Originally Posted by
simpleas forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif
For me, the decline of people attending church has nothing to do with emerging Christianity, especially people of my age group, they haven’t taken to another church, they just don’t do church. Doesn’t mean they no longer believe in God…
Our church needs to move into the 21st century, as the church has done in every other century. What people need to hear is a fresh approach to what sin is, as I think we are getting to a point where sin does not exist for some people.
I have found a reply by re-reading the initial posts in this thread. Ignatius, in post 3, asks: “What is emerging Christianity?”
PJH_74, in post 4, replies:
“I’m not sure it’s a movement so much as it is a search for how church remains relevant. Some of the ideas proposed could challenge Church doctrine, but some of it could compliment it. I guess my point is this can well be healthy discussion about how church moves into the future. It doesn’t have to mean abandoning things, it can mean keeping what we have relevant and alive too.”
I really am older than dirt.
In the 1940’s-1950’s, I lived in an area which could be considered grass roots for Vatican II. How to make the Church relevant was discussed in our living room. Note: I would eavesdrop by sitting on the stairs going up to the bedrooms.
Now that everyone knows my credentials.
Here is a timely comment by Simpleas in post 115.
“Our church needs to move into the 21st century, as the church has done in every other century. What people need to hear is a fresh approach to what sin is, as I think we are getting to a point where sin does not exist for some people.”
Historically, the Catholic Church has been dealing with relevancy since Acts, chapter 15. The search for how Catholicism can remain relevant will continue until the Second Coming. It is part of Matthew 28: 16-20 and John, chapter 14. The key issue in this century is that there are Catholics who want the Church to fit the cultures (plural intended) which are considered as modern or contemporary.
As PJH 74 point commented: “I guess my point is this can well be healthy discussion about how church moves into the future.”
Healthy discussion or a healing discussion is what was in the back of my mind when I asked: “Which Catholic doctrines are currently being challenged by emerging Christianity?” Following the ***valid ***pruning of the thread (thank you Michael), I now think that I should have asked: Which Catholic doctrines are being challenged by those want the Church to comport with current cultures?
Sidebar: One of my favorite sentences on updating Catholic doctrines is “Catholics should not leave their brains at the door.”
Getting back to this thread.
Here is a very good point. Nita, in post 10, answered the question “What is emerging Christianity?”
“That would be my question also ---- to the point that I would question the validity or benefits of any proposals classified as “
emerging Christianity”. Christianity “emerged” 2000 years ago.”
My apology, Nita. I should have recognized that the protocol that the visible Catholic Church uses to declare doctrines has to be understood when speaking about Christianity “emerging” 2000 years ago. It is the protocol of the major ecumenical councils which comes into play when we are talking about challenges to Catholic doctrines.
I do not know how readers feel about all of the above; however, my brain is very tired.
