Vatican to debate teachings on divorce, birth control, gay unions

[cbayer]

http://www.latimes.com/world/europe/la-fg-vatican-family-20140430,0,1501699,full.story#axzz30TpoaonS


Pope Francis meets with Polish President Bronislaw Komorowski, left, at the Vatican. On the pontiff's orders, the Vatican will convene a meeting of senior clerics this fall to reexamine church teachings that touch the most intimate aspects of people's lives. (Vincenzo Pinto / AFP/Getty Images / April 26, 2014)

Henry Chu
April 30, 2014, 5:00 a.m.

Reporting from Vatican City—

Contraception, cohabitation, divorce, remarriage and same-sex unions: They're issues that pain and puzzle Roman Catholics who want to be true to both their church and themselves.

Now those issues are about to be put up for debate by their leader, a man who appears determined to push boundaries and effect change.

On Pope Francis' orders, the Vatican will convene an urgent meeting of senior clerics this fall to reexamine church teachings that touch the most intimate aspects of people's lives. Billed as an "extraordinary" assembly of bishops, the gathering could herald a new approach by the church to the sensitive topics.

The run-up to the synod has been extraordinary in itself, a departure from usual practice that some say is a mark of the pope's radical new leadership style, and a canny tactic to defuse dissent over potential reforms.

more at link

[Goblinmonger]

1. Two things

1. Anyone want to place bets about how spectacular the changes are that come out of this?

2. Why do so many people go out of their way to be so happy about an organization in which THIS is a big deal? This is one seriously fucked up organization and if it was the Republican Party making these statements, everyone at DU would be calling them idiots. But it's a religion, so....

Likewise, Thavis said, Francis has hinted that same-sex unions, though not "marriage," could serve a practical purpose, if not a sacred one, by legally protecting the children of such relationships. This month, in an event that made headlines, the infant daughter of a lesbian couple was baptized in a cathedral in Francis' native Argentina, apparently with the Holy See's tacit assent.
"When he was cardinal in Buenos Aires, he really had a go at priests who wouldn't baptize the children of single mothers," said Catherine Pepinster, editor of the Tablet, a Catholic weekly in Britain. "He takes it back to a human place. It's more about the person than about sticking to the letter. He's willing to find a way through things."

Holy ball, he actually thinks that babies of single mothers should be saved from the fires of hell and be baptized? What a true progressive.

[trotsky]

5. And on top of it, if you point any of this out, you're a bigot.

Seriously fucked up shit.

[rug]

15. It's a big deal because a billion people belong to it.

And precisely how many of the seven billion people on earth do you think would pass your muster on same sex marriage?

This step is a step but it's a big step nonetheless.

[Laelth]

2. Excellent.

The Catholic Church seriously needs to have this very discussion. Better late than never, and k&r for Pope Francis who has the courage to open this can of worms.

-Laelth

[cbayer]

3. It could possibly lead to an overhaul of central doctrine.

I also support his putting this together and will very interested to see how it proceeds.

[trotsky]

6. It could also lead to monkeys flying out of my ass.

Can't wait to see if one of those things happens!

[Goblinmonger]

7. I'll make book on it for people

I'll actually give 5:1 odds in favor of change in central doctrine over monkey's flying out of your ass. Push means I keep the money.

[trotsky]

8. Better do it right - clearly define what constitutes a "change in central doctrine."

I can tell they're already sizing up those goalposts for some wheels.

Hopefully there will be no such challenge in determining whether monkeys have indeed flown out of my ass. I'll post it to Vine.

[skepticscott]

14. Even Vatican II did not come close

to producing the kinds of changes in central doctrine that many here are expecting from this pope. Nor will this, unless Francis is intending to provoke a full-blown schism in the RCC. Methinks not.

More probable that there will be far more promising-sounding (but ultimately meaningless) words about things like being "open-minded" for the future than there will be actual and significant change in doctrine as a result of this. Just enough to keep liberal Catholics on the hook and fawning over the wonder pope for a little longer. It certainly would be nice if one of the most bigoted organizations in the world changed their tune voluntarily, but we all know how often that sort of thing happens.

[rug]

16. I can't evaluate the data. How often do monkeys fly out of your ass?

[skepticscott]

4. It makes you wonder what there is to "debate"

about depriving a segment of the population of their full rights as human beings. One would have thought the issue had already been settled among decent people not mired in medieval thinking.

And of course, Catholic church doctrine comes down from "god", and has been adamantly declared as not subject to majority opinion or the shifting winds of societal change, so one also has to wonder what arguments could be made to change existing, long established doctrine that don't hypocritically contradict that. The church has basically painted themselves into a corner with their past defenses of doctrine and its justification.

[AtheistCrusader]

9. Better ask the men who aren't allowed to marry what they think of marriage issues.

Boy, that will fix some shit.

Let's bring in the EXPERTS

Heh, the photo in the article sums the scenario up nicely:

[okasha]

17. The photo in the article is not related

to the content of the story. It's simply a recent pic of Francis.

[AtheistCrusader]

18. ...

It's a joke.

[okasha]

19. If you say so.

NT

[AtheistCrusader]

25. Apparently you don't see the irony

of men with no marriage experience whatsoever debating the ways and mores of aspects of marriage.

They cannot hope to pretend to be experts, even if they officiate marriage.

[okasha]

26. The President of Poland

has no.marriage experience? If you say so.

[Warren Stupidity]

27. " a meeting of senior clerics "

The picture is stupid disinformation.

[AtheistCrusader]

29. Ok ok ok ok. I'm going to be generous here.

I'm going to assume you didn't get it, and spell it out for you.

The image is, in the context of my joke, the pope and two other men laughing. The implication being that they KNOW that engaging a committee of men who have zippo in the crib-o of experience with marriage, to debate the merits of 'alternative' forms of it, with a possible eye toward the church sanctioning such arrangements, is silly and will produce squat for change.


That's the joke.

[okasha]

35. Oh, I got your point.

Maybe if you put your next joke into the context of the picture, instead of the other way around, it might get a laugh.

[AtheistCrusader]

36. I did. It's a pack of men, and the pope laughing.

Which most people would take away from it, sans the caption.

[Humanist_Activist]

10. I'm not optimistic, but IF this leads to substantial changes in the Catechism, then that would...

be good.

[cbayer]

11. I think we will definitely have to wait and see what, if anything, actually

happens as a result of this.

Optimistic? Not very, but it could happen.

[okasha]

12. We already know that several people here

will be crushingly disappointed if RCC policy on these issues actually changes. Frankly, I think the Pope is far too canny to hold such a conference unless he already has defined changes he wants to make and has his ducks--er, cardinals-- lined up. To raise hopes only to dash them would do far more damage than simply to let things chug along as they are and do nothing.

[cbayer]

13. For some it will never be enough, no matter what, but I have very

little concern for those people.

I am hopeful that the scenario you paint is correct. I think he wants change, particularly in the areas defined here.

The question is whether he can get it.

[skepticscott]

20. Never be enough?

Tell you what-If the RCC changed its doctrine to allow woman priests, artificial contraception, assisted suicide and full rights and acceptance for homosexuals, including marriage within the Catholic Church, promised to stop trying to strong-arm the laws of sovereign nations, turned over ALL records of child abuse and rape complaints to the proper authorities and stopped shielding the perpetrators and enablers of same, that would pretty much do it. The rest they can keep.

Are any of those things they shouldn't have done a long time ago?

[rug]

22. You left out exorcisms a dead babies. Maybe you didn't mean it.

[AtheistCrusader]

30. I would definitely add 'stop pretending demons are a thing' to the list.

I've never seen a catholic do the 'let my kid die slowly while I pray' thing, so we can probably skip that one.

But demonic possession is definitely in their bag of nonsense.

[rug]

34. Well I've never seen a Catholic prattle on about demonic possession.

Certainly not as much as I've seen posters here do.

Which reminds me, he's late this week.

[okasha]

23. Let me amend the above.

If Francis does make changes, there will be a number of people here who will vigorously deny that any change has taken place.

[cbayer]

24. Honestly, I care little about them, either.

[skepticscott]

31. The more accurate prediction would be

that people here will assess how much was actually changed against what could and should be changed, and that they will look at substance, not show, at deeds and not empty and meaningless platitudes designed only to give people the warm fuzzies, but which leave bigoted doctrines intact.

[AtheistCrusader]

32. I'll take that bet.

If the changes Skeptiscott listed are made, I'll have no more problem with the catholic church, than I do with my pagan friend that is celebrating Blessed Beltane today, with a big bonfire and fucking someone or probably a bunch of someone's under the stars.


Which is to say, no problem at all. Oh, I might have a few grudges against the RCC for a couple thousand years of shitty, discriminatory, vile doctrine, but I'll get over it.

[skepticscott]

21. Well, here's what another expert on the Vatican has said

To have the support of the cardinals, he has to build his own base, oust those that were installed by the previous two very conservative Popes, and build in some structural reforms. This takes time.

And you underestimate the need for liberal Catholics to see anything that they can convince themselves is "progress". All Francis has to do is dangle a few things out there and he'll have everyone fawning over him even more. No actual change will be needed.

[Humanist_Activist]

28. I, for one, would be ecstatic if the RCC stopped attacking my friends and family...

and blocking their equal rights.

I'd still consider the superstitious stuff absurd, of course, but then again, I frankly don't give a shit about that, I don't even care about whether they bless same sex marriages in their churches, or still forbid female priests, those are internal church matters, and of no consequence to those of us not in the Church. If they stopped funding or discriminating against those outside the church in their charities, health services, stopped lobbying to restrict our rights and access to abortion and contraception, along with same sex marriage, then that would be enough.

[skepticscott]

33. I would agree even that would be

amazing progress. I would add that they stop protecting and abetting child-raping priests and those who enabled them.

[rexcat]

37. Some might see this happen, say...

in 400 or so years. I base this on how long it took the RCC to realize they Inquisition was incorrect in 1615 when they found Galileo Galilei guilty of heresy. Things tend to move at glacial speed with the RCC and some of the nonsense that is spouted by their leadership will never change. It is too conservative of an organization to see major changes. It is just not in their nature. I don't have much "faith" that the RCC will change its tune anytime soon.

Practicing homosexuals, atheists and others the RCC does not like will always be considered sinners without redemption and are headed to hell as do most Christian denominations.

edited for one typo

[AtheistCrusader]

38. Well, if it turns out I'm wrong, and hell does exist,

I have the comfort of knowing it'll be fabulous, and filled with good company.

[edhopper]

40. I'll see you in Hell!

I'll bring the bratwurst, you bring the beer. Imported please, no Bud.

[rexcat]

44. I'll be there with both of you...

but the beer does not have to be imported. There are some excellent craft beers made in the US!

[edhopper]

39. I think the Vatican is wrong about

everything on these subjects, and would prefer if all or most Catholics simply ignored them and that no predominantly Catholic country had any laws that reflected this regressive thinking.

But in the real world, they are and they do.
So I hope this results in a Vatican III type of change that allows Catholic to live in the 21st Century mentality.

[cbayer]

41. +1 (nt)

[skepticscott]

42. Vatican II produced no change of the type that's needed now

Not even close. And with Ratzi and (saint) JPII stocking the cupboard for the last few decades, the church hierarchy has definitely not moved to the left.

And the RCC is not interested in helping people live with "the times". It's been made quite clear that church doctrine is not changeable in response to shifting societal norms.

[edhopper]

43. I should have added

I hope, but not not holding my breath.

And I didn't delineate that Vatican II brought big changes and maybe this one would address the social issues.