Boring Woodstock Generation Crotch-Obsessed Rebels…

issue same tedious demands they have been issuing since 1968. Something something contraception something something divorce and remarriage something something gay “marriage” something something something women priests something something democracy something something conscience

Some people have lived 44 years since 1968. Some people have lived 1968 44 times.

  • SouthCoast

    So many professors, so few confessors.

  • Blog Goliard

    I still don’t understand what their alternate sexual ethic consists of. Should fornication/adultery/sodomy/etc. be always allowed or sometimes allowed? What arguments and authority do they bring to bear to support this judgment?

    Or is it their contention that sexual activity is always morally neutral and/or insignificant, and therefore I should pay no more attention to what the Church might appear to say in this area than I do in deciding what color shirt to wear tomorrow?

    • B.E. Ward

      The Christians I know who tend to agree with all of this kitty litter say “it’s not fornication/adultery/sodomy/etc. if it’s between two consenting adults who love each other”.

      And no, you don’t get a good, thoughtful reply when you ask “what about three or more consenting adults?” or “what’s an adult?” or “so Romans 1 doesn’t apply anymore?”

      • Blog Goliard

        Or, I imagine, when you ask precisely what the “love each other” standard means?

        If it means a permanent commitment to seek the good of the other, and to accept children if they come and raise them together, then basically what they’re positing is “marriage by desire”.

        But since that sort of understanding of Christian marriage itself has long since faded, I can’t imagine that’s what they really mean.

        • B.E. Ward

          Yeah, the reply to that one normally goes “it’s not up to me to decide what love is for someone else”.

          • enness

            Suuure it’s not…ask the women about Chris Brown. I bet most of them will make an exception.

      • Andy, Bad Person

        The Christians I know who tend to agree with all of this kitty litter say “it’s not fornication/adultery/sodomy/etc. if it’s between two consenting adults who love each other”.

        So, according to them, there’s literally no such thing as fornication/adultery/sodomy/etc. There’s rape, and non-rape.

        • Blog Goliard

          Sorta makes you wonder why they don’t go ahead and add sexual favors to the items up for bid in the parish silent auction. It’s consensual and for a good cause, right?

    • Irenist

      “Or is it their contention that sexual activity is always morally neutral and/or insignificant, and therefore I should pay no more attention to what the Church might appear to say in this area than I do in deciding what color shirt to wear tomorrow?”
      Perhaps the latter: http://squid314.livejournal.com/313411.html

    • Ted Seeber

      It has only one word: Consent.

      Anything done with proper consent is valid. Anything done with improper consent is only valid if it leads to proper consent.

      • Blog Goliard

        So basically they’ve collapsed all of Christian ethics into the Wiccan Rede (concluding along the way that no consensual sexual activity ever harms anyone, natch). Nice trick.

        • Ted Seeber

          Yep- I find that most new age Catholics are Wiccan in disguise.

  • Chris

    Academics get an “F” for Originality.

  • Julianne Wiley

    So OK, here’s the rule: Sex Is Always Cool.

    Unless it’s marital and procreative.

    Kind of a warm and slippery Albigensianism of the Present Age.

    Mutatis (in a big way) mutandis.

  • SpasticHedgehog

    Because when I think ecclesiastical reform I think more cubicles and bureaucracy.

  • Joe Long

    “Some people have lived 1968 44 times.” Man, those flashbacks are some bad stuff, man…

  • Marion (Mael Muire)

    It would appear that they want to nail “1968″ to every church door.

    • http://hezekiahgarrett.wordpress.com Hezekiah Garrett

      The 1,968 Feces.

      With apologies to Matt Groening.

  • http://www.likelierthings.com Jon W

    Forget about sex obsession. The most awesomest thing on that website is this:

    The exercise of authority in our church should emulate the standards of openness, accountability and democracy achieved in modern society. Leadership should be seen to be honest and credible; inspired by humility and service; breathing concern for people rather than preoccupation with rules and discipline; (emphasis mine)

    I’m going to dig this out every time I’m tempted to think of PhD’s, as a class, as “smart”.

    • Baltimore Catechesis

      Nunh unh! The most awesomest thing is the Pitchers! Check out this “Diagram for Christian Living” http://www.churchauthority.org/diagramlife.asp It’s kind of a cross between the woodcuts from the Catholic Worker and a Chic Tract.

      • SpasticHedgehog

        Married priests and no new financial plan. Oh this will work out grand for everybody!

        • kmk

          OUch, that’s a laugh out loud!!!! : )

    • enness

      So, laity get away with breaking rules; clergy don’t. Sounds fair.
      Without rules and discipline, what is accountability?

      (You know what they say about PhDs…”Piled higher and Deeper.”)

    • Bob

      Ouch! (to the PhD comment)! Well-taken. I guess that if you see one source of authority as all bad, you have to idolize another one (Cf. the protestant reformation in its attitudes towards the European monarchs, or for that matter the tendency towards theocracy among the rad trads). Hence the recurrence of state-worship or theocracy.

      Enness, clergy do get away with breaking rules, and indeed are required to. Just not certain ones, the same ones as for everybody else, except if you are, like, really, really famous and then everything is cool.

  • Linda C.

    “So OK, here’s the rule: Sex Is Always Cool.
    Unless it’s marital and procreative.”

    Most succinct description of it I’ve ever seen.

    And this: “The exercise of authority in our church should emulate the standards of openness, accountability and democracy achieved in modern society”, almost cost me a keyboard….

  • John

    Why all the focus on sex in this discussion? The linked web page is primarily about authority, not sex. I agree with them that I’m uncomfortable with the way authority works in the Church today. Our current authority structures often seem like the Pharisees Jesus railed against: more concerned about legalistic interpretations of the rules than about the healing our world needs.

    Shouldn’t part of the conversation on this page be about how authority in the Church could be structured to be more effective?

    John

    • Steve P

      I thought the same thing, John, until I actually followed the link on “conscience” that dealt with the issues on sex and gender.

      Clearly, the new vision they have for authority and accountability is only valid if it makes room for a break from consistent Church teaching on these favorite areas of dissent.

      A helpful way of thinking about it might be to separate canonical issues of governance and structure, as distinguished from doctrinal matters.

      A lot of it is wrapped up in academic language, but it boils down to the same tired questions.

      • Blog Goliard

        It’s an institutional strategy: they’re counting on people of their sort being put in charge. From the page on reforms to the CDF:

        “In the complex academic situation of today, proper guidance can only be given by international commissions of experts.”

        Bien-pensants only need apply, of course.

        • enness

          That would be hilarious if it wasn’t serious. What shall I have for breakfast? This is too complex – call in an international panel!

    • James Isabella

      “Our current authority structures often seem like the Pharisees Jesus railed against: more concerned about legalistic interpretations of the rules than about the healing our world needs.”

      Could you give me an example of the most egregious “legalistic interpretations of the rules” abuse of authority that you’ve seen in the Catholic church?

      My experiences have been that *any* local and diocesan authority has been MIA for decades.

      • Ted Seeber

        “My experiences have been that *any* local and diocesan authority has been MIA for decades.”

        That *might* be influenced by the diocese you are in, and have no scope for the wider Catholic Church.

    • Mark Shea

      I was just responding to the boilerplate in the press release I got containing the link. I’m afraid my eyes glazed over and I haven’t bothered looking at the link itself. Nor shall I. I’ve heard it all before. The notion that the Church needs to re-invent itself to look more like the 2012 American Elections is too ridiculous to contemplate.

    • beccolina

      Probably because all the talk about restructuring authority and redefining things to be more like Christ intended seems to be double speak for, “let each of us decide what is right in our lives,” and “Stop telling people things are sinful!” The concept looks like it relies heavily on the idea that loving someone never means telling them they are doing wrong and never making them feel bad. Like it or not, there are rules to Chrisitan living. There are things defined as sinful because they are sinful. Loving someone is doing what is best for them, and that defines best for them as, “What gets them closer to God and the ultimate goal of the beatific vision in Heaven.” Looking at the link to the pictures Baltimore Cathechesis provides, they are strongly advocating for freedom to commit mortal pelvic sins: contraception, gay “love”. I love my children so I don’t let them eat candy for three meals a day, not even on Nov. 1st. I don’t let them play in the street, even if they really, really want to. Allowing it, not admonishing them for it and guiding them to safety, would be negligence, not love. Urging people to change the authority of the Church so they can continue with their favorite sin without feeling bad about it is not love. It is negligence and ultimately selfish.

  • Andy, Bad Person

    From the site:

    Many of the key insights of Vatican II have not at all, or only partially, been implemented.

    I agree! I look forward to their drive to make sure all of the faithful can recite the parts of the Mass that pertain to them, in Latin.

    • beccolina

      Me too. I’m even planning of teaching the children LAtin here at home in anticipation.

    • dpt

      Or the call for us to be the leaven to the world and bring unbelievers to Christ!
      (Or is that too religious and not spiritual?)

  • Dale Price

    The very thought of our disordered, polarized electoral culture being imported into the church for clerical elections is enough to prompt a gasp of horror.

  • Sean

    “Priestly senates and pastoral councils, as envisaged by the Council, should involve the faithful more directly in decision making concerning the formulation of doctrine, the running of the pastoral ministry and evangelization in secular society.”
    How did nobody mention this “formulation of doctrine” clause yet? It’s just nestled in there nicely next to things that actually are up to the laity and individual and local efforts.

  • Marion (Mael Muire)

    Our current authority structures often seem like the Pharisees Jesus railed against: more concerned about legalistic interpretations of the rules than about the healing our world needs.

    The world does need healing, and it’s not the job of “structures” to do that; it’s the job of THE LAITY living in the world to get out there where it needs healing, roll up their sleeves, and make it happen.

    The Master’s followers are to live as He lived, not as the people around us who need healing currently live. Jesus was a Jew and observed many, many rules. Many of these – the Jewish Ceremonial Laws – were for the most part set aside for her children by the Church during Apostolic Times. Many more – the Moral Laws – have been upheld by the Church on behalf of their Creator, the Maker of Heaven and Earth, who has set forth how His people are to conduct their lives so as to live in His friendship (unlike our first Parents, Adam and Eve, who got tired of rules, also, and decided to skip one or two, just to see what happened. . . What that got them was sin, and it was through sin that every evil, every misery, and every woe that ever was or ever will be suffered by mankind entered our lives. The Rules were given to teach us how to avoid more of the same.

    The Rules are a blessing. The Rules are breath to our lips and light to our eyes. The Rules help to bring healing and wholeness to those who love them, who observe them, who share them.

    It’s true – the rules are not the same as the love of God or the healing He wants us to have. But those who love God and desire His healing will treasure and observe His commandments.

    One who says He loves the Lord, but who is cavalier or disdainful in their observance, is one in whom I would await some future time before placing my trust.

    • enness

      Doesn’t Chesterton say, “He who will not be governed by the Ten Commandments, will be governed by the ten thousand commandments”?

  • John G.

    I thought it was “Christ the King” not “Christ the Prime Minister” or “Christ the President”. Not much room for democracy in a Kingdom. Seems to me this is where we got in trouble in the Garden.

    • Chris M

      Jesus Christ, Minister for Spiritual Affairs and co-chair of the Trinity Foundation.

  • http://datechguyblog.com DaTechGuy

    The question one might ask is “Why do they bother, why not just become Protestants?”

    If one assumes they are not actually in league with the evil one then the answer is actually obvious.

    There are three normal ways you can deal with habitual sin, you can give in, you can resist and confess as needed, or you can go cold turkey, but our friends have discovered a fourth.

    Have the church declare their sins NOT sins, therefore they can do what they want without guilt.

    The irony here is this path acknowledges the authority of the Church to define sin, so rather than use prayer and/or the sacraments like confession to combat sin, they set a goal of having the church celebrate is as good and right.

    All the pleasure, none of the guilt or worry about eternity.

    Rather pathetic isn’t it?

    • http://hezekiahgarrett.wordpress.com Hezekiah Garrett

      It’s spiritual bulimia is what it is.

  • http://www.godandthemachine.com Thomas L. McDonald

    I just love that their model for church governance appears to be Dunder-Mifflin: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/godandthemachine/2012/10/cranky-old-people-demand-church-reform/

  • Joe Cool

    These manifestos always remind me of the Calvin and Hobbes strips where Calvin would report to his dad how he was polling poorly among 6-year-old, and mention that, unless his dad got with the program, he wouldn’t fair too well in the dad elections.

    • Blog Goliard

      This thread is done. Joe Cool just won it.

  • LaVallette

    Contrary tro these morons, in reject the the advice of the “expert panel” Paul VI in his “Human Vitae” wprote one of the most prophetic social documents of the 20th Century. His vindication: look at the world around you!!!!!!

  • Andy, Bad Person

    The “view responses on vision” section of the churchauthority website is in desperate need of the kind of snark that strikes the Stupid Amazon Products Comments.

  • http://sperolaus.com David R

CLOSE | X

HIDE | X