G
grannymh
Guest
Welcome to CAF.
I see that we have a lot in common. Besides the first three chapters of Genesis, I often cite chapter 14, Gospel of John. This time, what struck me is our common salvation in Jude 3-4.
Which Catholic doctrines are currently being challenged by emerging christianity?
- Status
I see that we have a lot in common. Besides the first three chapters of Genesis, I often cite chapter 14, Gospel of John. This time, what struck me is our common salvation in Jude 3-4.
J
James82
Guest
Hi Grannymh,
If I may.
The whole ‘emergent church’ fad started in the late 90’s and to my knowledge petered out half a decade or so, though of course some remnants clearly remain; particularly in the form of Rob Bell, though he himself isn’t actually anything new.
Bottom line is that they really have no stance on any doctrines. As far as them affecting the Church in any meaningful way I wouldn’t worry. The poor souls who are improperly catechised and formed may in fact be swayed but will ultimately come to see it for the mess of pottage that it is (Rob Bells mega church in Michigan split asunder not too long ago).
I am speaking from first hand knowledge of some time spent among them at a conference I attended with some adherents coming from around the globe. It’s all very hip, universalism etc.
If you have any more questions I would be glad to answer.
In Christ
If I may.
The whole ‘emergent church’ fad started in the late 90’s and to my knowledge petered out half a decade or so, though of course some remnants clearly remain; particularly in the form of Rob Bell, though he himself isn’t actually anything new.
Bottom line is that they really have no stance on any doctrines. As far as them affecting the Church in any meaningful way I wouldn’t worry. The poor souls who are improperly catechised and formed may in fact be swayed but will ultimately come to see it for the mess of pottage that it is (Rob Bells mega church in Michigan split asunder not too long ago).
I am speaking from first hand knowledge of some time spent among them at a conference I attended with some adherents coming from around the globe. It’s all very hip, universalism etc.
If you have any more questions I would be glad to answer.
In Christ
S
simpleas
Guest
I found this and thought it was interesting how the Pope points it out quite obviously :Hi Simpleas:
From Wikipedia:
"In 1998, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued another opinion, a Doctrinal Commentary on Ad Tuendam Fidem[6] to state that the teaching of Ordinatio Sacerdotalis was not taught as being divinely revealed, although it might someday be so taught in the future:
" A similar process can be observed in the more recent teaching regarding the doctrine that priestly ordination is reserved only to men. The Supreme Pontiff, while not wishing to proceed to a dogmatic definition, intended to reaffirm that this doctrine is to be held definitively, since, founded on the written Word of God, constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. As the prior example illustrates, this does not foreclose the possibility that, in the future, the consciousness of the Church might progress to the point where this teaching could be defined as a doctrine to be believed as divinely revealed."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinatio_Sacerdotalis
So, the answer to the infallibility of the statement is “not yet”. Some people say “yes, it is infallible” regardless of what the Congregation says, though.
The question is, again, is it worth our time and our communion to be divisive over the issue? A priest once told us, for example, that he did not think there would ever be women priests, but that perhaps women would eventually be taking on the same priestly roles. So, do you see, even if they eventually decide that JP II’s document was infallible, there would still be the possibility of women someday doing everything that priests do.
The Spirit moves people and moves the Church. If God wants the Church to eventually have women take on the same roles as men, absolutely nothing that anyone says will stop it. This is a good reason to be open-minded. There is no infallible statement against open-mindedness. Indeed, to have such a dogma or doctrine would be to close off the Spirit Himself.
Have you ever seen Fiddler on the Roof? Think of Reptevia looking into the sky and crying “tradition!” in his frustration over the winds of change. Change is scary for people, but as I was always taught, fear is the opposite of faith.
I stand by my statement: divisiveness over doctrine or dogma or what have you goes against the spirit of the Eucharist itself. If someone thinks that Ordinatio Sacerdotalis should be infallible, then that is okay, let us break bread with the person. If someone thinks that women should be priests or take on priestly roles, then who am I to exclude them from who I call brother or sister? Christ calls for inclusiveness, right Simpleas?
Go forth, and make the world a better place!
He spoke of how the in the professions of faith of the New Testament, only men are remembered as witnesses of the Resurrection, the Apostles, but not the women. “This is because, according to the Jewish Law of the time, women and children were not considered reliable, credible witnesses. In the Gospels, however, women have a primary, fundamental role. Here we can see an argument in favor of the historicity of the Resurrection: if it were a invented, in the context of that time it would not have been linked to the testimony of women. Instead, the evangelists simply narrate what happened: the women were the first witnesses. This tells us that God does not choose according to human criteria:
news.va/en/news/audience-the-fundamental-role-of-women-in-the-chur
G
grannymh
Guest
As you can tell from my coming experience (attending a funeral) related in post 57, the title of my thread is too limited.
As for Catholic Doctrines being disputed, in my humble opinion, the only doctrine which could escape challenging would be the one which declares that God exists.What I have been seeing is more like a “granted permission” for Catholics, themselves, to hold a contradiction to the essential meaning of a chosen doctrine. The attitude seems to be that all contradictions are permitted as long as there is the spirit of breaking bread together. The source of that attitude seemed impossible to find.
As part of my off-CAF work, I normally research authors. Accidentally, I came across information about an emerging christian church kind of movement. In addition, I have been given various links. At this point, I do not think that there is a single source for this “permission” to accept any and all contradictions to Catholic doctrines as long as there is “communion” between individuals. Interestingly, one of my kids was talking about something similar and then claimed he did not know anything about any emerging church thing.
I am not much help in answering your post. Maybe what I am sincerely worried about is in plain sight.
G
grannymh
Guest
Thank you for appearing.
By any chance, did you attend this conference?
ncronline.org/news/faith-parish/unformed-future
Everyone of us needs to remember. From post 32.
Because of the Sacrament of Holy Orders, we respect our priests. Unfortunately, the reality is that priests, like ourselves, can fail in a variety of ways. As we pray for ourselves, we need to add prayers for our priests, including the one who serves as our diocesan Bishop and the one who serves as our Pope.
As I have learned by researching different authors, there are a few Catholic priests who hold contradictions to some Catholic doctrines. We must remain respectful at the same time we address these positions.
G
grannymh
Guest
Everyone of us need to remember. From post 32.
Because of the Sacrament of Holy Orders, we respect our priests. Unfortunately, the reality is that priests, like ourselves, can fail in a variety of ways. As we pray for ourselves, we need to add prayers for our priests, including the one who serves as our diocesan Bishop and the one who serves as our Pope.
As I have learned by researching different authors, there are a few Catholic priests who hold contradictions to some Catholic doctrines. We must remain respectful at the same time we address these positions.
J
James82
Guest
Small world!
Shaine Claiborne was in fact there to speak, but I didn’t bother to stay any longer than a half hour, so I never did hear him. I had to leave partly out of lack of time and partly because, ironically, for all it’s post-modern hipness, it was all quite bland.
Of the few ‘workshops’ I attended I particularly took umbrage with one in which pastor ‘so and so’ was criticizing the work of the Church in 3rd world Latin America. I won’t bother getting into the details of their ‘solutions’ but suffice to say, a lot of the work being put in seems to be a strange symbiosis of left-leaning Protestantism mixed with liberation theology…if that makes any sense.
This conference took place in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada however, not ALBUQUERQUE, N.M.
Basically…Ecclesiastes 1:1-16.
I hate to sound cold about it all, but these things come and vanish (and unfortunately souls are lead astray) when their works are eventually made manifest.
The Church holds.
Shaine Claiborne was in fact there to speak, but I didn’t bother to stay any longer than a half hour, so I never did hear him. I had to leave partly out of lack of time and partly because, ironically, for all it’s post-modern hipness, it was all quite bland.
Of the few ‘workshops’ I attended I particularly took umbrage with one in which pastor ‘so and so’ was criticizing the work of the Church in 3rd world Latin America. I won’t bother getting into the details of their ‘solutions’ but suffice to say, a lot of the work being put in seems to be a strange symbiosis of left-leaning Protestantism mixed with liberation theology…if that makes any sense.
This conference took place in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada however, not ALBUQUERQUE, N.M.
Basically…Ecclesiastes 1:1-16.
I hate to sound cold about it all, but these things come and vanish (and unfortunately souls are lead astray) when their works are eventually made manifest.
The Church holds.
S
simpleas
Guest
Here is another link on the subject. I did try coping/pasting bits but my computer is playing up!
I think it is a few years old.
christianpost.com/news/catholics-join-emerging-church-conversation-37481/#!
I think it is a few years old.
christianpost.com/news/catholics-join-emerging-church-conversation-37481/#!
S
steve_b
Guest
Your lead off OneSheep forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif ] is a commentary on Ad Tuendam
adoremus.org/RatCom1098.html then Card Ratzinger on Ad Tuendam
writes
“A similar process can be observed in the more recent teaching regarding the doctrine that priestly ordination is reserved only to men. The Supreme Pontiff, while not wishing to proceed to a dogmatic definition, intended to reaffirm that this doctrine is to be held definitively, since, founded on the written Word of God, constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. As the prior example illustrates, this does not foreclose the possibility that, in the future, the consciousness of the Church might progress to the point where this teaching could be defined as a doctrine to be believed as divinely revealed.”
Do you see what’s being said? There is NO chance the doctrine will be reversed. If it procedes to “dogma divinely revealed”, then it will, but that doesn’t negate the fact it is NOW already an infallible doctrine (teaching) and belief of the Church. That means by definition it can’t be reversed
OS:
IOW you don’t believe the priesthood is reserved for men only?
OS:
The point is, there is no argument except with those who refuse to accept the fact the case is closed. Those who keep the pot stirred on this after being shown the truth that it is closed, sin greviously against charity towards the Church.
OS:
It won’t be reversed. There is NOTHING in those documents that even suggest it is open for reversal. In fact the docs show clearly it is NOT open for reversal so stop thinking it is still open
OS:
Here’s what I believe. I go with the Church not my personal opinion or others personal opinions. The Church says clearly it’s infallible teaching that men alone are to be ordained as priests. End of discussion. Case closed.
S
steve_b
Guest
Your lead off OneSheep forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif ] is a commentary on Ad Tuendam
adoremus.org/RatCom1098.html then Card Ratzinger on Ad Tuendam
writes
“A similar process can be observed in the more recent teaching regarding the doctrine that priestly ordination is reserved only to men. The Supreme Pontiff, while not wishing to proceed to a dogmatic definition, intended to reaffirm that this doctrine is to be held definitively, since, founded on the written Word of God, constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. As the prior example illustrates, this does not foreclose the possibility that, in the future, the consciousness of the Church might progress to the point where this teaching could be defined as a doctrine to be believed as divinely revealed.”
There is NO chance the doctrine will be reversed. If it procedes to dogma, that doesn’t negate the fact it is already an infallible doctrine (teaching) and belief of the Church.
OS:
IOW you don’t believe the priesthood is reserved for men only?
OS:
The point is, there is no argument except with those who refuse to accept the fact the case is closed. Those who keep the pot stirred on this after being shown the truth that it is closed, sin greviously against charity towards the Church. And that IS important.
OS:
It won’t be reversed. There is NOTHING in those documents that even suggest it is open for reversal. In fact the docs show clearly it is NOT open for reversal so stop thinking it is still open
OS:
Here’s what I believe. I go with the Church not my personal opinion or others personal opinions. The Church says clearly it’s infallible teaching that men alone are to be ordained as priests. End of discussion. Case closed.
O
OneSheep
Guest
Steve, my brother:
All of these Catholics differ with your opinion on the matter:
womenpriests.org/teaching/mag_con2.asp
So, the question is, have you judged all of these groups uncharitable, or are you able to be in communion with them? Can you be thankful for Jesus alongside these people, or do you condemn them and shun them from your idea of Church? Do you really judge people with these differing opinions as uncharitable?
Are you inclusive, or are you exclusive, of people with differing views? Is our Church the “let’s be thankful together” Church and let the little issues work themselves out, or at least not stand in the way of communion, or is our Church the “My way or the highway” Church?
This is the point of the matter: If there is someone sitting next to you in Church who is doubting whether or not there is a God, but is in some way thankful for Jesus, how do you feel toward that person? Hey, we all struggle with judging.
It’s a matter of self-awareness, Steve. Do you see what I mean?
D
davidv
Guest
When some teach others in direct contradiction to Church teaching, they are being uncharitable. Why? Because their misrepresentations are leading others away from God. This is the epitome of unloving. Love must desire the best for the other. The best is holiness, not dissent.
G
grannymh
Guest
OneSheep, please be at peace,
We do respect our sisters and brothers who have different opinions. That, my friend, is not the problem.
As we follow the theme, such as it is, of this thread, we look for Catholic doctrines which are currently being challenged by anyone. That is step one. Thank you for providing some examples.
Step two is to discover the effects of Catholic challengers. For example. Is there a received impression that it is o.k. for ordinary folk to simply substitute a personal interpretation for a Catholic teaching? That includes substituting an author or speaker’s personal interpretations for a Catholic teaching.
Long range, step three is to determine whether or not, permission to oppose a Catholic doctrine leads away from the deep meanings of God being present in the Catholic Eucharist.
G
grannymh
Guest
S
steve_b
Guest
This isn’t about my opinion. All that I’ve been saying is from quotes from Church docs, here #58 and the following.
2037, The law of God entrusted to the Church is taught to the faithful as the way of life and truth. The faithful therefore have the right to be instructed in the divine saving precepts that purify judgment and, with grace, heal wounded human reason. They have the duty of observing the constitutions and decrees conveyed by the legitimate authority of the Church. Even if they concern disciplinary matters, these determinations call for docility in charity.
the list of people you present, are they observing the decree conveyed by the legitimate authority of the Church (priesthood is for men only) ? No
By their active and continued dissent on that matter, are they docile in charity? No
By their active disssent with the Church on this issue THEY are the ones being uncharitable towards God and His Church.
OS:
Everything I’ve said, is not my opinion. I’ve quoted from Church documents. Don’t make this about me.
OS:
If something is open, one can have differing views. Not if the issue is settled.
using the language of 2037
the faithful have the duty of observing the constitutions and decrees conveyed by the legitimate authority of the Church. Their call is to be docile in charity.
“Their call is to be docile in charity” is a strong statement.
Therefore, since the groups you list, dissent from a decree, that the legitimate authority of the Church on this subject has given, they sin against charity
OS:
You continue to make this about me. It’s not about me. It’s about those who dissent from Church teaching.
G
grannymh
Guest
Thank you for your enlightening posts.
Just had a thought.
Maybe you and I are strawman and strawwoman.
S
simpleas
Guest
So women as priestess of our Lord Jesus Christ would be leading people away from God?
D
davidv
Guest
Yes, because this is in direct contradiction of the Chuch, who speaks for Jesus. Jesus says to the apostles in Luke 10
G
grannymh
Guest
Before I can reply, I need to understand what “women as priestess of our Lord Jesus Christ” actually means in this century. The only priestess I know lived in pagan temples centuries ago. Please update me.
S
simpleas
Guest
This is talking about people rejecting God, does it say somewhere that the seventy-two people he sent out were all male? Maybe they were, because that was the conditions 2,000 years ago…
- Status