Pope Francis' First Year...

[Lord Jim]

I watched this interview of David Gregory's this morning on Meet The Press with Cardinal Dolan...

Personally I found it very interesting and thought provoking, so I thought I would post it for anyone who might be looking for an intelligent and thoughtful perspective on the philosophy of the contemporary Catholic Church, who might have missed it:





(If this is a topic you find of interest, it's worth watching the whole 15 minutes...)

[dgs49]

On the issues where he could be groundbreaking, he is as timid as any of his predecessors (except possibly JPI, if the rumors are true).

Married priests. Women priests. Artificial birth control.

And ironically, the Church's positions on these issues are basically contrived and not scriptural.

I agree that the Church should not modify its positions on key issues to suit popular opinion (as the Episcopal Church has done with divorce), but rectifying its position on these three issues could make the difference between a viable Church and an empty shell.

Also, it would be helpful if he would come clean on the Church's pedophilia scandal - that the Church unwittingly created a sub-culture for its priests that was attractive to those who would victimize kids, and they've taken steps to prevent it from continuing.

I'm not impressed by window dressing, and that's all I see from Francesco.

[Guinevere]

I agree that the Church should not modify its positions on key issues to suit popular opinion (as the Episcopal Church has done with divorce), but rectifying its position on these three issues could make the difference between a viable Church and an empty shell.

Right. In 1533. Clearly popular opinion was the key consideration there. I wonder if Henry took an internet poll of citizens, or just gathered his information from the "MSM."

[Big RR]

Wasn't that more of an annulment? After all, he maintained he was tricked into marrying his brother's widow after she had consummated that marriage. The marriage never existed in the eyes of god, which is why god refused to grant him a male heir. Indeed, didn't one of the Kennedys get the same sort of annulment from the RC church after years of [non]marriage? The Church wasn't going to make the same mistake again, at least for a prominent member.

[dgs49]

1533?

Are you fucking kidding me?