In the U.S. Catholic church, if there's a battle between the nuns and the bishops,

the nuns will win. The bishops may win a battle or two but the nuns -- and the ordinary priests who side with them -- will win the war.

Why? Because the majority of lay Catholics are WOMEN who are increasingly disgusted by the behavior of the Bishops -- and will identify with the nuns.

They are speaking with the word of God; nuns are not.

The "ism" is nothing without the actual human beings.

Catholic doctrine puts the individual human conscience at the forefront. The Holy Spirit speaks to ALL Catholics, not just the hierarchy.

The Pope's word is the Word of God.

This is the kind of stuff that got Martin Luther in trouble with the church, and why Protestantism formed in the first place.

Today's Catholic church is full of millions of unconscious Protestants.

The Pope's word is NOT the Word of God. I can't believe you're a Catholic. You're just someone parroting the fundie view of Catholics.

and I'm well aware that rank-and-file Catholics are not priests, as all Protestants are. Priests are the only ones who are allowed to understand God's will; ordinary members cannot. Hence, what the rank-and-file members say about Catholic doctrine is irrelevant, since only Catholic priests are to interprest the will of god. And in a hierarchy such as the Catholic Church's that means the Pope decides what the will of God is.

a bunch of ignorant crap.

I don't think you understand the theology behind Catholicism.

What is your background?

It was directed at the provis99. (It was a direct response to his/her last post.)

If you insist, I also went to a Catholic university. My husband as his liscenciate in Theology and Philosophy from the Angelicum in Rome. Not my degree, of course, but Catholic theology is not something I'm unfamiliar with. Hence my remark that provis99 doesn't know what he/she is talking about.

operate in closer dedication to the tenets of the ministry of Jesus than that tradition's hierarchy.

A very strong case, IMO.

Infallible popes have been demonstrated to be anything but. Truth can howl from the throats of people hardly anyone has ever heard of.

intrigue in the history of the papacy which completely belies any Godliness. (Fascinating to study, too!)

Agree.

Hollywood ought to be at work with its brightest talents to make a terrific film on this subject.

here is a RCC source that might help your understanding: http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

i'm not saying i agree with church teachings, just that you may get your points across better if you knew the theology.

you sound like some fire and brimstone Calvinist preacher during the reformation.

No, I take that back - they probably had a better grasp of Catholic theology.

Keep reading below; it's educational.

In regard to statements on faith and morals, the pope is infallible when speaking ex cathedra. The laity have absolutely no voice in the formation of Catholic doctrine. This is reserved solely to the bishops in unity with Rome, i.e., the pope. It is an absolute hierarchy with the pope as its unquestionable head. The most important issue that resulted during Vatican II was that of the collegiality of the bishops and that they shared that power with the pope. Both Paul VI and John Paul II made short shift of that notion and reasserted their absolute control of doctrinal issues such as in the cases of clerical celibacy and contraceptive birth control.

Let me provide a little history of what was know of the Papal Birth Control Commission that had been formed by Pope John XXIII. This commission which consisted of bishops, priests and laity after extensive investigation of the issue of contraceptive birth control issued their report to the Vatican in which the overwhelming majority of bishops on the commission recommended that the church no longer oppose contraceptive practices. The priests and laity were not allowed to vote on the recommendation, but totally supported it with the exception of two priests who had only recently been appointed to the commission along with the future Pope John Paul II who boycotted the final session. He was busy secretly collaborating with Paul in writing the encyclical that would restate the church's condemnation and totally ignore the commissions findings.

Earlier when the issue, along with mandatory celibacy, was breached by several bishops during Vatican II, Pope Paul VI, who had succeeded John XXIII ordered that no further discussion be allowed since these subjects were being investigated by the Vatican. Pope Paul VI totally ignored their recommendation and reasserted the church's condemnation of contraception. The members of the commission, especially the laity, were in shock and felt that they had been betrayed. The Vatican went to the extent that they forbid the members of the commission from revealing their recommendations and swore them to secrecy, however, several members refused to be silenced and revealed the commissions findings. It is fortunate for the Vatican and their bishops that the average Catholic is totally ignorate of what has transpired in the secrecy of the Vatican.

both times, several hundred years ago.

In no other situation has a Pope claimed a statement or teaching to be infallible.

the RCC teaches that their God works through the pope - but not that the pope is their God's mouthpiece

882
The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, "is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful."402 "For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered."403


883
"The college or body of bishops has no authority unless united with the Roman Pontiff, Peter's successor, as its head." As such, this college has "supreme and full authority over the universal Church; but this power cannot be exercised without the agreement of the Roman Pontiff."404

the pope is God's voice. the pope is head of the church, has all authority, and can invoke infallibility, but if a pope says God is actually speaking to him, i think there would be some eyebrows raised....

That's not in accord with the theology.

Practiced Catholics have been around since the beginning of Christianity. The early theologians referred to them when they urged Catholics to follow the “sensus fidelium,” or the feelings, as we might say, of the faithful believers. These are the Catholics who provide a reliable sense of what the Church teaches in the way they pray and he way the live.

Practiced Catholics offer a rule of thumb for belief according to the venerable insight that, if you want to know what the Church teaches or what is right, ask what the “sanior et major pars fidelium” believes or does. That means it is always safe to follow the path of the “larger and healthier portion of believers.” Had the Church handed the problem of sex abuse over to a group of practiced Catholics, it would have been resolved many years ago.

The Church prides itself in its “munera” or “gifts.” One of these is given only to practiced Catholics, the Gift of Reception. By this special guidance of the Spirit no teaching can be considered Catholic unless it is received by that same healthy majority of the faithful.

Yet it is practiced Catholics who are often criticized, ignored, told how to vote, or refused permission to have their speakers on Church property. These are the Catholics to whom the hierarchy should pay more attention. There is an old saying that we should “feel with the Church.” The only way you can find that out is by asking these abused and neglected but triumphantly faithful Catholics what they feel about the Church and what is going on in it these days.

http://ncronline.org/blogs/bulletins-human-side/practiced-catholics

What more could they do? Vote the Bishops out?

There is a long slide in respect for the Bishops and leadership within the Catholic Church. (And pwnmom is correct when she states that the Catholic Church is not comprised solely of the leadership. All of us lay people are a part of the church.)

I am completely frustrated with the Vatican leadership and the out of touch local Bishops in NYC. (I am a part of the Brooklyn/Queens diocese, and Bishop DiMarzio and the people in his support system are a good example of people who are looking at the bottom line more so than the overall good of the spiritual health of the Church as a whole.)

It's frustrating, and I agree that many will support the nuns and those working on the front lines to eradicate poverty. I am blessed to be a part of a very liberal community (including church community) which I love and respect. People here are frustrated. We are just starting to think about how we can affect change within our parish, diocese and the Church as a whole.

not necessarily all of how you get there.

I do think the RCC needs a Vatican III - which sure as heck won't happen with Ratzinger as pope. And I think if it doesn't happen, they may get another reformation instead.

The people in the pews are the church - putting aside the titles and fancy vestments. Won't be much of a flock for those very misguided and sometimes downright evil shepherds if they don't start leading according to Jesus' teachings and not the dictates of imperial Rome.

I think the folks in the pews have had a more rounded impression of the nuns and parish priests - some amazing people, some rotten people, but mostly people like the rest. Few have much contact with bishops on up - and especially in our democratic society, the idea of top-down only organization rankles.

argument with nuns. That is if he can find one.