As most people know, due to advances in the field of science, some of the doctrine, teachings and practices of the Roman Catholic Church, are outdated and obsolete.
Shouldn't the Roman Catholic Church revise its practices, to accommodate science, and still retain a religious nature. For example, stories like Adam and Eve, and most likely, untrue. The RCC shouldn't still teach this story, or any others that most obviously, untrue.
Without these unnecessary stories, the Roman Catholic Church, or any other religion that decides to revise its practices, can be more "down to earth" with its people, and more believable.
truth can not be organized without invalidating it.
with so much shown to be false, i dint understand why they dint just throw it all out and disband the religion, its almost like they like monkey and kiddie fiddling.
The Bible and what it contains is the basis for the Christian Church. Who are you to say what is true and what is not in the Bible? Science isn't doing such a bang up job. They just can't seem to find that "missing link". Maybe because there is none.
They change their universe theories so often I have a hard time keeping up with it.
You say `some` of the practices but just what exactly? as for changing the teachings that have come down from the apostles these cannot ever be altered.I fail to see what advantage it would be to yourself or others by eradicating the story of Adam and Eve, finally the church has the divine power to update its doctrines according to the times but this does not mean that it will do so to accommodate modernism or atheism.
God bless.
The Roman Catholic Church HAS changed many of its practices. They revised many things during the second Vatican Council, 1962-1965. One of the things that changed was that the early parts of Genesis were recognized as being metaphorical.
I am not Catholic and will not give my opinion on that particular religion. Yet your question made me think of a Bible scripture.
(2 Timothy 4:3-4) 3?For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the healthful teaching, but, in accord with their own desires, they will accumulate teachers for themselves to have their ears tickled; 4?and they will turn their ears away from the truth, whereas they will be turned aside to false stories.
Not saying that science is wrong, I am a highly scientific person. But I am saying that science, history, even archeology, do not contradict what is the Bible says. I could mention many things where they go hand in hand. And so far the majority, if not all, of the claims to disprove the Bible as true have led to dead ends. We have to be careful to not want to change things to our liking as if worshiping God should be as we say and not as he expects. Going into a religion because it says things we like even though it may be contrary to what the Bible says is pointless.
Here is a warning to that effect for all of us:
(James 4:4) 4?Adulteresses, do YOU not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God.
===========================
If you would like to know more about this and other themes, next time Jehovah's Witness come to your door, ask them for a free Bible study at your convenience. You will never regret all the knowledge you will acquire and remember that what you do with that knowledge is your choice.
Tell that to the members of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.
NOTE: Not to be confused with the "Christian science" bunk
The depiction of the fall of man in Genesis is central to Catholic theology and must be true in order for Catholicism to be...It can't just be dropped...Especially since the truths of it are theological truths using "most likely figurative language" to quote the Magisterium.
I attended a Catholic school in the 60's and was taught that parts of Genesis were not literally true. We were also taught that for the answers of many questions we should turn to scientists.
Unfortunately some people - fundamentalists and some atheists - cannot cope with anything which is neither 'true' nor 'untrue'. Why do you think people still read the Greek myths? No one takes them literally, but they have much to say about human psychology. When I was very young I was told the story of Saint George and the dragon. Of course it never happened - we all knew that! But this fable shows how many Englishmen through the ages have regarded their country.
I am no longer a Catholic; I have serious disagreements with the church. But I have to say that they have changed in the face of science.
@ Brian - No. The RCC should not change teachings to "accommodate" science. What next? change to accommodate groups? Or individuals? GOD's teachings are firm, not to be swayed like dust in the wind. RCC deals with matters of faith and morals, not science and as such, there is no need to bend to what science believes.
Revisions in the Roman Catholic Church?
