to me, despite all the philosophical theological arguments there are really two great 'parties' in our church[RC] and i think history will show this. Group one: the church is not a democracy, but more a monarchy. Yes lay persons have their place but it is clearly secondary to to those who have special callings[the clergy]. What the clergy say is substantially of greater weight than the laity. Group two: Yes their are different 'offices' in the church, but the laity opinion is just as weighty as clerical pronouncements. in other words all members of the church stand on their behavior as christians, and no office elevates one to greater status than another.

now don't misunderstand me. take the pope for example. he is 'elected'[ a bit democratic i might say, shouldn't a finger come down from heaven and point out the best candidate?] i hope on the basis of his holiness, his learning, his kindness etc, therefore his views are most important, but because of these good traits his bad behavior drives him either further from god.

I really don't have much sympathy with protestants on theorogy, but i do on their actions. doesn't the old protestant sibolith of the priesthood of all believers have merit? we all stand equal before god---the pope and the guy 'under the bridge". oh, i know we catholics say we believe this, but do we practice it.

just an example, and i know anectotes are not evidence. During the height of the priest abuse scandal our church held a forum on the issue. the DA was there and others including our social justice director. when the latter made the point that abusers should be reported to the DA, the chancellor rose and propunded "you can't do this--remember these are priests!! by the way the social justice director was fired by the bishop and the priest was reprimanded!

i really haven't worded this well, but i tried . my moto: the church is not democracy, not a monarchy, but a meritocracy. alice.

let me also say, i am catholic and will never leave MY church.