Pam thanks for this interesting link. I can understand the sentiment up to a point. But why would an intelligent woman want to climb higher up the hierarchy of the very organisation that is so antithetical to them? It doesn't altogether make sense.
At least I can now better understand some of the points that Pat Condell makes about the Church's attitude to women. The Church's opposition to anaesthesia in childbirth was because a woman is supposed to feel pain as punishment for Eve's sin (not Adam's), the sin of begin a woman (one of the Church's two greatest sins). He suggests that this is why the minds of the righteous are so often filled by wicked women (and evil Jews)!
Perhaps the women in the article Women may shun mass but church won't listen believe the Church is capable of reform. I remember Mikhail Gorbachev thinking the same thing about the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
Pam, I feel you may be dragooning Jennifer into a role she hasn't sought, citing her as evidence to Justin of 'catholics organising outside the Church'. I think Clive is nearer the mark as she believes/?hopes her church is capable of reform but knows it will take something of a seismic shock, or a whole series of them, before we reach that point.
As a (by now somewhat a la carte) Catholic myself, I can admire Jennifer's stand while disagreeing with her use of the Eucharist as a weapon or lever. I think she's also confusing her dissatisfaction with her local parish priests in West Cork, the evidence of very poor handling of clerical child abuse cases across Ireland over the past half century or more, and the (sometimes fumbling) attempts by Benedict and other religious leaders to maintain a place for religion & reason as a "creative minority" in the public square of what must be a secular society.
Good luck to Jennifer, but I think she may be a little naive in her article in today's Irish Times : "My hope is that empty pews on September 26th will move the hearts and minds of those in charge, that change will happen, and that the Church will emerge invigorated by the equality of all."
But then naiveté and hope are the dominant notes of the Acts of the Apostles and much of the New Testament two millennia ago.
Permalink Reply by Hugh on September 17, 2010 at 19:53
The Papal Visit 2010 – YouGov finds out what people think about Catholicism and Pope Benedict XVI’s UK visit.
Key Findings
• 29% actively oppose the Papal visit
• 87% think that the Catholic Church has been permanently damaged by the child abuse scandals
• 71% of British Catholics believe that contraception should be ‘used more often’ to avoid unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases
• 41% of Catholics believe we should ‘celebrate all loving [consenting adult] relationships, whether gay or straight’
• 65% believe that Catholic priests should be allowed to marry
Support for the Papal visit fairly lukewarm
A nationally representative poll of 2,108 people found that 49% of the population say that they neither support nor oppose the Pope ’s UK-wide itinerary, 29% actively oppose it, 17% support the visit.
Public divided over whether state funding of Pope’s visit is appropriate
47% of British public think it is an appropriate use of taxpayers’ money, a close 44% consider it inappropriate.
Poll of British Catholics finds many disagree with conservative Catholic teachings
71% of British Catholics believe that contraception should be ‘used more often’ to avoid unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. 23% think it is ‘the couple’s choice’, while 4% say artificial contraception is ‘wrong’ and should not be used.
41% of Catholics believe we should ‘celebrate all loving [consenting adult] relationships, whether gay or straight’ while 11% of Catholics consider homosexual acts to be ‘morally wrong'.
65% believe that Catholic priests should be allowed to marry, but 27% think they should remain celibate.
The public is scathing about the Church’s responses to the child abuse scandal
87% think that the Catholic Church has been permanently damaged by the scandals. 65% believe that the Vatican did try and cover up abuse cases and has been rightly criticised for doing so.18% of British Catholics consider the criticism to be unjustified.
Public feels the Church is ‘pushed to the sidelines’ in modern Britain
68% of the public believe that Christianity has been ‘pushed to the sidelines’ in modern Britain, as 9% of parents selected ‘religion of the school’ as one of a list of important factors to consider when choosing a school for their children. However, this may just be symptomatic of a shifting of understanding of what it means to be ‘religious’. 7% of the population think you need to attend religious services to be ‘religious’ while 78% don’t think that attendance is necessary.
Why? Well, to start with the state and organisation of which he is head has been responsible for: opposing the distribution of condoms and so increasing large families in poor countries and the spread of Aids; promoting segregated education; denying abortion to even the most vulnerable women; opposing equal rights for lesbians, gay, bisexual and transgender people; and failing to address the many cases of abuse of children within its own organisation.
Re. this State visit: the man's hypocrisy is breathtaking. It is not that this German religious leader was a former (conscripted) member of Hitler Youth. It is that he is the leader of a religion that, over hundreds of years, laid the groundwork for anti-Semitism. Which culminated in the Holocaust. The comparisons of "aggressive" atheism with Nazism are odious and invidious.
Herr Ratzinger would do better to return to the Vatican, that non-State, to sort out the cover-up of the most appalling conduct by officers of his own organisation, around the world, and which activity is seriously criminal in all countries, rather than lecturing this country about the ills that he sees here.
Oh, Clive! You should have been at this morning's Interfaith meeting. You could have enlightened the Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks. He's so ignorant about Herr Ratzinger's hypocrisy that he thinks the Pope's the beesknees. He seems to be equally ignorant about anti-Semitism and the Holocaust. He not only embraced Benedict this morning as an old friend but on Wednesday's Today programme wasted several valuable minutes of airtime saying how appropriate it is that today's meeting with Benny (a nice Jewish boy) comes a few hours before the start of Rosh Hashanah, the Feast of Atonement/At-one-ment/Forgiveness (Jonathan's explanation). And the Office of the Chief Rabbi website, I seem to recall, had his even more fulsome praise when Benedict visited Israel last year.
But then The Chief Rabbi has said sharper things about "aggressive atheism" and Europe's loss of her roots than our Benny has ever dreamt of.
Well, OAE, if all you say is true then the Catholic Church must be even closer to a merger with Judaism than Anglicanism! As a plague-on-all-your-houses fellow, I nonetheless recognize a great deal of wisdom in the Bible:
In respect of Herr Ratzinger, his comments about the state of the UK and his Pedophile Priests, I think the relevant quote is Mathew 7:3: Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
We'll be protesting the Pope.
= "We'll be witnessing for the Pope." Well that's nice to know.
Good that YouGov and HOL are both broad churches.
I guess what we saw today was just an amalgam of the Twickenham-Lambeth-Westminster Bubble.
On the YouGov Poll: I thoroughly agree with all the main findings, but just like to add that it's time the Catholic Church had a good foundation of women priests; otherwise how will we ever get any women bishops, archbishops, cardinals, popes ?
"permanently damaged" ?? I thought all Christians believed that happened after Adam's Fall, no?