Pope Francis sends out survey to ask Catholics about gay sex, abortion and contraception

What are they going to do with that information? The article informs us that it will be used to develop and issue 'new Vatican guidance for followers' in 2015. I'm not sure what use such guidance could have since the issues in question, e.g. 'don't use contraception in any circumstance' don't really need much explaining and I can't imagine any behavioural guidance that could help that be put into action other than 'don't have sex unless you're ok with it resulting in pregnancy' and that has sufficed for a long time.

Then there's the pope's comments:

That really makes it sound like that CC might actually be considering changing some of it's rules. Are they going to allow the use of contraception in certain circumstances, or change their stance on gay sex? What are the implications of the CC reversing their stance like this, could it make being Catholic more practical and help prevent the church becoming redundant or might it have the effect of reducing the authority of the CC because they've capitulated to their 'children's' demands?

This isn't the first time the Church has "changed it's mind", the idea of limbo for unbaptised infants and the delivery of the mass in languages other than Latin provide a couple of examples of the churches position changing in relatively recent times.

I don't know that you intend to have the question weighted and I think your use of capitulated is telling. It's an interesting topic though so I'm going to swerve this for now.

No, no agenda on this one, just curious.

I used 'capitulated' because I feel that's what they'd be doing. I'm sure that if there were no problems in how the rules are implemented, if the behaviour of the CC's followers wasn't causing this re-evaluation to be necessary, that things would simply continue as they are.

I was actually thinking about it from a parental perspective. As a parent, I need to be flexible, but I think it's important to maintain discipline and I think that discipline comes from respect. My children won't comply with my wishes if they don't respect my authority and capitulating to their demands can sometimes undermine that authority. I try not to get myself into situations where I might have to reverse a 'command' for that reason, if I say 'no', I'm usually not going to change my mind. I think the CC is in that situation now and I wonder if changing their minds isn't going to have the effect of undermining their own authority. Or does that not apply in the case of a religion, are there factors in play which completely negate that aspect of maintaining authority because the authority is technically coming from a deity, not mere mortals? (NOT a loaded question)

see I think capitulated is a loaded term. If I would like an institution to make moral progress I am unlikely to consider it capitulating

I'm also not sure how you reconcile these demands with not telling your kids stuff that you're uncertain about.

The CC has been very certain on these subjects however and so they face different challenges when accepting mistakes that have been made and offences committed in those areas but as my preference is for the church to make progress on these questions I am going to welcome it when they do.

Ok, I don't want this to turn into something else, I'm happy to substitute whatever term that you are happy with.

And this is why it becomes difficult talking to you because you want to see the world in black and white terms. Personally I think the CC position on contraception abortion and same sex marriage is wrong and is in error but I'm also able to accept that an organisation can review these policies without it being a capitulation.

How about the CC puts itself in a position to make progress and advances made on these fronts will save and improve lives. If they do this I wont really care what they or you call it.

Sorry I've just seen you edited and that last post may read harsher in the context of the edited post.

As it stands I think this is a genuine attempt by the church to gauge what their congregation thinks. My time with the catholic church may be done but I'll support whatever changes I consider progressive irrespective of the organisation or institution that makes them. That obviously requires some qualification but I'm hopeful for the church under Francis.

I decided that trying to defend why I chose to use 'capitulation' was just going to keep that part of the conversation going and ultimately I wasn't trying to weight the question and my personal view isn't relevant since I'm canvasing opinion so it doesn't matter to me what word is used.

Ok, thanks for the contribution. You don't think then that it will undermine their authority?

Assuming you're referring to the churches claim to some moral authority.

We have to distinguish between the survey and what the church does with it. I don't know what they are planning but I will be watching that space.

If it were to result in some softening on the churches position in line with what the congregations think and practice, then it shouldn't within the church given it will, to some extent, reflect the congregations attitudes. Outside of that I think not given that by addressing concerns with it's positions the church becomes a more credible moral voice.

Those within the church who would resist change will adapt or leave and those outside of the church who will point at an institution making moral progress and claim it shows that they are fallible are less like to subject to the churches claims to authority anyway.

I think abortion is the least likely to see much change but I'm hopeful on contraception and same sex marriage.

And this goes someway to explaining why I'm hopeful for the church under Francis

http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...l-voice-change