Many Catholics feel disappointed by the way in which certain issues are being dealt with in the RC Church. The sense of frustration that many people feel when the institutional church can;
· Laicise, dismiss or censure those who ‘DO’ call for dialogue e.g. Fr Roy Bourgeois, Fr Bill Rowe, Frs Gerry Maloney & Tony Flannery, Bishop William Morris, Fr Brian D’Arcy C.P. Fr Owen Sullivan OFM Cap, Fr Peter Kennedy (St Mary’s in Exile) and all those listed in Matthew Fox’s book ‘The Pope’s War.’
· Impose a translation of the missal without any consultation after appointing a secretive commission ‘Vox Clara’ to finish off the job.
· Put all religious sisters in the U.S. under Papal scrutiny without consultation
· Equate discussion with dissent. Looking at the past, take for example the doctrine of ‘reception’ of church teaching e.g. humane Vitae, or the principle of Vox Populi vox Dei – so important in the Arian controversy – this would now be seen as dissent ! ! !
· Replace the authority of, implementation of and interpretation of an Ecumenical Council (Vatican II) with that of the opinion of the Bishop of Rome !
· Cover up and delay dealing with child abuse crises and even a senior Cardinal (Sodano) referring to the crisis as ‘idle chatter’
Peter’s Pence generated $82.5 million dollars in 2009. Only ‘Cor Unum’ published details of their $8.6 million allocation from Peter’s Pence, approx. 10.5 per cent of the $82.5 million. The Vatican has not released figures on how it spent the rest of Peter’s Pence in 2009. (c.f. Render Unto Rome : Jason Berry pg 37).
Jesus had little time for those who put the institution before the spirit as in the 23rd chapter of Matthew’s Gospel. Did Jesus dialogue with the representatives of the institution (Pharisees) or did he simply recognise hypocrisy for what it is ? After all, the institution crucified our Saviour.
Is Saying No to Peters Pence really so out of proportion, in the light of the Vatican’s implementation of it’s ungenerous and limiting policies in the last decades?