Catholic Church Should Return To A Democracy?

[Paladin D]

[url="http://www.beliefnet.com/story/136/story_13602_1.html"]http://www.beliefnet.com/story/136/story_13602_1.html[/url]

If the early Church was 'democratic' in the papal election process, doesn't this give more fuel to those who want more say in Church matters?

[Vincent Vega]

What was that bit by the funny hat guy about truth not being determined by majority vote?

[CatherineM]

If we become a democracy, can we vote him off the island?

[goldenchild17]

ugh. never did like that guy very much.

[eagle_eye222001]

[quote name='Paladin D' post='1659711' date='Sep 19 2008, 10:41 PM'][url="http://www.beliefnet.com/story/136/story_13602_1.html"]http://www.beliefnet.com/story/136/story_13602_1.html[/url]

If the early Church was 'democratic' in the papal election process, doesn't this give more fuel to those who want more say in Church matters?[/quote]


Changing to a more 'democratic' process would be a mess.

Imagine, cardinals running campaigns!

"Vote for cardinal #1, a Real Catholic in a Real Time.!"

We could put out yard signs!

Next we would have lobbyists in the Vatican.

[Galloglasses' Alt]

Thanks, but I'd rather not have pro choice lobbyists putting up campaign rallies in St.peter's Square thank you very much.

[rizz_loves_jesus]

You can't have a democracy when you're dealing with the Catholic Church. Truth is truth is truth is truth is truth.

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='Article']"Would you like the next Pope to be more open to change or do you think things are OK the way they are?" Strong majorities in all the countries, by the way, favored more change in that question.

In all the countries, the majority of the laity also approved of a Pope who would ... permit the ordination of married men.

There is not a ghost of a chance that the next Pope will fit that job description. The lay people remain hungry for reform. As an organization made up of human beings, the church must always be reformed. Ecclesia semper reformanda, as the Latin puts it. The temper in this city now is strongly against more reform. The laity have no choice but to like what they get and not get what they like.[/quote]

This is telling. I wonder what other "reforms" the people would like to have?

I have no problems with "reform" nor with "change", but they must be tempered by Truth.

[Madame Vengier]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1659741' date='Sep 19 2008, 10:14 PM']If we become a democracy, can we vote him off the island?[/quote]


Awesome retort!

[cmotherofpirl]

God does not do democracy, just ask satan.

[Socrates]

This article is a typical load of dissenting liberal bs.
The Church was never a democracy in the sense Fr. Greeley ( a known liberal dissenter) implies here; it was always bishops who voted, not laypeople.

The "troublesome" Fr. Greeley's agenda becomes fairly obvious here:
[quote]They are a collection of elderly males who speak only for themselves, a good number of them (but not all) are clueless. Judging by recent conclaves, many of them will stand around waiting for the Holy Spirit to whisper in their ears how to vote. The history of the papacy provides ample proof that the Holy Spirit can be and has been resisted frequently in the choice of the Pope. It is unfair for the Spirit to be blamed for some of the disasters.[/quote]
In other words, the Pope and Cardinals are a bunch of "elderly males who speak only for themselves," most of them "clueless" about "ordinary Catholics" and the "Holy Spirit" (Who, of course only speaks through liberal dissenting nuns and such, not through "clueless elderly males.")

You know, like, if those clueless old guys in Rome wouldn't resist the "Holy Spirit," speaking through "Democracy," the Church would have women priests, gay marriage, allow abortion and contraception, fornication, and all that other stuff we all know the the oh-so-hip-and-liberal "Holy Spirit" is down with, if only we'd listen to Him (as voiced by the "Call to Action" crowd).

(And this begs the question, of course, of why we should listen to the elderly male Fr. Greeley, and who exactly does he "speak for"?)

Nothing new here, just more of the same old same old from the aging and no-longer-as-hip-as-they-think-they-are dissenting clergy.

Edited September 22, 2008 by Socrates

[Vincent Vega]

Oy vey, didn't realize this guy was a priest!

[Didacus]

[quote]None of the changes would touch on Catholic doctrine.[/quote]

LOL

I suppose the popular vote would simply become the new doctrine?



And his 'send off', saying people have no choice but to like what they get but not get what they like - taht actually makes a lot of sense.
You don't just give candy to a child because the child wants it, you offer an apple to a child because the child needs it. The cardianls, along with the Holy Spirit, give the people the Truth they NEED, not the 'truth' they want; and that's exactly how its supposed to be.

[b]God bless Benedict XVI! And keep near you John-Paul the Great - who definately would disagree with this priest.[/b]

Edited September 22, 2008 by Didacus

[Winchester]

Greeley is an idiot. Don't waste time on him.

Again, Greeley is an idiot.

[princessgianna]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1659741' date='Sep 19 2008, 11:14 PM']If we become a democracy, can we vote him off the island?[/quote]

[Majella]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1660632' date='Sep 22 2008, 10:53 AM']God does not do democracy, just ask satan.[/quote]

AMEN!!!!!

[Nihil Obstat]

Imagine how fast the "Church" would support homosexual union, birth control, even abortion if it was a democracy. Everyone would become Catholic, and then everything would... "go to hell in a handbasket", probably literally.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Paladin D' post='1659711' date='Sep 19 2008, 11:41 PM'][url="http://www.beliefnet.com/story/136/story_13602_1.html"]http://www.beliefnet.com/story/136/story_13602_1.html[/url]

If the early Church was 'democratic' in the papal election process, doesn't this give more fuel to those who want more say in Church matters?[/quote]

I tuned out soon as he used the word "clueless." He started to sound like an adolescent who has no idea why he thinks what he does, except that it opposes the people he doesn't like. If I'm going to read a liberal argument, it should at least be logical and bring some actual evidence to the table.

What's encouraging is that the general opinion in the "Talk About It" section on the right side, where readers can provide their own imput, tends to support the current practice and some of them also criticized Fr. Greelely's "research," like the polls among laity in western European countries. Plus, 45% of voters in beliefnet's poll like things just as they are now. How's that for a little democracy???

Some of the other Catholic articles on beliefnet look like they may actually be pretty good.

Edited September 26, 2008 by LouisvilleFan

[CatherineM]

How can you call people, given the keys of the kingdom, guided by the Holy Spirit, as "clueless?"

[foolishmortal]

With altar rails gone, the people going up to the sacred place to read and the priest facing the people: you have all the egalitarian symbolisms for inspiring democratic thinking in the people. Not all abuse it, of course. Some see conservatives being obsessed too much by externals (esp. after Archbishop Lefebvre's group's schism, I'm sure) and others go the far opposite direction until you have many wanting the opposite when more people are being more charitable, but faith is becoming more democratic in minds. Not all issues can compliment each other, but some do and externals and internals do. Most people in the world, like me, need externals that awe them--esp. one that also teach the internals; ones going for a like like St. Francis, for example, don't as they are not as spiritually sapped by the world as most people. The externals, since the mid 60s, have inspired democracy (modernism-inspiring postmodern architecture and rock band liturgical music hasn't helped either) and not the kingship of Christ, I feel. It's time to return to the symbols in Mass that awed and inspired us as being subjects of the greatest and benevolent monarch as well as a father. The "externals are not everything" bunch don't see that maybe externals were of great interest to the ones who changed them after the mid '60s. It may not be malice, but maybe a good intention that was blinded to egalitarian symbols inspiring democratic thinking regarding theology, or personal theology.
Not all who like have been so influenced by the egalitarian movement of that time, but then, not all who like the Latin Mass are in schism, either. Mother Theresa and Pope Benedict 16th, for example, have advocated receiving Jesus kneeling. More have been in schism since the mid '60s, though, and a relative few have been of the Lefebvre kind. This issue could use a harmony of opposites (though they're more like seemingly-opposite--in this case, the externals are the classic, art, architecture and music paired with firm teachings on faith, hope and charity of the supernatural kind.