Quote:
Originally posted by nostatic
playing with Nazis is one of the lesser transgressions of the church. Plenty of bad things done by bad humans over the years. As for JP2, I think his heart is in the right place, but to be honest, I think he set back Catholicism at least 50 years. Vatican II reforms lost almost all momentum, and his conservative dogmatism has fueled rifts with most of the church (especially north and southe america).
I think the next pope needs to make major reforms in Catholicism. No more celibacy for priests (that was all about land ownership anyway) and women should be ordained...that would be a good start.
|
Nostatic, I'll agree with the assertion that greater transgressions than playing briefly with Nazis have occurred. The Church has been run by humans. Humans are substantially more vicious and unethical, on the whole, than sharks or any other creatures. The Church has had some moments that are embarrasing.
But I disagree with the rest. Vatican II was arguably one of the most substantial policy shifts in TWO MILLENIA. Two thirds of the world's Christians are Catholic. It takes a long time to change the course of a ship that size. Vatican II was created in the '60's. I am very surprized at the amount of change that has already taken place, and am frankly not entirely comfortable with some of it. And I'm modern, progressive, educated. Think of how the rest of the world is reacting. The papacy is a truly heavy burden, IMHO.
And as far as married priests, and female priests....not only do I personally disagree with both those ideas, I am confident they will not occur in our lifetimes, or the lifetimes of our great grandchildren. For a variety of reason. You, Nostatic, are smart and learned. But many here cannot understand why the Pope does not condone the use of condoms. Folks who do not understand the "why" of that are not in a position to evaluate Vatican II reforms or any other aspect of the role of the Pope or the teachings of the Church.
Not trying to be argumentative or insulting, so I hope no one takes me that way. It's just that concepts like birth control are slam-dunk issues, unless you are so confused as to think the papacy is a secular position. It is most assuredly not. Just as the Pope can depend on the Surgeon General of the United States of America to refrain from ordaining priests, consecrating hosts and saying mass, so the Surgeon General can rely on the Pope to not dispense health advice.
Okay, one more attempt, and I said part of this before: In a perfect world, God and the Pope would be happy if abortion were no longer an issue because there are no unwanted babies. That's the Church's goal. Not health. Not financial security. And condoning abortions or birth control is not going to get us closer to Heaven. Indeed, human misery here on Earth is a product of our distance from God, not a failure of medicine or science. To relieve the world from this misery, the Surgeon General cannot get us there, but the Pope's teachings could. And his condoning gratuitous sex, and abortions for our mistakes, is not the Pope's role. Same with birth control. What's really surprizing is the number of folks calling themselves Christians who do not grok this concept.