An organization that represents 230 religious congregations in Canada has offered open and blatant dissent from the Church’s clear teachings in the areas of homosexuality, women priests, divorce, contraception, euthanasia, and more. Addressing the Canadian bishops as they prepare for their ad limina visits to Rome. (Every seven years every bishop in the world must travel to Rome for meetings with the curia and the Pope.)
The document takes issue with Church teaching on divorce, contraception, condoms and even assisted suicide. “We regret,” says the CRC, “In terms of ethics and bioethics, the holding up of an ideal that leaves little room for advancement and progress; the defence of principles that do not reflect human experience (divorce, contraception, protection against AIDS, alleviation of suffering at the end of life).”
The document further laments Church teaching against homosexuality. “We regret,” the document says, “The legalistic image of the Catholic Church - and of our Canadian Church - its rigidity and its intransigent stands on sexual morals; its lack of openness regarding access to the sacraments for divorced and remarried Catholics, its lack of compassion for them; its unwelcoming attitude towards homosexuals.”
It’s the same old, liberal morass of relativism and the trumping of personal inclinations over the requirements of the Gospel and metanoia. They even invoke the dreaded Roman beast.
The CRC takes direct and unabashed aim at ‘Rome’ - meaning the authority of the Pope. The document says “we regret ... The unconditional alignment of our Church with directives issued from Rome.”
Sorry, folks, but it your Church isn’t “aligned” with Rome then you’re not part of the Church. We must be in communion with the Peter and the apostles, not the other way around. Which of you did Jesus appoint as head of the Church?
Technorati Tags: Canada, Catholic, dissent, doctrine, heterodoxy, religious-orders
Will Pope Benedict do anything about this major statement of dissent from a vey large group of priests, nuns and brothers?
Hmm… I think that bishops who go to Rome for their ad limina visits only every seven years will find that they’ve kept the Holy Father waiting for two.
I first saw this on Cafeteria is Closed. I read big chunks of this document. If someone thinks there isn’t a problem in Catholic Religious Orders, they unquestionably have a crack problem.
And there is not such thing as a “small” crack problem.
It has been difficult to grasp the logic of the liberal critique—within and without the Church—concerning the Church’s stance on “protection against AIDS.”
First we are told that a majority of Catholics ignore the teaching on birth control. So this population set would seem to be at a minimal risk of getting AIDS—at least according to the pop culture teachings on safe sex—no thanks to the Vatican.
The smaller population of Catholics who do follow the Church’s teachings on chasity and faithfulness to marriage would face next to zero risk for getting AIDS, or are we to believe that AIDS is spreading rampantly in this group thanks to the Vatican.
Where’s the logic?
Or, are we to pretend that good folks are being obedient to the Church’s teaching on safe sex and contraception so we can blame the Vatican for the spread of AIDS (don’t mind, we will ignore that these folks are not following other teachings on sex outside of marriage, drug use, and other risky behaviors).
AIDS is spreading rapidly in India, Thailand, Burma and Mainland China. Are we to pretend the Pope has vast influence on Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists and atheists?
I do know it is popular,trendy and trendy to criticize the Catholic Church. I pray that someday the critics will be able to look beyond themselves appearing trendy to the pop culture crowd.
dpt,
It seems really obvious, doesn’t it?
I was in a secular masters program in Marriage and Family Counseling. I was told that you had to “keep your religious views to yourself, or risk getting “drummed out of the department” (actual quote from an evangelical Christian barely hanging on in the program).
So, I tried to ask questions about things like this VERY topic, applying logic or “science” to the indoctrination I was getting. You wouldn’t believe the ferocity of the poop storms that ensued!
I had one professor that just about lost it when I suggested that his stated belief that sex was about pleasure didn’t seem to make sense with respect to evolution.
I asked him whether it made sense to think that “nature” would arbitrarily decide “throw in” sexual pleasure into human physiology like an option upgrade to a new car, as opposed to evolving as part of a functional biological purpose. And wouldn’t it make sense that that purpose was procreation?
I soon left the program.
DaVinci Decoder,
I note from previous posts you used to live in the Bay Area. I live in Fremont, and there were several letters to the local paper following the passing of Pope John Paul II that he is to blame for the spread of AIDS (especially in Africa), poverty, blah blah.
I responded with my own letter using the obvious logic above. (One letter writer was specific in cited the spread of AIDS in South Africa. Wait, Catholics represent about 4-5% of the population in South Africa. Is it only Catholics, faithful to the no condom teaching, that were infected with AIDS?)
The replies to my letter were that is was plain wrong to teach that condom use was bad.
dpt,
I lived in Castro Valley and worked in San Jose. Sorry we didn’t meet a few years back. It was a lonely place to be a Catholic, or Christian of any sort. I worked in an office of over 130 people. To the best of my knowledge, I was the only Christian in the building. There may have been some closet Christians that didn’t want to cause a stir.
It is always amazing how outraged the libs get when you suggest that people engaging in random sexual encounters are responsible for the spread of STDs (which seems unquestionably true), but will blame “Christendom” for teaching something that will indisputably stop the spread of the disease.
These same people will ALWAYS mention that Europeans “invading” North and South America were responsible for spreading diseases that decimated the indigenous population. Just because they showed up!
Can’t win for losin’. Whatever that means :o)
This is a bigger story than it seems. Think about that; 230 Congregations. Has there ever been open dissent on this scale…say, since Humane Vitae?
I am assuming “congregation” means that the letter would not have been sent out if the congregation had not been unanimously supportive of the document. So, it might represent DIRECTLY, thousands of individual religious, not to mention the hordes of wimpy fellow travelers that are just sneakier in their dissent.
It will be interesting to see how this get handled.
A refuge? No, sorry I never encountered one up there.
We tried Our Lady of Grace in Castro Valley, where the priest said that there was no Hell and said “Mother God” during Mass.
Then I went to Holy Cross in Hayward. They had a “priestess” read the Gospel and give the Homily. All while the priest sat in the pews to listen to her.
So, we drove out to Pleasanton.
That is a beautiful remembrance of Fr. Sweeny. I am sorry I wasn’t able to find him, and OLP while I was up there. My three year sentence up there would have been a blessing.