A comment by Craig (in response to my blog entry (March 19) about the possible implications of using gender-neutral language in baptisms) has me thinking about a larger and (to me, at least!) very interesting aspect of this whole controversy. And that is this: is it not fascinating to see people in positions of power humbly proclaiming that they are powerless to change things that they very much do not WANT to change? This is, of course, very much a "whose ox is getting gored?" issue. The Roman Catholic hierarchy is exclusively male, and they want very much to keep it that way; what better way to make sure it stays that way, than to proclaim that they are without power to change it? Could it be more obvious?
The Roman Catholic Church has changed dogma, doctrine, liturgy, and many practices throughout the centuries, and rightly so (one of my favorite graduate courses at the Loyola Institute for Ministry was in Church History: what an eye-opener!). The doctrine of the Holy Trinity, for example, was certainly not a part of the understanding of the earliest Church (making it exceedingly unlikely that Jesus actually ordered his disciples to baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit"). The Church changes her teachings for many reasons, one of which would be to respond to developmental changes in human knowledge and understanding, such as advances in scientific knowledge (astronomy, psychology, medicine). And then, having acknowledged and assimilated a new understanding, and the new teaching that emerges from it, the Church formally proclaims her new "truth," usually with the (highly amusing) prefatory language: "As it has always and everywhere been taught... "
It's enough to make your head spin, if you think about it too much...
p.s.: another comment by Craig; now, he reveals that he believes that Church doctrine is "set in stone," and never changes... He also gives helpful (but misspelled) reference to a recent Vatican document that explains the role of women in today's world! What a relief, to know that the guys in the Vatican have THAT all figured out (and how gracious of them to explain it to us, especially those pesky women, who become so easily confused)!
The Four Seasons Hotel and L'Atelier de Joël Robuchon will not renew their
operating agreement. The restaurant will close June 30.
1 hour ago
You realize that by your reasoning you, all of Scripture and Tradition are man (as in vir) made and are false?
ReplyDeleteEver the victim of some big bad men. I wonder what the multitudes of female Saints would say of folks like you.
No wonder "Catholic" universities are in such sad shape. Psychologist thinking they are theologists. ooh ooh I took Psychology in High School, perhaps I should open a practice.
buddha existed many years before Christ, I wonder how much of his teaching was changed to control individuals. hmmm.
Never in Scripture do we read that accepting Christ is going to be easy. But of course, its all made up to keep a woman bare foot a pregnant, right?
Why don't you save it, Craig, until you have something a bit more substantial to offer?
ReplyDeleteSuch as what? I give you truth, you pat me on the head like a little dog. You spout unsubstantiated heresies, and expect people to glory in your insight.
ReplyDeleteThe Church teaches that everyone is created for a different purposes. This is most basic in their created gender. Man is not the same as a woman. I am not the same as you, we were created with different tasks, that does not make me les than you or you less than me. I can not be ordained, does that mean I am less of a man? Nope, just mens I have to walk a different path to reach Heaven.
Have you read Mulieris Digintatem? It very beautifully expresses a vision of what it means to be a woman in todays world. is Theology of the Body also quite succinctly gives us a vision of both a man and a woman.
You laid claims that the Church has changed Doctrine by using the example of the Holy Trinity. Do you realize that the expression Trinity was first used in 180AD? You were probably mislead that we did not even consider a Trinity until the Council of Nicea, and it was a way to appease Constantine. This argument has been around for years.
The 1st Council of Nicea was called to solidify the Church's teachings, to lay it all out and make set it in stone. For nearly 400 years we had been supresed and slaughtered by Rome, understandably this left things in much disarray. When the Council was convened, the Church could finally settle some arguments, such as the Trinity. Doctrine never changes, but our understanding of what it entails can indeed grow.
As for disciplines, such as ritual, are at the Church's disposal. We have seen many disciplines change over he centuries; Latin instead of Greek, sitting instead of standing, women at the liturgy, etc. The Church tries very hard to make all changes organic, that is, to not break from tradition to harshly. This allows a certain continuity in the lives of the faithful. Pope Benedict's book "In the Spirit of the LIturgy" outlines this thinking very nicely.
Many of your posts on the Church are based off of emotions, As a psychologist, one would expect you of all peoples, to understand the problems in basing anything off of emotions. Truth is truth at all times, if it were to change with times, then it it simply a whim or fancy. Would you treat a patient simply on a whim of fad? Neither would the Church place the eternal soul of a person in the hands of a fad.