attendance at the conclave, could influence Cardinal Mahony’s decision as to his own attendance - that’s if the decision is his to make.
And then there’s the question of whether O’Brien was making the case for allowing married men to become priests or whether he was making the case for allowing ordained priests to subsequently get married. If it was the latter, I wonder if that played a part in the Pope’s decision.Interesting. Of course, resignation tends to give the appearance of guilt, but probably better than the appearance of philandering men electing the new Pope.
I wonder though, without O’Brien, is anyone else at the conclave going to make the case for married Priests?
Agreed. As a result of this, I really think we’re going to hear of his resignation soon.
Your faith in Christ?
That might not be a bad thing. If the intent of avoiding scandal was the original motivation for some of the past happenings, then that intent is even MORE pertinent now.
This all sounds nice but it will be harder to enforce than it seems. Many priests and even some bishops are already in open rebellion against the Church (think the German bishops with their pro multis nonsense, the Austrian priests and their Call to Disobedience, etc.) and so the threat of schism is very real. Certain sectors of the American Jesuits have publicly stated their intention to disobey the Vatican’s directive that homosexuals are not to be admitted to seminaries or religious life.
I have to think that a trusted companion selling out our Savior for thirty pieces of silver takes the cake in terms of scandal, no? Yet the Church survived and thrived. It will again.
Same here. While I’m lucky that I haven’t had to defend the church lately, I still feel really ashamed. This particular case is really hard for me because I lived in O’Brien’s diocese for a long time and have always had complete trust in his as a leader. I admired him so much and saw him as a wonderful example to the UK bishops. I really hope he is innocent. I know I shouldn’t take this personally but it is so hard not to.
And for a man of God, if the charges were true, the difference would be?
And maybe there will be a schism. I’d much rather see them leave than continue to defile the Church from within. I’m so done with the dissidence.
Honestly, I was leaving that up other people to decide for themselves.
I was just pointing it out as a difference. Obviously, both are bad.Didn’t mean to upset you, I was just pointing out that especially for a religious leader, there is no difference.Honestly, I was leaving that up other people to decide for themselves.
My faith in Christ is unwaverable. BUT, a priest at my parish when I was a teenager was a molester, the priest who officiated at my wedding was secretly and illicitly married, the priest who cried during the funeral for my oldest son has left the Church.
