The Inquisition ...

[RJM]

No, it never caused me actual pain -- just frustration at how the Catholic Church is still a medeival institution that has never done anything much right, and is staffed by charlatans, and followed by gullible idiots, basically. And I know Catholics are not the only ones.

I didn't think this was your intention either. I don't know how better to explain myself.

Best wishes.

 

[RJM]

...

I can't prove G!d exists; yet in my experience, in my heart, always behind every thought...I know He does.

Yes. Me too.

I was reading Schumacher's 'Guide for the Perplexed.' About how the deeper the mystery, the more it retreats into invisibility from the material world. But I left it on the bus. I was about half way into it Have to find another copy.

 

[juantoo3]

For what its worth, at the risk of digging myself an even deeper hole, I think the challenge brought about by the Reformation *eventually* made the Vatican reassess its position...I think Vatican II in the mid 1960s went a long way towards amending some of the more hardline stances. I'm not prepared to remove all of my concerns, but I have seen outward overtures that make me want to believe there is renewed emphasis on returning to the root core of what the Church is supposed to be about. I like John Paul II, I am neutral (which is a good thing) about his successor, and I want to like the current Pope. I still have unanswered questions about JPII's predecessor, who I remember being in office for less than a month before he mysteriously died, and his first efforts were reform of the Vatican Bank, so needless to say that has been long speculation over why he died so suddenly and unexpectedly after starting such an investigation. So, I guess I'm trying to say I see improvement, but we're not out of the woods by any means. When the Church focuses on spiritual needs of their flock, they are hard to beat. But when they continue to muddle in politics, they tend to get out of their element and often come across as out of touch with reality...I hope that's a safe way of expressing my what I see. I see similar when Protestant denominations butt into the political realm as well...they really aren't suited to the task. They mean well, I suppose, but their narrow focus tends to alienate rather than unite. I suppose they can't help it, but it comes across all wrong. In their defense, some of the secular attacks leveled (always at Christianity! Never other faiths...) tend to put them in defense mode and back them into a corner, what other choice do they have, politically speaking, but to come out swinging?

 

[Thomas]

For what its worth, at the risk of digging myself an even deeper hole, I think the challenge brought about by the Reformation *eventually* made the Vatican reassess its position...

The Council of Trent (1545-63) was exactly that.

The First Vatican Council (1868-70) was called in the face of contemporary issues, and is most famous for the dogma of Papal Infallibility — a legislation I am not at all happy with.

I think Vatican II in the mid 1960s went a long way towards amending some of the more hardline stances...

I see VII as a move away from a legalistic and dry, if not sterile, legalistic scholasticism, the result of VI and the Church definitely on the defensive in its dialogue with the world. Theologians (among them Karl Rahner) promoted a more humanist approach based on the principles of Christ's teachings, and a return or renewal of a more spiritually-inspired reading of Scripture found in the early Church Fathers — Henri de Lubac, Yves Congar, Joseph Ratzinger, Hans urs von Balthasar are all heroes of mine.

I'm not prepared to remove all of my concerns, but I have seen outward overtures that make me want to believe there is renewed emphasis on returning to the root core of what the Church is supposed to be about.

Yes, that was Pope John XXIII's wish ... a simple soul, and that's no criticism.

I like John Paul II ...

A great PR figure, and did loads of good work ... I do have some reservations about his conservatism ...

I am neutral (which is a good thing) about his successor...

Too much the philosopher, not enough populist. The 'firm' was not in favour ...

... and I want to like the current Pope.

Don't we all. His latest comment in the abortion debate might lose him some of his popular appeal.

So, I guess I'm trying to say I see improvement, but we're not out of the woods by any means.

No, indeed.

When the Church focuses on spiritual needs of their flock, they are hard to beat. But when they continue to muddle in politics, they tend to get out of their element and often come across as out of touch with reality...

That's always an issue when the Church stands for values not in favour by the march of modernism. Sometimes wrong, sometimes right (IMHO). As you say, when it's right, it's luminous, when it's wrong, it's dark ...

Personally, I think the renewal of the 'no negotiation' on birth control and female ordination is a set-back. Allowing a married priesthood would alleviate the plummet in ordinations, but currently we're stuck with this stupid technicality that priests can't marry, but married Anglican priests can convert and fulfil the priestly duties ...

Overall I'd like to see the Church move from 'we are the moral arbiters of your choices' to 'you make informed moral decisions about your situation', but that would be another revolution...

 

[juantoo3]

Overall I'd like to see the Church move from 'we are the moral arbiters of your choices' to 'you make informed moral decisions about your situation', but that would be another revolution...

That is what I want to believe the Reformation was supposed to be about. Practical application is another matter, and the history speaks for itself...often changing one set of rulers for another. But the underlying concept of "teach the children well" and set them free to put it into action and let them figure it out is, to me, what it is all about.

 

[wil]

"teach the children well"

Well to me would be an interfaith exploration

 

[Thomas]

That is what I want to believe the Reformation was supposed to be about.

A bit idealistic? I think we're asking just too much of a Post-Modern outlook from the Middle Ages?

... often changing one set of rulers for another.

I don't think the Reformation really was about 'setting people free' so much as 'setting people free of Rome to be governed by us'. Freedom of choice for the individual was not on offer, and Lutheran theology mitigates against it.

I could be wrong, but two centuries later we have the Enlightenment, and who come out on top? Rich Old White Men, who undoubtedly believed themselves socially, morally, and in every other way superior to their servants the middle classes and the great unwashed — and don't even bother looking at race or gender ... the assumption was the ruling class was born to rule ...

But the underlying concept of "teach the children well" and set them free to put it into action and let them figure it out is, to me, what it is all about.

Depends on social values and who's defining those terms. I have friends who think the English Public School system is the best education a boy can get. It was established to turn out emotionally repressed individuals with an inflated sense of self-worth and entitlement and a lack of empathy — just the kind of thing you need to govern an empire.

 

[juantoo3]

Depends on social values and who's defining those terms. I have friends who think the English Public School system is the best education a boy can get. It was established to turn out emotionally repressed individuals with an inflated sense of self-worth and entitlement and a lack of empathy — just the kind of thing you need to govern an empire.

Dunno 'bout that, I think a good bit spilled over on us Yanks, and we were never really comfortable with Empire. Looking back, it is probably the result of WWII how America ended up king 'o the mountain, so we've got a good bit of attitude problem for the past few generations as well. Add in decreasing testosterone levels (I suspect but cannot prove being manipulated in some way deliberately as a population control) and widespread and gaining effeminism, and pretty soon the male of our species will become redundant. The she-males in power will wage war via robots who will wake up and conquer humanity, and we will have brought about our own doom.

Eh? What's a guy to do?