Is the Vatican facing a world-wide schism?

robindch

The Vatican hasn't had to face down a serious schism, or the threat of one, since Luther's Reformation in the 16th Century, but over the last few years, there's been so much political jockeying in and around the Catholic Church, and so much of it has done openly, that I can't finally help but wonder if it's starting to face one now.

Inputs into this are the ongoing, unpleasant and increasingly open, fight between the conservative and liberal wings of the church; the afterburn of the worldwide pedophile scandal and the Vatican's cold response to it; increasing centralization and legalistic application of dry church doctrine and policy at the expense of human decency; declining believerships in many countries; populations of priests and nuns who are becoming fewer, but older; the open homophobia and deceit concerning sex education; the control of schools and their use as indoctrination centers; weird goings-on within the Vatican Bank; the increasingly shrill tone of many current catholic publications; Ratzinger's evident inability to connect on a human level with just about anybody; associations like the ACP in Ireland which openly defy Vatican policy; occasional talk even amongst hard-liners of schism. And so on and so on.

Has the Vatican finally navigated itself so far up the only creek it could, that it's finally on the verge of breaking apart?

Sarky

I hope so. I've never seen a schism before, I think it'd be fascinating. All those priests saying "no, THAT bit of imaginary theology is bollocks" without a trace of irony...

krudler

Vatican III: Vatican With A Vengeance.

Galvasean

Considering the amount of Catholics (not just laypeople, but priests too) saying things along the lines of, "The Pope aint the boss of me!" these days, it doesn't appear far off. I would not be surprised if in the next ten years we had a breakaway 'Irish Church of Catholics' or some such.

Dades

I heard some elderly country folk over the weekend talking about how priests should be allowed marry.

Even this demographic can see how outdated and detrimental the whole celibacy concept is.

aidan24326

The nuns are being criticised by the Vatican, for, amongst other things -

NYT wrote:

...being silent in the church’s fight against abortion and same-sex marriage while pouring energy into working for the poor and disenfranchised.

Imagine that, striving to help the poor and the needy while ignoring the fight against the evil sodomites! Should they be burned at the stake or merely excommunicated?

yeppydeppy

I don't see it happening - Herr Kommandant Ratzinger is 85 and so there can't be too much diesel left in that tank. Once he's browners they'll elect a middle of the road pope and keep the money rolling in ship afloat.

krudler

Galvasean wrote: »

Considering the amount of Catholics (not just laypeople, but priests too) saying things along the lines of, "The Pope aint the boss of me!" these days, it doesn't appear far off. I would not be surprised if in the next ten years we had a breakaway 'Irish Church of Catholics' or some such.

Irish Church of Catholics? fcuk off we're the Catholic Irish Church.

vibe666

krudler wrote: »

Irish Church of Catholics? fcuk off we're the Catholic Irish Church.

splitters!

what about the REAL Catholic Church?

worked for them IRA fellas having a *REAL* branch. :pac:

robindch

Looking at the way the church seems to be splitting, what about The Continuity Catholics?

Mistress 69

Galvasean wrote: »

Considering the amount of Catholics (not just laypeople, but priests too) saying things along the lines of, "The Pope aint the boss of me!" these days, it doesn't appear far off. I would not be surprised if in the next ten years we had a breakaway 'Irish Church of Catholics' or some such.

How about The PCCOI, The Provisional Catholic Church Of Ireland..:pac:

seamus

Sarky wrote: »

I hope so. I've never seen a schism before, I think it'd be fascinating. All those priests saying "no, THAT bit of imaginary theology is bollocks" without a trace of irony...

In reality that should probably be read in Dara O'Briain's voice, but just because it was you who posted it, I read it in Billy Connolly's voice.

Sarky

But I sound nothing like him, as this shameless podcast plug will attest!

Actor

robindch wrote: »

The Vatican hasn't had to face down a serious schism, or the threat of one, since Luther's Reformation in the 16th Century, but over the last few years, there's been so much political jockeying in and around the Catholic Church, and so much of it has done openly, that I can't finally help but wonder if it's starting to face one now.

Inputs into this are the ongoing, unpleasant and increasingly open, fight between the conservative and liberal wings of the church; the afterburn of the worldwide pedophile scandal and the Vatican's cold response to it; increasing centralization and legalistic application of dry church doctrine and policy at the expense of human decency; declining believerships in many countries; populations of priests and nuns who are becoming fewer, but older; the open homophobia and deceit concerning sex education; the control of schools and their use as indoctrination centers; weird goings-on within the Vatican Bank; the increasingly shrill tone of many current catholic publications; Ratzinger's evident inability to connect on a human level with just about anybody; associations like the ACP in Ireland which openly defy Vatican policy; occasional talk even amongst hard-liners of schism. And so on and so on.

Has the Vatican finally navigated itself so far up the only creek it could, that it's finally on the verge of breaking apart?

So long as the renegades break away and don't expect the Church to fund their endeavours; all the best to them. They'll soon see how hard evangelising is once they have to put their hands in their pockets. The Church is funded by the Faithful down through the ages and this good-will should not be used to fund heretical outfits such as the ACP.

Sarky

No doubt they'll just finance it through sodomy. They're evil heretics, after all.

muppeteer

Actually what happens to pooled assets in clubs when a split occurs? Do the splitters get a proportional share or just told to fcuk off and get your own priceless art collection?

Subpopulus

I don't think we'll see a huge schism per say, but more of a gradual spalling off of national churches. I can certainly see a split happening in the Irish church with a more moderate group heading off and allowing greater lay participation and allowing married priests.

If that were to happen it would be quite messy, I'd imagine all the Bishops and other clergy further up the pecking order would be still quite loyal to the Vatican and would be reluctant to relinquish any power to a new church.

On the other hand none of that might happen and the church might continue to limp on in it's state of decrepitude, becoming ever more out of touch and continuing to fade in influence.

The Mad Hatter

muppeteer wrote: »

Actually what happens to pooled assets in clubs when a split occurs? Do the splitters get a proportional share or just told to fcuk off and get your own priceless art collection?

With any luck both sides will claim to be the real catholic church and a lengthy legal battle and/or infighting will ensue. That would be funny.

GLaDOS

There is a lot of Irish people who would like to call themselves Catholic while not actually Catholic rules, would certainly suit them.

Galvasean

krudler wrote: »

Irish Church of Catholics? fcuk off we're the Catholic Irish Church.

The Catholic People's Front?

robindch

muppeteer wrote: »

Actually what happens to pooled assets in clubs when a split occurs?

When the Soviet Union was dissolved, each derivative republic grabbed whatever Aeroflot 'planes happened to be sitting on their own sovereign territory.

I'm sure the Vatican could manage something equivalent.

muppeteer

robindch wrote: »

When the Soviet Union was dissolved, each derivative republic grabbed whatever Aeroflot 'planes happened to be sitting on their own sovereign territory.

I'm sure the Vatican could manage something equivalent.

I suppose it would depend on the size of each portion that was splitting off.
A single parish priest and a chunk of the local congregation would probably be told to feck off and get out of church property.
If however a bishop and a whole diocese were to split I would imagine they would have enough legal claim to keep the buildings, cars, pension funds etc.

The thing is though a split would be unlikely to be so neatly divided, with bits and pieces of parishes splitting all over the country. This would leave the splitters with little power and little claim to assets.

Would be interesting to see how it would all pan out, though I suspect it will come to nothing.
Those liberal enough to disagree with the Vatican will be drawing on al a carte Catholics for a base of support, they will moan and fight as best they can but I can't see them causing such huge a huge upheaval. A bit like trying to organise a pot smokers protest:D

The parallels with the Soviet breakup with the liberalising and conservative forces vying for power are interesting too. I'm sure the irony will be lost on them:)

aidan24326

robindch wrote: »

what about The Continuity Catholics?

Who would surely run into disagreement with the Real Irish Religious Association of Catholics ?

kylith

Probably Acquiris Quodcumquae Rapis (you get what you grab)as they say*, with the first priest to get to the church calling dibs.

*On the Discworld anyway.

the culture of deference

Caption this

Subpopulus

the culture of deference wrote: »

Caption this

Santa: Frohe Weihnachen!
Putin: Why is Santa not have beard?

Kivaro

the culture of deference wrote: »

Caption this

Popey: How do you like my outfit?
Putin: It's a bit camp.
Popey: But the masses love it!

robindch

Ratzinger: Youthful fascism is so easy to get over, innit?
Putin + Ratzinger: lol!

joseph brand

magicbastarder

how would they pick a leader of the new church? democracy sounds like an atheist plot.

Dades

the culture of deference wrote: »

Voiceover: "Two, there always are."

Nodin

the culture of deference wrote: »

Caption this

'No, we're not big on gays...I mean, can you imagine the kind of mad outfit a gay pope would go round in?'

Mistress 69

Vatileaks


http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0813/breaking21.html

Zillah

If there is a split I guarantee you that 99% of the faithful will be of whatever faction their local church/priests are. I'd also hazard that 33% of them won't realise anything happened, 33% will know something happened but not understand the difference, and 33% will have an idea but just won't care.

The 0.5% vs 0.5% will be so loud, obnoxious and opinionated that they will sound like the majority and come to dominate public discourse on the matter.

aidan24326

yeppydeppy wrote: »

Once he's browners they'll elect a middle of the road pope and keep the money rolling in ship afloat.

I wouldn't go betting too much money on that. I honestly (naievely?) thought that when Pope John Paul died they'd elect someone a little bit more liberal, someone to bring the RC Church forward. How silly was I.

They're so stuck in their ways at this stage that they'll never change. They don't know how to. They're destroying themselves from the inside out but they can't see the wood for the trees, and don't know how to change or how to adapt to a changing world.

Personally this makes me happy. I will delight in watching them implode. It still baffles me that an organisation so detestable could actually have so many followers. In fairness that probably says more about humanity than it does about the RC Church.

Penn

aidan24326 wrote: »

I wouldn't go betting too much money on that. I honestly (naievely?) thought that when Pope John Paul died they'd elect someone a little bit more liberal, someone to bring the RC Church forward. How silly was I.

They're so stuck in their ways at this stage that they'll never change. They don't know how to. They're destroying themselves from the inside out but they can't see the wood for the trees, and don't know how to change or how to adapt to a changing world.

Personally this makes me happy. I will delight in watching them implode. It still baffles me that an organisation so detestable could actually have so many followers. In fairness that probably says more about humanity than it does about the RC Church.

I thought the same when JP² died. But the more I think about it, the more I realise that they actually can't change. The laws they lived by 2,000 years ago, they still have to follow today. They literally can't go against them. So they'll never get more liberal because if they go against one of their own laws, there'll actually be more of a schism in the church with different groups wanting them to go against more of their laws. Only by not compromising and telling people "This is what it is and we can't go against it" will people either live with it or go against it. Trouble is, believers fear going against it, so have to try and accept it.

Hotblack Desiato

aidan24326 wrote: »

I wouldn't go betting too much money on that. I honestly (naievely?) thought that when Pope John Paul died they'd elect someone a little bit more liberal, someone to bring the RC Church forward. How silly was I.

A pope doesn't get to choose his successor.
But, if he reigns long enough, he'll have chosen most of those who will choose his successor...

Penn wrote: »

I thought the same when JP² died. But the more I think about it, the more I realise that they actually can't change. The laws they lived by 2,000 years ago, they still have to follow today. They literally can't go against them.

Most of the rules of the RCC have no basis in the bible, are a lot less than 2000 years old, and have changed greatly over time.
Even within the last 50 years (i.e. pre-Vatican II to post-V2) - Latin mass, fish on Fridays, limbo, headscarves, etc. etc. - but what was started quietly under JP2 and is very obvious now is the intent to reverse/overturn all liberalising elements of V2 e.g. any sort of meaningful lay participation. Back to pay, pray, obey - for the few remaining adherents that is...

robindch

Hans Kung, one of Ratzinger's former friends, has publicly called for the pope to be removed from power:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/oct/05/catholic-revolution-nazi-dictatorship-pope

The Guardian wrote:

One of the world's most prominent Catholic theologians has called for a revolution from below to unseat the pope and force radical reform at the Vatican. Hans Küng is appealing to priests and churchgoers to confront the Catholic hierarchy, which he says is corrupt, lacking credibility and apathetic to the real concerns of the church's members.

In an exclusive interview with the Guardian, Küng, who had close contact with the pope when the two worked together as young theologians, described the church as an "authoritarian system" with parallels to Germany's Nazi dictatorship. "The unconditional obedience demanded of bishops who swear their allegiance to the pope when they make their holy oath is almost as extreme as that of the German generals who were forced to swear an oath of allegiance to Hitler," he said.

The Vatican made a point of crushing any form of clerical dissent, he added. "The rules for choosing bishops are so rigid that as soon as candidates emerge who, say, stand up for the pill, or for the ordination of women, they are struck off the list." The result was a church of "yes men", almost all of whom unquestioningly toed the line. "The only way for reform is from the bottom up," said Küng, 84, who is a priest. "The priests and others in positions of responsibility need to stop being so subservient, to organise themselves and say that there are certain things that they simply will not put up with anymore."

Küng, the author of around 30 books on Catholic theology, Christianity and ethics, which have sold millions worldwide, said that inspiration for global change was to be found in his native Switzerland and in Austria, where hundreds of Catholic priests have formed movements advocating policies that openly defy current Vatican practices. The revolts have been described as unprecedented by Vatican observers, who say they are likely to cause deep schisms in the church. "I've always said that if one priest in a diocese is roused, that counts for nothing. Five will create a stir. Fifty are pretty much invincible. In Austria the figure is well over 300, possibly up to 400 priests; in Switzerland it's about 150 who have stood up and it will increase." He said recent attempts by the archbishop of Vienna, Christoph Schönborn, to try to stamp out the uprising by threatening to punish those involved in the Austrian "priests' initiative" had backfired owing to the strength of feeling. "He soon stopped when he realised that so many ordinary people are supportive of them and he was in danger of turning them all against him," Küng said.

The initiatives support such seemingly modest demands as letting divorced and remarried people receive communion, allowing non-ordained people to lead services and allowing women to take on important positions in the hierarchy. However, as they go against conventional Catholic teaching, the demands have been flatly rejected by the Vatican. Küng, who was stripped of the authority to teach Catholic theology by Pope John Paul II in 1979 for questioning the concept of papal infallibility, is credited with giving the present pope, Joseph Ratzinger as he then was, the first significant step up the hierarchy of Catholic academia when he called him to Tübingen University, in south-west Germany, as professor of dogmatic theology in 1966.

The pair had worked closely for four years in the 1960s as the youngest theological advisers on the second Vatican council – the most radical overhaul of the Catholic church since the middle ages. But the relationship between the two was never straightforward, with their political differences eventually driving a wedge between them. The dashing and flamboyant Hans Küng, by various accounts, often stole the limelight from the more earnest and staid Joseph Ratzinger. [...] "He has developed a peculiar pomposity that doesn't fit the man I and others knew, who once walked around in a Basque-style cap and was relatively modest. Now he's frequently to be seen wrapped in golden splendour and swank. By his own volition he wears the crown of a 19th-century pope, and has even had the garments of the Medici pope Leo X remade for him."

That "pomposity", he said, manifested itself most fully in the regular audiences who gather on St Peter's Square in Rome. "What happens has Potemkin village dimensions," he said. "Fanatical people go there to celebrate the pope, and tell him how wonderful he is, while meanwhile at home their own parishes are in a lamentable state, with a lack of priests, a far higher number than ever before of people who are leaving than are being baptised and now Vatileaks, which indicates just what a poor state the Vatican administration is in," he said [...] Calling Pope Benedict XVI's reign a "pontificate of missed opportunities", in which he had forgone chances to reconcile with the Protestant, Jewish, orthodox and Muslim faiths, as well as failing to help the African fight against Aids by not allowing the use of birth control, Küng said his "gravest scandal" was the way he had "covered up" worldwide cases of sexual crimes committed by clerics during his time as the head of the Roman Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith as Cardinal Ratzinger.

"The Vatican is no different from the Kremlin," Küng said. "Just as Putin as a secret service agent became the head of Russia, so Ratzinger, as head of the Catholic church's secret services, became head of the Vatican. He has never apologised for the fact that many cases of abuse were sealed under the secretum pontificium (papal secrecy), or acknowledged that this is a disaster for the Catholic church." Küng described a process of "Putinisation" that has taken place at the Vatican.

Yet despite their differences, the two have remained in contact. Küng visited the pope at his summer retreat, Castel Gandolfo, in 2005, during which the two held an intensive four-hour discussion. "It felt like we were on an equal footing – after all, we'd been colleagues for years. We walked through the park and there were times I thought he might turn the corner on certain issues, but it never happened. Since then we've still kept exchanging letters, but we've not met."

magicbastarder

robindch wrote: »

Hans Kung, one of Ratzinger's former friends, has publicly called for the pope to be removed from power:

it'd completely undermine the notion that the pope is god's main man on earth, and undermine all claims about the level of fallibility - in short, it'd undermine catholic doctrine itself.
so if it happens, it'll either create a new movement, or catholics will be forced to stick their fingers even further into their ears to block out the obvious complaints about the lack of logic of the church existing in the same way it has.

Dades

magicbastarder wrote: »

it'd completely undermine the notion that the pope is god's main man on earth, and undermine all claims about the level of fallibility - in short, it'd undermine catholic doctrine itself.
so if it happens, it'll either create a new movement, or catholics will be forced to stick their fingers even further into their ears to block out the obvious complaints about the lack of logic of the church existing in the same way it has.

Undermining doctrine won't make a whit of difference to a lot of catholics. Most would be happy to see the church dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th (!) century and have women/married priests. They'd happily ignore any doctrinal issues for a new church mixing it up a bit they could embrace.

mewso

I want to see the church get more medieval. Threaten to burn heretics, excommunicate folks and so on. I could do without them looking more acceptable in modern life. Makes me a big fan of Ratz.

Obliq

mewso wrote: »

I want to see the church get more medieval. Threaten to burn heretics, excommunicate folks and so on. I could do without them looking more acceptable in modern life. Makes me a big fan of Ratz.

I'm with you on that. The more out of line the vatican becomes, the more people start to think for themselves.

666irishguy

The church is a dead duck. It can't adapt to the modern world without compromising its base ideals. I'd say most western countries will be properly secular within the next 100 years, with religions increasingly becoming more new age watered down versions of their former selves. A schism may be the only thing that saves it. The church is finished in Ireland after the current older generation passes on. The few younger people involved will just become alienated hard liners.

kylith

mewso wrote: »

I want to see the church get more medieval. Threaten to burn heretics, excommunicate folks and so on. I could do without them looking more acceptable in modern life. Makes me a big fan of Ratz.

When I was 13 I told my mother that I wished the RCC was more 'Fire and Brimstone' because at least then it wouldn't be so boring.

Nodin

Meanwhile.....

CATHOLIC bishops have snubbed an offer to meet with a group of priests and lay people who want to reform the church.
Around 400 people attended an assembly in Galway at the weekend which was organised by the Association of Catholic Priests (ACP).
Organisers had extended an invitation to around half a dozen bishops in the west of Ireland to attend the gathering, however none showed up.

Some of those who contributed to the conference said they want to feel like they belong to and are involved in their church and want to be "regarded as equals" as envisioned by the Second Vatican Council.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/bishops-snub-offer-to-talk-about-reform-of-the-church-3252414.html

Aha. hahaha. yeah. That'll happen allright.

kylith

Nodin wrote: »

Meanwhile.....



http://www.independent.ie/national-news/bishops-snub-offer-to-talk-about-reform-of-the-church-3252414.html

Aha. hahaha. yeah. That'll happen allright.

Yeah, there's a reason the priests like to call themselves Shepherds; sheep don't get to have a say in how they're sheared.

Nodin

kylith wrote: »

Yeah, there's a reason the priests like to call themselves Shepherds; sheep don't get to have a say in how they're sheared.

...or shagged.

(no, I couldn't resist. Don't judge me, yez bastards)

Undergod

I doubt it would happen. People are blind to the dissonance between "I'm a catholic" and "Pope doesn't tell me what to do."

Despite everything, I think people are to reliant on Catholicism as their identity, and will seek to preserve that internal image of their identity.

kylith

Nodin wrote: »

...or shagged.

(no, I couldn't resist. Don't judge me, yez bastards)

I think you'll find that as a godless heathen I can do all the judging I want! *judges*

Bannasidhe

kylith wrote: »

I think you'll find that as a godless heathen I can do all the judging I want! *judges*

Can we cast stones?

Rookster

Galvasean wrote: »

Considering the amount of Catholics (not just laypeople, but priests too) saying things along the lines of, "The Pope aint the boss of me!" these days, it doesn't appear far off. I would not be surprised if in the next ten years we had a breakaway 'Irish Church of Catholics' or some such.

Why not just have no church?