Should Catholics abolish the papacy and elect cardinals?

[Harry]

Yes.  The monarchical hierarchy is a pretty huge anachronism in the 21st century.  Now that even third world Catholics can have the opportunity to read the Bible and other theological documents and form their own opinions, we all deserve some kind of voice in how the church is run.

The contraception ban has completely ruined Africa in the wake of AIDS.  If only Catholic lay people could have had a say on it...  This incident alone pretty much proves my position.

[Joe Republic]

You should write down these suggestions, and perhaps pin them to the door of a church in Germany.  People wouldn't expect that.

[asexual trans victimologist]

Who would be electing the cardinals, and from what sort of pool of candidates?

[So the Heroes Fall]

Why would someone who favors that even be Catholic to begin with? That contradicts a ton of Catholic theology, it's like claiming to be Christian and denying Jesus' divinity. If someone believes that I would just advise them to switch to a church that does have a system similar to that.

FWIW this is primarily why I'm not really big on "democratic" church structures. If you don't like what your church teaches, go join a different one. It's not like there's any shortage.

[Dr. Cynic]

You could always start your own church and do it your way.

L. Ron Hubbard proved that you can pretty much shovel the biggest pile of sh**t that you can lift out there and people will buy it.

But, to summarize that in a slightly less rude tone, why not speak up? Hell, if you went out and formed your own branch of Christianity or Catholicism and did it that way, I'm sure there would be people who would join and would be inclined to agree.

But asking a church, especially one as conservative as the Roman Catholics, to reform is like trying to find a goose that lays golden chocolate eggs.

[TJ in Wisco]

If you think politics and Catholicism are too intertwined now, imagine what it would be like if we voted on it. Heck, I wonder if the candidates for Cardinal would have R's and D's after their names. Maybe they should have debates first. It would certainly lead to schizms for whichever side loses an election.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Why would someone who favors that even be Catholic to begin with? That contradicts a ton of Catholic theology, it's like claiming to be Christian and denying Jesus' divinity. If someone believes that I would just advise them to switch to a church that does have a system similar to that.

FWIW this is primarily why I'm not really big on "democratic" church structures. If you don't like what your church teaches, go join a different one. It's not like there's any shortage.

^^^^

BRTD may be a Protestant, but this is absolutely right.

[Progressive Realist]

As BRTD said, that wouldn't be the Catholic Church anymore. And while in the case of the Roman Catholic Church, the hierarchy is more conservative than many of the adherents, I could easily see a more motivated conservative base of Catholics take over and push the Church even further to the Right.

[TJ in Wisco]

As BRTD said, that wouldn't be the Catholic Church anymore. And while in the case of the Roman Catholic Church, the hierarchy is more conservative than many of the adherents, I could easily see a more motivated conservative base of Catholics take over and push the Church even further to the Right.

Well that's the other thing, the Catholic Church is not supposed to be an outlet for affirming our political opinions but rather a guide to our beliefs, which then in turn help us to form political opinions. I don't want the Church to go campaigning against the Federal Reserve Bank any more than the liberals do. I don't want to see it reduced to either another liberal denomination that has sold out anything requiring personal sacrifice or another evangelical church that serves as an outlet of the Republican Party.

[So the Heroes Fall]

As BRTD said, that wouldn't be the Catholic Church anymore. And while in the case of the Roman Catholic Church, the hierarchy is more conservative than many of the adherents, I could easily see a more motivated conservative base of Catholics take over and push the Church even further to the Right.

True. People who aren't motivated enough to come to church more often than Christmas and Easter if even that aren't going to be to vote either.

And on what criteria is suffrage determined? If it's every person who's ever been confirmed that's going to include TONS of people who have no connection to the church at all anymore...

I'm actually kind of a libertarian in church governance, or moreso in the "states rights" areas, I think it's best just to have it so loosely organized individual churches have a ton of autonomy. For example my current church is nominally affiliated with what has traditionally been a conservative evangelical association as afleitch loves to remind us (though for some reason he doesn't seem to have any issue with his friends and family members who are going to a Catholic church, double standard anyone?), but the association is so loose that churches vary widely, the one I'm going to being one of the more liberal ones, even useful idiot pointed out that there are both liberal and conservative churches all over the spectrum. This kind of avoids the issues that churches like the Episcopalians and Methodists and ELCA are dealing with now and being ripped apart over. If you don't like what a church teaches, no one's forcing you to go.

Also I'm not bothered by schism, if I were Anglican/Episcopalian I wouldn't care at all if conservatives wanted to split like the many who have and though I still identify with the ELCA and consider myself culturally Lutheran I'm not bothered by the Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ, essentially a schism of more conservative ELCA churches that split because they aren't fond of gays. Really it's be hypocritical for any Protestant to be opposed to schism...

[CathKhan]

Pretty much in agreement with all of the above.

[Vote UKIP!]

You should write down these suggestions, and perhaps pin them to the door of a church in Germany.  People wouldn't expect that.

LOL.

[Is Totally Not Feeblepizza.]

Didn't a recent poll show that 61% of Catholic churchgoers actually support birth control? Are all of these Catholics not really Catholics?

[Progressive Realist]

As BRTD said, that wouldn't be the Catholic Church anymore. And while in the case of the Roman Catholic Church, the hierarchy is more conservative than many of the adherents, I could easily see a more motivated conservative base of Catholics take over and push the Church even further to the Right.

True. People who aren't motivated enough to come to church more often than Christmas and Easter if even that aren't going to be to vote either.

And on what criteria is suffrage determined? If it's every person who's ever been confirmed that's going to include TONS of people who have no connection to the church at all anymore...

I'm actually kind of a libertarian in church governance, or moreso in the "states rights" areas, I think it's best just to have it so loosely organized individual churches have a ton of autonomy. For example my current church is nominally affiliated with what has traditionally been a conservative evangelical association as afleitch loves to remind us (though for some reason he doesn't seem to have any issue with his friends and family members who are going to a Catholic church, double standard anyone?), but the association is so loose that churches vary widely, the one I'm going to being one of the more liberal ones, even useful idiot pointed out that there are both liberal and conservative churches all over the spectrum. This kind of avoids the issues that churches like the Episcopalians and Methodists and ELCA are dealing with now and being ripped apart over. If you don't like what a church teaches, no one's forcing you to go.

Also I'm not bothered by schism, if I were Anglican/Episcopalian I wouldn't care at all if conservatives wanted to split like the many who have and though I still identify with the ELCA and consider myself culturally Lutheran I'm not bothered by the Lutheran Congregations in Mission for Christ, essentially a schism of more conservative ELCA churches that split because they aren't fond of gays. Really it's be hypocritical for any Protestant to be opposed to schism...

Though to be fair, the local autonomy thing can backfire too. Look at the Southern Baptist Convention (which, up until the 1970s, actually had a lot of non-fundamentalist and even some "liberal" leaders).

[The Mikado]

This proposal would make the RCC into something fundamentally unCatholic. 

I'm not even sure how someone can support this and be a Catholic.

Democracy is an idea that's fundamentally in conflict with religious law.  Democracy seeks legitimacy from the consent of the governed, religious law comes from fealty and submission to the all-powerful Creator of the Universe and his dictates.  That's, on a fundamental level, not something that's up for a vote.  You can't just say "birth control's no longer sinful, we took a Church referendum."  That takes God out of the Church.

[asexual trans victimologist]

This proposal would make the RCC into something fundamentally unCatholic. 

I'm not even sure how someone can support this and be a Catholic.

Democracy is an idea that's fundamentally in conflict with religious law.  Democracy seeks legitimacy from the consent of the governed, religious law comes from fealty and submission to the all-powerful Creator of the Universe and his dictates.  That's, on a fundamental level, not something that's up for a vote.  You can't just say "birth control's no longer sinful, we took a Church referendum."  That takes God out of the Church.

Exactly. Polity is one thing but the only remotely sensible way to even come close to democratizing theology is to hope for and preferably engage in extensive long-term discourses with and between the kinds of people who in Anglicanism are called 'divines'. Anything more populist than that is just nonsensical.

[Harry]

This proposal would make the RCC into something fundamentally unCatholic. 

I'm not even sure how someone can support this and be a Catholic.

Democracy is an idea that's fundamentally in conflict with religious law.  Democracy seeks legitimacy from the consent of the governed, religious law comes from fealty and submission to the all-powerful Creator of the Universe and his dictates.  That's, on a fundamental level, not something that's up for a vote.  You can't just say "birth control's no longer sinful, we took a Church referendum."  That takes God out of the Church.

I'm not talking about a referendum of the people deciding on something like birth control.  It would be extremely knowledgeable cardinals making those calls.  Perhaps I wasn't clear that only priests/bishops would be eligible to run as cardinals.  And no campaigning, etc. would be allowed other than maybe a brief essay on what the candidate believes the most important issues are.

I still like the heirarchy; I just think it shouldn't be a "right wing pope picks the cardinals; those cardinals pick a right wing pope" endless cycle.  Let the people choose who governs.  Whoever is picked will still be guided by Catholic theology.

[Vermin Supreme]

The church should just adopt a policy where women can be priest and hold pro women stances on issues such as contraciption and abortion.

[asexual trans victimologist]

The church should just adopt a policy where women can be priest and hold pro women stances on issues such as contraciption and abortion.

The funny thing about the first issue is that belgiansocialist once mounted a highly postmodern argument in favor of an all-male priesthood that made a lot more sense than most of the traditional arguments, which should say something about how weak I think the traditional arguments are since it really doesn't seem like the sort of thing one should be able to successfully mount a postmodern argument for otherwise.

What constitutes a 'pro-women' stance on abortion is debatable; contraception less so.

[King]

You know, if this bothers you, you can always choose to not be a Catholic.

[realisticidealist]

Worst idea ever. Do you have something against apostolic succession?

[So the Heroes Fall]

I didn't buy that belgiansocialist argument but of course it didn't appeal at all my very "low church" views, I hardly see a pastor or whoever's giving a sermon as representative of the resurrection of Jesus. I think barring a majority of Christians from pastoral work is not just offensive it's also pretty idiotic and self-destructive.

You know, if this bothers you, you can always choose to not be a Catholic.

And this is why I don't have much sympathy whenever people whine about how reactionary the Catholic Church is.

[asexual trans victimologist]

I didn't buy that belgiansocialist argument but of course it didn't appeal at all my very "low church" views, I hardly see a pastor or whoever's giving a sermon as representative of the resurrection of Jesus. I think barring a majority of Christians from pastoral work is not just offensive it's also pretty idiotic and self-destructive.

Well, I wasn't at all convinced by his argument but it made a lot more sense to me than the traditional arguments, since as a High Church type I do see the value of that sort of symbolism. I just don't think phallogocentrism is a critical part of the Resurrection. I think anybody can in theory be taught to act out that particular pageant. But then again, one of my favorite television shows has a critical scene in which a guy with a mullet wearing a vaguely carnivalesque prince outfit attacks a doorway covered in briar-roses with a sword while a bunch of other swords pinion his sister in midair, and one of the most common interpretations of this scene is as some sort of weird Buddhist/feminist/Gnostic allegory of the Crucifixion, so the intellectual background from which I came to an interest in this sort of theology is, shall we say, a bit nonstandard.

[So the Heroes Fall]

Well yeah but we don't have any type of that symbolism at all just someone speaking about their interpretation of the Bible, so gender is completely irrelevant.

[asexual trans victimologist]

Do you distinguish between preacher and celebrant ever? At my church it's not always the same person, since we have three priests, one of whom is also a graduate student and another of whom is on some environmental non-profit board, and one Saturday and two Sunday services.