• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Twenty-First Century: Will the Catholic Church finally end?

Kephalos

J.M.P.P. R.I.P. B5: RLOAI
Joined
Mar 2, 2009
Messages
687
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
5w4
I think that during the twenty-first century several forces will either change the Catholic Church beyond recognition or completely obliterate it.

The first I think is demography: even though Christianity began in the Middle East and the Mediterranean, it later spread to Europe and from Europe to all the other continents. But, today the homeland of the Catholic Church -- Europe -- is less Catholic and Christian than ever. In fact, the biggest concentrations of Catholics in the world are outside Europe in some of the former Catholic powers like Spain and Portugal. How will Catholicism look like when most believers (and necessarily an increasing number of the higher-ups in the clergy) will be from America and Africa, and maybe Asia. Not only fewer and fewer Europeans and North Americans are believers, but even those believers are in risk of being outnumbered due to low birthrates. Now, I don't think that Catholicism is the same everywhere. For example, think of the great admiration in which John Newman is held by English-speaking Catholics, but he is virtually unknown to Spanish-speaking Catholics. Catholicism will change, therefore, in this century solely for that reason.

The second I think is, of course, other religions that will compete with Catholicism. The first battle that Catholicism lost was the battle against Protestantism (or mayby, the battle against Eastern Orthodoxy), which divided European Christianity. But Christianity was never able to attract Muslims in the Middle East and elsewhere, who have been visited by European missonaries for many years now, and have been in touch with Western culture even in the days when Christianity was a big part of it. Or, think of the failure of Catholicism to take root in East Asia. In both these places there are rich religious traditions that Catholicism is not able to replace.

The third is, the possibility of scientific progress in the twenty-first century. Looking back to the discoveries of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, one can only imagine what this century will bring. So, not only Catholicism may be undermined by other religions, but all religion may be undermined by discoveries that give naturalistic and godless answers to important questions. Religion can of course try to adapt to a naturalistic point of view, but there is only so much naturalism that religion can accept.

Finally, I think the weight of the criminal failures of the Catholic clergy will tend to discredit them. How can an institution -- indeed, how can a single man like the Pope -- claim to be infallible in matters of morality when not only their clergy abuse children, but cover it up as much as they can? When you claim such moral knowledge you must be held to a higher standard. But, maybe now in the twenty-first century people will no longer look the other way at the moral failures of the Catholic priests.

What do you think? Will the Catholic Church survive the twenty-first century? Whatever happens, would that be a good thing or a bad thing?
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
how can a single man like the Pope -- claim to be infallible in matters of morality when not only their clergy abuse children, but cover it up as much as they can?

What do you think?

Perhaps a parent of an abused child will try to send him to heaven before his time.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
AMDG

What do you think? Will the Catholic Church survive the twenty-first century? Whatever happens, would that be a good thing or a bad thing?

The Roman Catholic Church like other Churches, Synagoges and Mosques, movies, TV, the internet and motor cars, books and the spoken word, is a trance monger.

The Roman Catholic Church has been mongering trance for millenia. They understand how to induce trance and suspend disbelief. And they know how to end a trance and return the faithful to the world, relaxed and refreshed.

Of course as we notice, the Roman Catholic Church is now in competition with other trance mongers.

The competition though will hone their skills and allow them to find their place as an electronic tribe in the global village.

And the Roman Catholic Church even has an advantage. For most of its existence it has been a spoken culture and only with the invention of the printing press in 1440 did the Church start to loose to the literate culture.

But the literate culture is coming to an end to be replaced by the electronic culture which is very much like to old traditional spoken culture.

So the Roman Catholic Church will not only survive in 21st century, but the Catholic Church will thrive in the new electonic culture, so much like the old spoken culture of the 11th century, when the Roman Catholic Church was at its height.

Ad maiorem Dei gloriam inque hominum salutem (AMDG).
 

ceecee

Coolatta® Enjoyer
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Messages
15,908
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
8w9
Finally, I think the weight of the criminal failures of the Catholic clergy will tend to discredit them. How can an institution -- indeed, how can a single man like the Pope -- claim to be infallible in matters of morality when not only their clergy abuse children, but cover it up as much as they can? When you claim such moral knowledge you must be held to a higher standard. But, maybe now in the twenty-first century people will no longer look the other way at the moral failures of the Catholic priests.

People and the church have stood by watching immoral behavior by the their followers and the clergy for centuries. Child abuse is one more thing in a long, long line of terrible things. Every religion has atrocities but we aren't talking about them. Unfortunately, I doubt this will signal the beginning of the end for the Catholic church.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
People and the church have stood by watching immoral behavior by the their followers and the clergy for centuries. Child abuse is one more thing in a long, long line of terrible things. Every religion has atrocities but we aren't talking about them. Unfortunately, I doubt this will signal the beginning of the end for the Catholic church.

Unfortunately? I believe I will think differently about you after this post.

How easy it is to discount all the good that religion has done, how hard it is to remember and acknowledge.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
The Catholic church has faced many crises.. within and without. And instances of corruption it's recovered from. More than most institutions. I'm not good at predicting anything, but I doubt it's going anywhere anytime soon.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I cant understand why people still hate one Roman Catholicism, its been a long time since Luther freed up people to hate but the baton seems to have been safely passed on from believers to non-believers.

I dont know how anyone could suggest that the Roman Catholic church lost the battle to protestantism, the RCC stands today as a closer approximation to what it always was than any of the reformed churches do to their original founders or creeds, if any of the reformed churches did exist unchanged I suspect that many of their modern supporters would flock to the RCC as the less bigoted alternative.

Likewise I dont understand the sort of mindset which condemns religion and specifically the RCC and wishes to see its demise, perhaps when I was younger I was more secularist than I am today and I'm sure that locking horns with a lot of haters has probably consolidated my faith and support for the RCC in a manner which may not have otherwise taken place. Although the relentless attacks upon an institution which isnt really fighting back and instead constantly adopts positions of conciliation and moderation with quietism are really and truly unimpressive. I cant be convinced of the good or value of that sort of behaviour. It does not spring from anything other than hatred and the target is objectively less important than satisfying that drive.

Its a little like saying my parents who have loved and cared for me and sacrificed much that I could even be here are going to die some day, is it a good or bad thing? And the whole tone and pace of the preceeding remarks suggesting that its believed to be a very good thing.

I would ask, what do you see as changed beyond all recognition? And why would you consider it unrecognisable? If you consider demographic shifts, scientific research and child abuse combining to cause the decline and disappearence of the RCC what do you think those things could do to other institutions? Whatever happens to the RCC will next happen to those institutions, which have nothing like the pedigree or history of the RCC, each of those things existed before and exist independently of the RCC with great social consequences.

Although perhaps atheist publishing, celebrity culture and homosexuality will fill the void, as it seems to have done for many who hate Roman Catholicism already.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
I cant understand why people still hate one Roman Catholicism, its been a long time since Luther freed up people to hate but the baton seems to have been safely passed on from believers to non-believers.

I dont know how anyone could suggest that the Roman Catholic church lost the battle to protestantism, the RCC stands today as a closer approximation to what it always was than any of the reformed churches do to their original founders or creeds, if any of the reformed churches did exist unchanged I suspect that many of their modern supporters would flock to the RCC as the less bigoted alternative.

Likewise I dont understand the sort of mindset which condemns religion and specifically the RCC and wishes to see its demise, perhaps when I was younger I was more secularist than I am today and I'm sure that locking horns with a lot of haters has probably consolidated my faith and support for the RCC in a manner which may not have otherwise taken place. Although the relentless attacks upon an institution which isnt really fighting back and instead constantly adopts positions of conciliation and moderation with quietism are really and truly unimpressive. I cant be convinced of the good or value of that sort of behaviour. It does not spring from anything other than hatred and the target is objectively less important than satisfying that drive.

Its a little like saying my parents who have loved and cared for me and sacrificed much that I could even be here are going to die some day, is it a good or bad thing? And the whole tone and pace of the preceeding remarks suggesting that its believed to be a very good thing.

I would ask, what do you see as changed beyond all recognition? And why would you consider it unrecognisable? If you consider demographic shifts, scientific research and child abuse combining to cause the decline and disappearence of the RCC what do you think those things could do to other institutions? Whatever happens to the RCC will next happen to those institutions, which have nothing like the pedigree or history of the RCC, each of those things existed before and exist independently of the RCC with great social consequences.

Although perhaps atheist publishing, celebrity culture and homosexuality will fill the void, as it seems to have done for many who hate Roman Catholicism already.


You know, I understand your beliefs have a place around here, but isn't that a bit much for this thread in particular? The OP just seemed like a person who analyzes trends. In this case, the RCC. I didn't see anything particularly hateful about it.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
You know, I understand your beliefs have a place around here, but isn't that a bit much for this thread in particular? The OP just seemed like a person who analyzes trends. In this case, the RCC. I didn't see anything particularly hateful about it.

What are you saying? I'm only highlighting the cultural trends being fomented of which much of the hope about the disappearence of traditions such as the RCC is about.

Really if you met any individual who was so intent on the complete erasing of their personal past and memory it would surely present concerns for their welfare or mental health, yet upscale that to the social and it seems to make perfect sense to many.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
What are you saying? I'm only highlighting the cultural trends being fomented of which much of the hope about the disappearence of traditions such as the RCC is about.

Really if you met any individual who was so intent on the complete erasing of their personal past and memory it would surely present concerns for their welfare or mental health, yet upscale that to the social and it seems to make perfect sense to many.

I'm just saying that he seemed to be more detached, rather than attacking. Looks like a "Pi" tangent, if you will. You made it more of a Fi issue. The analysis alone touched a raw nerve. Why not just present an opposing trend? You seemed to be doing that at first.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
In any case, I happen to appreciate a lot about the RCC. For example, the oldschool Protestant mentality is "sola scriptura". Many evangelicals think this way to this day. If something in archaelogy or science contradicts scripture, then it must be put down. I've found that Catholic materials are far more open. Sometimes they create paradox by leaving room for both academia and tradition, but that's better than being closeminded. Even the standard (American) Catholic bible (umm.. the NAB, I think) is full of critical commentary. They don't try to hide it or rationalize around it.

Now I guess my point is that this is just one thing I wouldn't want to go away. If religion is going to stick around, it's nice that there are open minded people involved.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I'm just saying that he seemed to be more detached, rather than attacking. Looks like a "Pi" tangent, if you will. You made it more of a Fi issue. The analysis alone touched a raw nerve. Why not just present an opposing trend? You seemed to be doing that at first.

Rationalising my posts to fit a projected frame and reinforce your prejudices isnt going to serve much of a purpose really now is it?

Physician heal thyself.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Rationalising my posts to fit a projected frame and reinforce your prejudices isnt going to serve much of a purpose really now is it?

Physician heal thyself.

Yeah, you don't know anything about me. You could ask first though.

I'll be here when you're ready.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
pope-boys-heaven.jpg
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
In any case, I happen to appreciate a lot about the RCC. For example, the oldschool Protestant mentality is "sola scriptura". Many evangelicals think this way to this day. If something in archaelogy or science contradicts scripture, then it must be put down. I've found that Catholic materials are far more open. Sometimes they create paradox by leaving room for both academia and tradition, but that's better than being closeminded. Even the standard (American) Catholic bible (umm.. the NAB, I think) is full of critical commentary. They don't try to hide it or rationalize around it.

Now I guess my point is that this is just one thing I wouldn't want to go away. If religion is going to stick around, it's nice that there are open minded people involved.

What you're describing is only the thin end of the wedge.

If you consider the discourse on free will between Erasmus and Luther it will appear that Erasmus is the more reasonable thinker, yet many assume a sort of progressive series of steps in which protestantism and the reformation were in fact the more reasonable and modern, a bridge to the present, in reality many of the trends unleashed at that time were much more atavistic than the RCC establishment, hence the crimes in Calvin's Geneva, almost entirely forgotten, which deliberately aimed to achieve parity in terror with the inquisition, witch hunts and burnings by puritans etc.

This in turn created the cultural ferment from which arose atheism and secularism either because people were challenging the atavistic or bigoted tendencies or they saw it as a logical next step in the intellectual trend protestantism for them represented.

When history is examined there is a lot of present day bias imported into it, a lot of "my enemy's enemy is my friend" rationalisation, so someone opposed to roman catholicism or religiosity per se will assume that its historical challengers were all "good guys" believing broadly similar things to themselves.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
Yeah, you don't know anything about me. You could ask first though.

I'll be here when you're ready.

Think about what I said, think about your response and then, well, just think instead of emoting.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Think about what I said, think about your response and then, well, just think instead of emoting.

You're one of the strangest people here, when it comes to projections. Half of your posts are emotionally charged and accusing people of "projecting" something on to you. It seems to be your biggest pet peeve.. Yet, it's what you do to others. It's at a comical level really.

I'm not emoting anything. I'm dry as a...umm... well, whatever is "dry". I'm dry as that.
 
Top