I think that it is likely that people that are interested in liturgical
matters might also be interested in doctrinal matters, includig the topic of
discussion on the canon1024 list.
I was somewhat concerned about the invitation however because I thik that it
gave the impression that the discussion list was for discussing the issues
from both sides. However, the list welcome information makes it clear that
This is not the case:
"The purpose of this list is to foster prayer, dialogue,
and action pursuant to the priestly ordination of women
in the liturgical churches, including the Roman Catholic
Church."
The list is set up with a point of view and an agenda to effect change,
although other points of view are tolerated if made "in the spirit of
Christian Charity." This latter requirement is not specified of those who
agree with the purpose of the list, though I assume that such a requirement
is still expected.
Now, I think that there are certainly a number of people that would be
interested in these discussions, regardless of their point of view.
However, I think that the nature of an list established with an avocacy
purpose is somewhat different than one established as a platform of unbiased
discussion, even though the latter may be tolerated, or even welcome on the
list and even exist in fact. I would have prefered if the invitation had
made the nature of the list a bit more explicit.
As it stands the issue is one that, for (R) Catholics, has been declared as
having been taught definitively. There are canonical sanctions attached to
(R) Catholics who obstinately deny the (RC) Church's teaching on the matter,
including, under some circumstances, the loss of communion with the Church.
For me that makes participating on a forum devoted to changing the (RC)
Church's teaching somewhat awkward.
thomas.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|