This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.
Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More
Yes - I read about this today. Followed a link in the article you referenced above - also very sobering: www.theamericanconservative.com
And another article by the same author: www.theamericanconservative.com
The below paragraph, in which the author notes that this is not just a Catholic problem, is followed by a poignant exceprt written by a Catholic:
"You can well imagine where I, a theological conservative, dissent from Sullivan’s view here, but I endorse his call for the need for honesty and truth-telling about homosexuality in the priesthood, and the truth about clerical sexuality, period. People need to face the facts, as painful as they will be. And you know, even though I would support a married priesthood, that is by no means a cure-all. We have in the Orthodox churches problems too with sexually compromised priests and bishops, and other bishops who are too spineless to stand up to them and to protect the integrity of the Church and the Gospel. This is not just a Catholic problem.
Finally, a Catholic reader writes:
This is an extreme, almost insane time for the Catholic Church. My hope is that this humiliation will be helpful and will flush out the crap. Not, of course, that everything will be fixed, but that something can be dislodged. I’d hoped that Benedict would have been able to do something on curial reform–he was in the Curia but not of it, an ‘outsider’ insider who knew where the bodies were buried–and he did get the ball rolling on sexual and financial transparency. But, the next pope has to address these matters head on, whether directly or through an powerful Secretary of State who’ll be his surgeon and hatchet-man.
My hope is that Benedict’s resignation has created the conditions in which something new, something radical can be done. I believe, with all my heart and my mind based upon long familiarity with the trajectory of his life and thought, that Benedict desires this renewal and knew that his resignation could open things up for something new. (My already-high esteem for Benedict went through the roof with his resignation; I say this as one who loves Ratzinger-Benedict, not as a Catholic progressive happy to see him go. For all of his limits, he is a better man that most of us deserve.)One last thing: you hit the nail on the head about the outrage of ‘devout’ parents who are trying to raise children to be believers. Combine the corruption symbolized by O’Brien’s resignation (and Mahony’s stupefying self-pity) with the take-no-prisoners propaganda of the media and others on marriage and sexuality (e.g., your WaPo post), and you’ve got an incredibly high hurdle to get over. I have to deal with this as the father of young children and as a college theology teacher. We can’t afford mediocrity in the Church anymore, as the stakes are too high. The first rule of medicine is, “Do no harm.” So few bishops and cardinals are willing–or able–to speak openly about the challenges facing the Church. It’s all either happy talk or ‘ism’-criticism: relativism, secularism, individualism, materialism, etc. There is no self-criticism. So few hierarchs speak to the laity (or their priests) like adults to fellow adults in the Church. Even highly-intelligent cardinals speak to the laity like we’re good-but-slightly-slow children. Even their tones of voice are patronizing and slightly inhuman. This is the tragedy of a self-enclosed, self-referential system that replicates itself and is divorced from reality.
And, yet, Rod, I love this Church and know that we’re all stuck with each other, we’re all in it together. There is nowhere else to go; no imagined, hoped-for Church; no self-selected community of the like-minded. This is the only Church there is, and we must love it and all of its members the same way that God loves us all. As Karl Rahner once put it:
“Could we not say to God: Here is someone with whom I cannot get on. She belongs to you. You made her. If you do not will her to be the way she is, at least you allow her to be that way. Dear God, I want to put up with her the way that you put up with me. Would we not find our heart a little lighter, more at ease, more patient?” (The Great Church Year, 379)
If I am repeating something someone else said, please forgive me. I don't have much time right now to read through the replies. I just caught that you said there were only two vocations within the Church - Marriage or Holy Orders. This is not true. The single celibate life is also a vocation. Here is more information.
Yes, life gets messy and there have always been single celibate people, you may have single people marrying a bit older than is average for the culture, widows and widowers, consecrated virgins and throughout history there have always been a few bachelors and 'spinsters'. I think it is a shift in culture, most people got married and settled down or had a religious vocation. I'm sure there were always people who never felt the call to a religous vocation but just never found a spouse. It was less common then because marriage was the norm. In our culture marriage tends to get deferred until much later in life than through most of history. Also, our culture has separated sex from marriage which sadly leads many to serial relationships without the commitment and self donation of sacramental marriage....if you read history and look for them there were always a few single people, they just seemed to be in the minority...
"...In our culture marriage tends to get deferred until much later in life than through most of history. Also, our culture has separated sex from marriage which sadly leads many to serial relationships without the commitment and self donation of sacramental marriage"
Excellent point Amber. Which brings up a question I see popping up every now and again on this site: The 7 Faith questions. Why do the people who run this site allow participation of people who say they are Catholic but are also proclaiming open dissent to some of the major teachings of the Church? Would we be more truly helpful to the Catholic Church on a whole if people self-disqualify themselves from this site who are not willing to accept the 7 Church Teachings listed, especially, in the light of the current sexual scandals rocking the Church, the teaching on no sex outside of marriage, the teaching on contraception, and the understanding that a Catholic, once married, is not free to even date until or if an annulment has been obtained?
As the homosexual problem within the Church hierarchy gains legs in the news sense, we are going to see the schizophrenic attacks on the Church by its opponents.
On the one hand the Church will be condemned for letting this filth get out of hand. In the next breath they will continue to attack the Church for being homophobic.
Even when this contradiction is pointed out to them, they will not see the silliness of their position and will just more virulently attack the Church on both issues.
Back in the 50's, the Army had a problem within the Women's Army Corps. It had become overwhelmingly lesbian dominated. So much so that it was difficult to recruit normal women to serve. It required a virtual purging of the Corps to get it back on track. On the men's side, openly practising gay men have always been a problem for the good discipline and order of the units in which one was found. Now one could legitimately argue (especially if they are gay) that one of the reasons for that was and is the "general homophobia" of men.
Be that as it may, that was and is reality. And all the branches of the Service have struggled with the problem.
Of course, we now have an official turn around in attitude by our enlightened ruling elite. But the problem remains. No matter how hard the elites try to change the hearts and minds of everyone who does not agree with them, in the end common sense will reign. Face it, people are revolted by perversion of any kind, hetero or homosexual.
So the elite media will attack the Church despite their contradictory stance. In the end it will be their perverted vision of society that will collapse. Not the Church, which will emerge stronger as it goes through the process of cleansing itself.
Pederasty has been legion inside the British aristocracy for centuries. Occasionally scandals break out. What's worse is that the pedo cults have infiltrated the counterpart to the British aristocracy in the US. Remember the Franklin Cover-up in Nebraska, which, in reality was no isolated case but rather a small glimpse of a phenomenon present among elites from the United States to Europe and beyond. Franklin, the Dutroux ring in Belgium, etc. are blatant examples of the depravity of the people who, in all too many cases, rule the world.