Do you think the Roman Catholic church is breathing it's last breath?

[SoundMaster]

In one of other other threads here, a poster stated that he/she believes "Christianity's time is done". While it has lost steam over the past century, I'd hardly say that Christianity is in it's death throes (see: middle and southern American states).
However, with that said, it's not ridiculous to claim that Catholicism has begun the journey towards oblivion. The rash of scandals and corruption (finally) uncovered and revealed in the past 10+ years has shed light on the nature of the church and allowed the reality of it to hit home. Heck, just this past week, more nonsense was unveiled in the New York Metro area (a 60+ year old priest has been having an affair with a 40+ year-old MARRIED woman - her young son walked in on them f*cking).

All of this has lead to ridicule and scorn. Catholics are no longer turning a blind eye to the indiscretions of their clergy. They're not attending mass (and giving the cash) in the excessive droves of yesterday. Parishes are closing churches and schools throughout the U.S.

And the appointment of a hardline, ultra-conservative pope may prove disastrous....this is NOT what the church needed.

One can easily imagine in, say 150 years, the church being nothing more than an afterthought.....an idea and institution of the past. And nothing more.

 

[Dushan S]

I definitely agree that catholic church is in crisis for some time, but it will hardly disappear or change more radically. In America it may lose some of its ground, but it is very strong in some other parts of the world, and finally, choice of catholic religion is for some nation’s matter of national identity, for some people it is a part of their heritage, so they will hardly change their mind about it.

This is era of a free flow of information so it is normal that openly totalitarian, power hungry catholicism of last centuries is soon to be forgotten, but Vatican will continue its policies and politics in a more subtle ways, that is for sure.

 

[RookParliament]

The Catholic Church will survive. It survived the Reformation, it can survive the scandals currently plaguing it.

So in the few psychology classes I took it was pointed out to me that pedophiles are not homosexual, homosexuality being a relatively normal thing. They are in fact considered sociopaths, or the newest PC way of stating it Anti-Social Personality Disorder. So if you except that...if... what do you think of the idea that these pedophiles join the Catholic Church simply because they know they will be in positions of authority and trust over the sweet young ass they desire so much?

 

[Iridium]

Homosexuality is actually an abnormal thing. I question the validity of what they taught you in those classes, since it seems somewhat contrary to common sense and greatly furthers a certain politically-correct agenda.

 

[speed]

No it will survive: If truth were not boring, science would have done away with God long ago. But God as well as the saints is a means to escape the dull
banality of truth (Tears and Saints p57).

Most people cannot accept that their lives are absolutely meaningless and totally organic. The catholic church tells them they are worth something.

 

[the alumnus]

why would you assume that a few scandals in america would ruin a global institution? the numbers don't support you either. there are over 1 billion catholics worldwide, and the number is only poised to grow, with certain regions like china and sub-saharan africa being the most fruitful. even pope benedict has stated that he is prepared to lead the church through a period of irrelevance in europe.

 

[RookParliament]

Homosexuality is actually an abnormal thing. I question the validity of what they taught you in those classes, since it seems somewhat contrary to common sense and greatly furthers a certain politically-correct agenda.

Well more and more evidence is mounting that homosexuality is not a personal choice, but is in fact biological in origin. The classes themselves didn't really mention homosexualty too much, but in the abnormal psychology sections we were taught that pedophiles are considered by the psychological community as sociopaths. Homosexuals feel attraction to people of their own gender who are of age. Pedophiles will molest children, male or female depending on their preference, who have often not even reached puberty. Sociopaths have a goal, in this case fucking children, and they will do what is neccesary to achieve it. They want the sweet prepubescent ass, and they know as a priest they will have a position of trust. Note the part about priest was not taught to me, I have just often thought about it. So anybody else have thoughts on that particular theory?

And what was that about common sense?

 

[the alumnus]

rookparliament: there have been studies of homosexual and pedophile priests. though i am not disputing the distinction between homosexuality and pedophilia, the research indicated that individuals who enter the seminary (and are homosexual or pedophiles) are often not sexually actualized individuals. they don't understand their own sexual orientation, only that they aren't really attracted to women, so a clerical vocation seems logical to them. years later their problem begins to manifest itself, and thus the church finds itself in hot water.

 

[MasterOLightning]

Since both my parents work in Catholic schools, and I went to Catholic schools for 12 years, this is an issue I pay attention to. I think the school closings don't have as much to do with scandal as they do with the expensive costs of private education. It used to be that they could have a bunch of nuns run the place rather cheaply, but once accredited teachers were needed, and when they started to run out of nuns, costs went up. Also, Catholic families aren't popping out 5-10 kids like they used to. Common sense says that very, very few Catholics actually accept the pope's anti-contraception policy. Fewer kids means less church income. Scandals surely have contributed to decreases in church attendance.

Vatican II moved the church out of the middle ages and into the 1960s (not a very liberal version of the '60s), where it's stuck today. Worldwide, there still are 1 billion Catholics, with especially strong populations in basically all of South America, Africa, and Indonesia. For the church to regain large segments of the population in the Western world, they have to become more liberal to suit the needs of the urban population which is mostly left leaning.

Besides scandals, loss of tradition is hurting. Italians, Spanish, Polish, and Southern Germans have Catholicism as a large part of their national identity, but in the past few decades, the importance of tradition is fading, and as many are now third or fourth generation Americans, their identity is no longer tied so close to faith.

@the alumnus: This is a very reasonable explanation of the abuse incidents.

 

[RookParliament]

rookparliament: there have been studies of homosexual and pedophile priests. though i am not disputing the distinction between homosexuality and pedophilia, the research indicated that individuals who enter the seminary (and are homosexual or pedophiles) are often not sexually actualized individuals. they don't understand their own sexual orientation, only that they aren't really attracted to women, so a clerical vocation seems logical to them. years later their problem begins to manifest itself, and thus the church finds itself in hot water.

Interesting. Probably shoots down my theory. Like I said I just thought about it with really no outside knoweldge. Maybe I just liked the thought of sociopaths gradually taking over the Catholic Church top to bottom and holding massive buggering sessions.

 

[SoundMaster]

why would you assume that a few scandals in america would ruin a global institution? the numbers don't support you either. there are over 1 billion catholics worldwide, and the number is only poised to grow, with certain regions like china and sub-saharan africa being the most fruitful. even pope benedict has stated that he is prepared to lead the church through a period of irrelevance in europe.

My original post was stated erroneously. I meant that the church in America is losing it's grip - not globally.

 

[Dushan S]

Well more and more evidence is mounting that homosexuality is not a personal choice, but is in fact biological in origin. The classes themselves didn't really mention homosexualty too much, but in the abnormal psychology sections we were taught that pedophiles are considered by the psychological community as sociopaths. Homosexuals feel attraction to people of their own gender who are of age. Pedophiles will molest children, male or female depending on their preference, who have often not even reached puberty. Sociopaths have a goal, in this case fucking children, and they will do what is neccesary to achieve it. They want the sweet prepubescent ass, and they know as a priest they will have a position of trust. Note the part about priest was not taught to me, I have just often thought about it. So anybody else have thoughts on that particular theory?

And what was that about common sense?

This is already for another thread, but technically, part of the misunderstanding about homosexuality is based on one misunderstanding. Homosexuals can be quite different.
Some people are born with certain and in that case it is true, it is biological origin, and I think that it is absolutely valid for those persons to change their gender, so they can have body that goes along with their inner sex.
Other large portions of homosexuals are people with psychological problems about their identity. Every human being goes thru homosexual phase thru his childhood, and when person for different reason fails to build his identity and learn his way with other sex, he/she ends like a typical case for a psychotherapy, may it become homosexual or not. Actually a lot of people that live life of hetero sexual are psychologically close to homosexual. Typical married man that has never become really psychologically intimate with his wife, and finds most of pleasure by having a beer with his buddies. He has never bridged the gap between sexes and never will.
Finally there are homosexuals that are sociopaths because they are finding that sex with same gender is turning them on in a same way as some pedophile is turned on by a child, and they can hardly make lasting relationship with other person that is of same gender.
Part of the confusion comes from the society. All homosexuals are constantly put to one basket, before because of hatred and suppression towards them, now because of idea of liberty and freedom of self-expression, without really understanding the matter.

Don't get this like I am bashing homosexuals, because I'm not, actually I am finding people that are transsexual and want to change their gender as very brave and true to themselves. It is not easy be in their skin.
But it is from a psychological viewpoint hard for me to accept homosexuality as a personal choice, because most of the homosexual would become hetero after psychotherapy and in most cases there is some kind of trauma, neurosis, whatever connected with their sexual choice.

 

[RookParliament]

This is already for another thread, but technically, part of the misunderstanding about homosexuality is based on one misunderstanding. Homosexuals can be quite different.
Some people are born with certain and in that case it is true, it is biological origin, and I think that it is absolutely valid for those persons to change their gender, so they can have body that goes along with their inner sex.
Other large portions of homosexuals are people with psychological problems about their identity. Every human being goes thru homosexual phase thru his childhood, and when person for different reason fails to build his identity and learn his way with other sex, he/she ends like a typical case for a psychotherapy, may it become homosexual or not. Actually a lot of people that live life of hetero sexual are psychologically close to homosexual. Typical married man that has never become really psychologically intimate with his wife, and finds most of pleasure by having a beer with his buddies. He has never bridged the gap between sexes and never will.
Finally there are homosexuals that are sociopaths because they are finding that sex with same gender is turning them on in a same way as some pedophile is turned on by a child, and they can hardly make lasting relationship with other person that is of same gender.
Part of the confusion comes from the society. All homosexuals are constantly put to one basket, before because of hatred and suppression towards them, now because of idea of liberty and freedom of self-expression, without really understanding the matter.

Don't get this like I am bashing homosexuals, because I'm not, actually I am finding people that are transsexual and want to change their gender as very brave and true to themselves. It is not easy be in their skin.
But it is from a psychological viewpoint hard for me to accept homosexuality as a personal choice, because most of the homosexual would become hetero after psychotherapy and in most cases there is some kind of trauma, neurosis, whatever connected with their sexual choice.

Well I know this is going to sound stupid, but I would say unless you are biologically homosexual than you are not homosexual at all. Either you're bisexual (which is a personal choice) or confused. I don't think that invalidates most of what you said. I agree with you on most.

The example of the guy drinking with his buddies is not even close to homosexuality. Its male bonding and relaxation. I bet those guys enjoy talking about and ogling the sexy ladies plenty. I will admit that Women (capital W) are a mystery.

 

[Kenneth R.]

now this is a thread i can agree with. i have found much to be disappointed with in the modern roman catholic church and its popular drive-thru religion appeal.

the catholics have built the largest and most expensive church on earth. would this not be a testament to greed and pride, than to God who was born in a stable? do they think that by making statues and carvings of gold (idols) that they are more pious? do they feel that the pope, a man, elected by fellow men, is truly a holy icon? Jesus said put down your possessions and follow me, not follow the pope. do they feel that their laws would bring justice to the world? do they glorify God's name when they so often forcefully condemn nonbelievers and ridicule their beliefs? their arrogant and often ignorant public attitude gives a widespread misconception of Christianity, which does not align with the tenet of 'show the world who God is, show them his grace'. behind their closed doors and closed walls in the vatican, do they share their joy of faith with the world, charging for admission? a church needs no coin to give praise, no roof to obscure the heavens, and no man to decree the laws of God. a church needs people who've actively sought the truth, and actively question it, finding in their questioning the affirmation of their conviction. a church needs those who are not only willing to recite and re-tell, but practice. those who wish to be to their peers what God has been to them, to truly live and follow.

for these reasons and more, i feel the catholic church will not last.

 

[Demiurge]

i have found much to be disappointed with in the modern roman catholic church and its popular drive-thru religion appeal.

Yeah, I remember reading about the good ol' days when the Church's activities were more pious...

Do you seriously think the stuff in your paragraph makes any difference at all? Grand ceremonies attract people, if anything. You completely miss the mark by not recognizing this as a social and psychological matter, not one of exegesis.

 

[Kenneth R.]

why should religion bow to appeal to society? if it compromises, it is compromised. i'm talking about christianity in general vs catholicism. people are attracted to such spectacles, but a spectacle is not the message. there are other, less simple ways.

 

[RookParliament]

why should religion bow to appeal to society? if it compromises, it is compromised. i'm talking about christianity in general vs catholicism. people are attracted to such spectacles, but a spectacle is not the message. there are other, less simple ways.

Did you mean simpler ways?

But that still doesn't mean that the Catholic Church will fall short of nuclear war.

Edit: Or maybe you meant the harder paths give greater rewards blah blah blah...?

 

[Kenneth R.]

Edit: Or maybe you meant the harder paths give greater rewards blah blah blah...?

the appeal of truth, as it is found by those who seek it. this is not so quick to acquire followers, but the followers it acquires are a different sort than those who seek spectacles.

 

[Demiurge]

why should religion bow to appeal to society? if it compromises, it is compromised. i'm talking about christianity in general vs catholicism. people are attracted to such spectacles, but a spectacle is not the message. there are other, less simple ways.

This topic is about whether the Church will survive or not, not if you think it features a proper biblical interpretation.

 

[Kenneth R.]

and based on my observations above, i do not think catholicism will.