The future of the Roman Catholic Church

23 posts

Flag Post

During a SOR class today I started to wonder what the future of the Roman Catholic Church will be. There are currently over 1.1 billion Roman Catholics (2008) in the world and odds are this number will keep on rising (population growth), for now.

At the moment the Catholic Church is very old fashioned, as it has to be. It can’t really call itself a credible religion if it constantly changed it ways and beliefs. The problem is that right now the Catholic Church is in a lot of trouble. They have a lack of priests (Due to the fact that woman can’t be priests and the chastity vows [which many have been said to break]), less people going to church and less support for the Church.

Now if you compare this to Protestants who allow contraception, woman pastors and bishops and allowed to have sex with their spouse (pastors). If you also compare it to Buddhism which is more a way of life then a religion. The growing number of atheists due to the increase of our knowledge of the world.

You start to wonder, how long is this old fashioned church going to last if they don’t change their ways? Will they change their ways?

Right now their biggest and best defence (bible wise) is that your not meant to take it literally, which in the modern day you shouldn’t be doing anyway, but is this really going to keep sheep in the flock?

Islam is the fastest growing world religion, followed by Buddhism and then Christianity (mostly outside of the western world though).

I want to know what you guys think the future of the Roman Catholic Church will be, and maybe other churches as well……

 
Flag Post

I worry not if other religions overtake Roman Catholicism.

 
Flag Post

The future of the Roman Catholic Church

40,000 years in the future to be precise.. lol

 
Flag Post

The Catholic Church, along with the rest of Christianity, will inevitably disappear in a puff of logic.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by basicbasic:

You start to wonder, how long is this old fashioned church going to last if they don’t change their ways? Will they change their ways?

They are slowly changing their ways. One of my favorite endeavors of theirs is the church of fools, an attempt to create an online VR church with actual sermons, to reach out to those who don’t wish to visit a physical church.

Another, whose name I have long since forgotten, was an attempt to model life in the time of Jesus down to as many details as possible in a 3D interactive, collaborative environments, and hold worship services in a church construction in the middle of it, with members assigned homes in the surrounding buildings and expected to interact. It’s probably still going.

There’s a lot of hit-and-miss involved, but there are efforts to change, to reach out to new audiences and new ways to worship. To change with the times so to speak.

 
Flag Post

They’re a lot more progressive than most of the rest of mainstream Christianity. Vatican II made a lot of changes.

 
Flag Post

Very rapid shrinkage as better education and more connectivity seeps into the backwaters it currently thrives in.

 
Flag Post

The Roman Catholic Church and related Churches who cling to the Jesus, His Church, and His Pope, has great vitality and is growing rapidly. It is synonymous with health care and education in large regions of the world, and, aside from this, is the great moral formation it gives to people. As the great caretaker of logic throughout its centuries of existence, due in no small part from the profound timing of its foundation, it makes no sense to conclude that logic can somehow disprove the validity of the Church.

Contraception is counter productive. It is unhealthy, of course, to suppress the health of a female with a dangerous drug. This leads to a constellation of problems, such as sexual immorality, which leads to the spread of disease. Indeed, propagation of Western culture, such as the use of birth control and condoms, fails to slow the spread of disease, not just AIDS in Africa, but also STDs throughout the US. Those who are interested in this topic can easily Yahoo! the topic and fine a lot of information, some contradictory. If they need more information I could possibly help as well. Also, the use of contraceptives put a strange notion in the mind that pregnancy as a result of sexual activity is somehow a health problem, when actually it is symptomatic of health. Further, there are natural alternatives that are good for couples and so effective they are actually used to distinguish fertility problems and achieve pregnancy.

The shortage of priests is not universal, for instance, in my diocese, the bishops says that we do not actually have a vocational shortage. The vocational shortage is related to religious groups who have taken on progressive notions, such as woman clergy and birth control. As if saps vitality from mankind, so to does it from the Church.

 
Flag Post

the prohibition against female clergy is the most moronic doctrine in all of Catholic Orthodoxy. Even birth control can, and has been argued against successfully (though the argument that it ‘saps the lifeforce from humanity’ is not one of them). The Church has nuns, monks, Sisters, Brothers, and male priests. Why not female priests? There is only one explanation: centuries of hardened bigotry.

I’d rather see women clergy. Perhaps they can do a better job of keeping their hands to themselves than the gormless pedophiles that permanently stained the Church’s reputation.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

the prohibition against female clergy is the most moronic doctrine in all of Catholic Orthodoxy. Even birth control can, and has been argued against successfully (though the argument that it ‘saps the lifeforce from humanity’ is not one of them). The Church has nuns, monks, Sisters, Brothers, and male priests. Why not female priests? There is only one explanation: centuries of hardened bigotry.

I’d rather see women clergy. Perhaps they can do a better job of keeping their hands to themselves than the gormless pedophiles that permanently stained the Church’s reputation.

I have attempted to make arguments for an all male priesthood. But, simply, it is divine revelation, who is Jesus Christ, that leads us to this conclusion.

I can discuss further the role of women, such as His mother, in the Christian faith, but I do not think you will find this inspiring.

The point of sapping the vitality of the Church point is important to those who seek a spiritual reality (which certainly touches the substance of our day to day life).

 
Flag Post

Funny, I don’t recall the part in the NT where he says that priests must be male, and certainly not for time immemorial.

It came from the early Church meetings at Nicene and elsewhere. There was no divine revelation sanctioned eternal sexism, they simply made it up. As for the Virgin Mary, she’s important, not so much because she’s the mother of Jesus, but because she’s the virgin mother. It can be seen rather clearly how these stern patriarchs considered sexuality by comparing the Virgin Mary to the other Mary – you know, the whore. Hmm, say, didn’t Jesus dine with her (and other whores, adulterers, etc.)? Didn’t she wash his feet to show her humility? What did Jesus do when she did that, again?

Seems to me that the divine revelation offers a rather different intention for women than the one we got stuck with.

Contraception isn’t a ‘dangerous drug’. It certainly was 2000 years ago when they would use something like ergot, but that’s no longer the case. For that matter, a progressive church in tune to the world it ministers, is not, by extension, a weak church. Such arguments were made during and after Vatican II in order to keep rotting antiques like the latin mass, but the Church went ahead and dissolved it anyway. It changed its position when there was no valid theological argument to keep it, and because it turned away Christians and converts alike. If it can do that for the latin mass, it should do it for women priests (a subject that was, in fact, brought up at Vatican II, but dismissed because of the age).

 
Flag Post

Recent reports have shown that Atheism is growing faster and faster as time goes on – specially on well-educated countries (oh, I wonder why!). Hopefully it will vanish along with every other religion, alternative medicine, magic powers and pseudosciences in the next few centuries.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

Funny, I don’t recall the part in the NT where he says that priests must be male, and certainly not for time immemorial.

It came from the early Church meetings at Nicene and elsewhere. There was no divine revelation sanctioned eternal sexism, they simply made it up. As for the Virgin Mary, she’s important, not so much because she’s the mother of Jesus, but because she’s the virgin mother. It can be seen rather clearly how these stern patriarchs considered sexuality by comparing the Virgin Mary to the other Mary – you know, the whore. Hmm, say, didn’t Jesus dine with her (and other whores, adulterers, etc.)? Didn’t she wash his feet to show her humility? What did Jesus do when she did that, again?

Seems to me that the divine revelation offers a rather different intention for women than the one we got stuck with.

Contraception isn’t a ‘dangerous drug’. It certainly was 2000 years ago when they would use something like ergot, but that’s no longer the case. For that matter, a progressive church in tune to the world it ministers, is not, by extension, a weak church. Such arguments were made during and after Vatican II in order to keep rotting antiques like the latin mass, but the Church went ahead and dissolved it anyway. It changed its position when there was no valid theological argument to keep it, and because it turned away Christians and converts alike. If it can do that for the latin mass, it should do it for women priests (a subject that was, in fact, brought up at Vatican II, but dismissed because of the age).

The Church cannot have women priests. It never has, and if it did, that church would no longer be the Church. If this offends you so much why not find another church and tolerate the Catholic Church as it is? I understand that you disagree, but I find your assertions highly dubious.

 
Flag Post

I know ardent catholics who said the same thing about the latin mass. It is a ridiculous argument, particularly coming from a church that has an usual degree of logic in its orthodoxy than similar mainstream religions.

 
Flag Post

What the Church will do is progress, believe it or not. That’s what they’ve done with evolution, which is accepted by the Pope and by all Catholics nearly. The Church won’t “collapse”. Everything stated in the OP can be used as an argument for any religion.

However, I believe religion will become obsolete in the western world by the 22nd century.

 
Flag Post

Interesting. I believe the western world will become obsolete by the 22nd century.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JaumeBG:

What the Church will do is progress, believe it or not. That’s what they’ve done with evolution, which is accepted by the Pope and by all Catholics nearly. The Church won’t “collapse”. Everything stated in the OP can be used as an argument for any religion.

However, I believe religion will become obsolete in the western world by the 22nd century.

I didn’t mean to imply that it will collapse, I meant to imply it falling out of the worlds top religions.

Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

the prohibition against female clergy is the most moronic doctrine in all of Catholic Orthodoxy. Even birth control can, and has been argued against successfully (though the argument that it ‘saps the lifeforce from humanity’ is not one of them). The Church has nuns, monks, Sisters, Brothers, and male priests. Why not female priests? There is only one explanation: centuries of hardened bigotry.

I’d rather see women clergy. Perhaps they can do a better job of keeping their hands to themselves than the gormless pedophiles that permanently stained the Church’s reputation.

You need to remember that the Roman Catholic was founded (as the name implies) in the Roman era, when many women were not educated and their main purpose in society was to have babies and look after the house. Now imagine yourself as your classic Roman male, would you want an uneducated woman to tell you how to live your life? I wouldn’t think so and while you may argue that they will be educated as priests, the strong stereotype still remains.

Originally posted by JaumeBG:

What the Church will do is progress, believe it or not. That’s what they’ve done with evolution, which is accepted by the Pope and by all Catholics nearly. The Church won’t “collapse”. Everything stated in the OP can be used as an argument for any religion.

However, I believe religion will become obsolete in the western world by the 22nd century.

Even Buddhism? And what if a miracle happens and Jesus comes back? (Lol)

Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

Interesting. I believe the western world will become obsolete by the 22nd century.

I doubt that will be the case. A huge amount of modern innovations and inventions are still done in the western world. A lot of the great minds of developing countries leave their homeland and live in the western world for the extra opportunities it supplies. Once the Middle East runs out of oil in 80-120 years it’ll start having troubles. Africa is still ages away from being properly developed. The only country that comes close to making the western world obsolete is China but they are heavily reliant on other countries for natural rescources for energy and infrastructure, they are also overpopulated already. If America gets its act together it can become even stronger.

Also, I forgot to ask in the OT (it was meant to be my main point as well :P)

Do your think they will allow pastors (Female priests [Sorta]) into the church? What about priests being able to get married? The vow of chastity is all very noble and holy until its broken, which we all know it has been many times.

 
Flag Post

You need to remember that the Roman Catholic was founded (as the name implies) in the Roman era, when many women were not educated and their main purpose in society was to have babies and look after the house. Now imagine yourself as your classic Roman male, would you want an uneducated woman to tell you how to live your life? I wouldn’t think so and while you may argue that they will be educated as priests, the strong stereotype still remains.

Yes, but the point is that it what seemed logical millenia ago no longer has any logical basis to it anymore. The Church, for all its many, many flaws, has always been governed by reason at its cornerstone. There is no reason not to have female clergy, it’s just tradition that we don’t.

As to the West becoming obsolete, you seem to be assuming that politics will remain pretty much the same in a century. They don’t. Societies evolve.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Jantonaitis:

You need to remember that the Roman Catholic was founded (as the name implies) in the Roman era, when many women were not educated and their main purpose in society was to have babies and look after the house. Now imagine yourself as your classic Roman male, would you want an uneducated woman to tell you how to live your life? I wouldn’t think so and while you may argue that they will be educated as priests, the strong stereotype still remains.

Yes, but the point is that it what seemed logical millenia ago no longer has any logical basis to it anymore. The Church, for all its many, many flaws, has always been governed by reason at its cornerstone. There is no reason not to have female clergy, it’s just tradition that we don’t.

I completely agree, maybe it’ll be changed in 50-60 years, I really hope it is.

 
Flag Post

Yes, but the point is that it what seemed logical millenia ago no longer has any logical basis to it anymore. The Church, for all its many, many flaws, has always been governed by reason at its cornerstone. There is no reason not to have female clergy, it’s just tradition that we don’t.

There is a deep male ethos that runs throughout the entirety of the bible. The prophets, the kings, the christ, the apostles, all male. I don’t see where a female clergy is forbidden by Christ, but it certainly would be a little counter intuitive. That said I don’t see the Clergy as something in keeping with the teachings of Christ, or of the Apostles, either. The Clergy is the inheritance of trappings of the existing roman, and jewish, religious castes.

Consider Peter’s admonition to the early church.
5 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed:
2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;
3 Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being examples to the flock.

If the idea of a chosen elect being given the special privilege of action and status is not declaring lordship “over God’s heritage” I don’t know what is.

 
Flag Post

They do change, it’s just that no one outside of the Church is very good at paying attention to it.
Yes, there is (and always will be) a crisis for priests, and the other holy orders are dying off as well.
But what people tend to forget is that this is a largely a problem centered in the Western world. We’re having to move priests out of places like India and Africa and into America. It’s still growing in the developed world because they are the ones providing stable aid, and they’re netting priests. It’s not as fast growing as other religions, Vatican II couldn’t solve problems forever, but they’ve been staved off for decades, and it’s still growing in devolving countries.
It’s not going anywhere anytime soon, and they will barely change their ways. They’ve been doing largely the same stuff for centuries now, and there is absolutely no indication that they will stop.

 
Flag Post

When you want to know the future of something, then you have to think from a logic perspective.
Humans are evolving to become a purely logical being, which also means that love won’t exist in the future and decisions will be made with numbers and no caring.

Small and medium length evolution has been proven, meaning that we WILL all in fact become the same.
(the parts that are important evolve, everything else falls away. in other words – brain increases in size, we no longer have need for a tremendous amount of muscles, etc.)

So: churches WILL all go away one day.(within this century all this superstition will fade away into stories)

 
Flag Post
Small and medium length evolution has been proven, meaning that we WILL all in fact become the same.

That’s not at all what evolution means. Whilst there will be some homogenisation of existing human populations, the random nature of mutation in every generation will ensure we are never identical to one another.