http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/gerald_warn...oat_people
"...The Catholic Church does not exist to provide a funk hole for pick 'n' mix Anglicans upset by the prospect of gays and girls on the episcopal bench. It is a comprehensive deposit of faith which the believer accepts in its entirety...."
Well, I do agree with the sentiment that if one disagrees with fundamental aspects of a faith....find a new one...rather than trying to force change from within....all you end up with is a hollow faith full of contradictions. The RCC is not set up for change...there is a head of the church and a set of teachings. There may be some possible changes but it would take a Pope to make the decision....nothing will happen quickly.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2...tting.html
Based on the theme above....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2143452/...gests.html
Some sexual orientation research.....not too surprising to me....seems to make sense.
At the risk of a bad stereotype....brains of straight men and lesbians are similar whereas homosexual men and straight women are similar. None of this is "proven" to be determinative...but it is some addl evidence.
Yeah I too agree that there's a point at which its time to move on to other pastures, but Mr. Warner is assuming a lot about the prelates in question. While his concerns may be valid, it is also possible that these men are genuine in their desire to cross the Tiber. And of course, if they are genuine in their desire to convert, their priestly ordination may or may not be deemed valid depending on the particulars of each persons ordination. None of them could serve as bishops if they are married, although they could with special permission serve as priests or deacons.
*Sighs heavily*
The Roman Catholic Church drives me insane. I do think its most liberal members are wingnuts in the context of the Church, and have yet to accept that the church will never share their views.
As for myself I have no use for the RC-the immense positive virtues are overshadowed by layers of B.S., an arrogant, hypocritical, lying, elitist organization with rivers of blood on its hands; the superstitions, the disconnect with the original message...no I am quite happy to have renounced the religion of my baptism. In the words of George Carlin "I was Catholic until I reached the age of reason".
I was raised Catholic, decided to give it up one year for Lent and it stuck
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/07/...index.html
More fun reading; of course, the US branch, the Episcopal Church, is already headed by a female bishop so it's really just the English Church that's struggling with this right now (well maybe other provinces too, but CofE is having its general synod right now).
Of course all of this, as I've often commented, is silly and shameful when you think of all the power the Church as a whole has, and how easily such a powerful body could alleviate the suffering of billions of people...
One more thought on women in ordained roles-I think it's odd for some denoms to essentially say that Jesus only wanted men leading the church, when it was perfectly fine for Mary to be the receptacle of divine insemination and entrusted to raise as her child the person these groups consider their saviour and god. How is it that a woman can hold such a high position (if one can say that being a messianic incubator is an honor) on the one hand, but can't wear pretty garb and play with incense? Or lead areas of the church? It's an odd reasoning used; saying that the apostles were all men ergo only men can be ordained is a logic whose other conclusion is that only Jewish men can be ordained...
It certainly was not an issue in the early church where women were prominent in many churches....the whole issue is a Papal decree and not a religious one...it could easily be reversed but they have painted themselves into a corner with Papal infallibility.