I would like to draw everyone’s attention to this article on the BBC news website about the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, which represents 80% of Roman Catholic nuns in the US, and their current impasse with the Vatican concerning their mission towards women and homosexuals: BBC News - US nuns won't 'compromise mission' The following link takes you to a further article on the BBC website which outlines discusses a book published on sexuality by one US nun which the Roman Catholic Church considers to teach against RC doctrine: BBC News - Vatican critical of US nun's book on sexual ethics Although I am not a Roman Catholic myself, nor indeed a woman, I have contacted Sr Janet Mock, the director of the LCWR to offer my wholehearted support of the LCWR's mission for social justice, bringing relevance to the church in the modern world, including issues surrounding women's rights and homosexuality. Should you wish to send a message of your support also, Sr Janet can be contacted via the LCWR website.
A religious representative who isn't so wrapped up in their religion that they'll actually understand the teachings they're supposed to be spreading. This is the Catholicism I knew and loved when I was practicing.
given that women, by virture of not having penises of their own, are not granted any true power or authority in the catholic church, so they are therefore free to stand up for christ, not for perpetuating the churches power, however unethically or un christ-like that act may involve. The vatican cant exist unless it perpetuate itself, and the only way they know to do that is through either aggression, or through false-piety. I have really been enjoyin hearing from Sister Simone, who has been an amazing voice in the last few years, and is getting attention placed on important issues ignored by most of our politicians (though mainly by the right wing, which would rather perpetuate itself with aggression and false piety, just like the church itself.)
People looking from the outside into Catholicism are probably often confused. The fact is that in America at least, the average Cathlic does not share a lot in common with the Pope. A lot of people judge all Catholics based on the views of the Pope and the Vatican, which in my experience don't represent Catholic people at all.
That's true, I'm Catholic, I surely do not want people looking into it and basing me off of the Pope and the Vatican. We don't even speak the same language, let alone all of our views.
Well at least someone came to the right conclusion, the pope is wrong. Maybe there is light at the end of the dark tunnel for Catholics. The question is, how long is the nun going to survive before the pope feels she is threatening his golden throne.
The Catholic Church is in the midst of an identity crisis, largely because of the sharp divide between the socially conservative clergy and the socially progressive laypeople. Very many individual Catholics I've talked to often emphasize the more "conventional" Christian beliefs (loving your neighbor, caring for the less fortunate, etc) over the political hot-button "victimless sins" (such as abortion, homosexuality, etc.) The clergy is none too pleased about this, but quite frankly, I often give props to most Catholics for this reason. It's certainly an example that US Evangelicals can take a strong lesson from.
Expecting US evangelicals to accept the teachings of christ into their hearts and reject the teachings of Robertson, Rand, and Falwell is harder than getting a camel through the eye of a needle. the main issue is that religious groups like the vatican, FotF/AFA/etc, and the like are obsessed with pushing their religious as a political issue. Sister Simone and the nuns are going out and advocating for the people who are harmed by anti-morality bullshit that we get from groups like the catholic bishops, and the televangelist/gospel of propserity (god wants you to horde wealth and have everything you think you deserve regardless of how many peoples lives you destroy along the way) bullshit.
Ayn Rand. Its ironic that the right wing, which constantly touts itself as followers of jesus, espose not christ's teachings, but those of Ayn Rand, a foriegner and an athiest who believe religion and any belief in a higher power was evil, and should be shunned from society because she viewed it as a great threat to her view of the 'individual'.
well, robertson and falwell have more in common with ayn rand than they do with jesus christ, so I find little challange in lumping them together. I think it is amazing how easily the concept of religious has been perverted by people who only use it for political and/or financial gain. so many right wingers profess to be christians, yet base their politics solely upon the works of people like Rand (and athiest), and falwell and robertson (fundementalist christians who believe in two tenets christ himself rejected: "god hates ____" and "God wants you to pursue your happiness at the expense of others". in the last 70 or so years, anti-christian fundementalist christanity has put its talons into our political system, and basically ruined it. the catholic bishops have started to do that too, and it is hypocritical, seeing as the things they are now against, they were themselves doing just a year and a half ago. For example, the whole hubbub about if catholic hospitals and universities should provide birth control to its employees was not a problem, as most all did without question for decades. it was only when the bishops, looking to score politically, blew their tops that it became a problem. funny how the bible not only never demonizes abortion and birth control, but there are passages in the bible that give instruction on how to do it.