It is opportune we recognise the limits of our knowledge when dealing with people. It is pride to assume that because we are an authority, we must provide an answer to questions beyond our competence.
Last week, I argued that being in a position of authority does not mean that everything we do and say is correct. Throughout history, the …
As Church authority, we are not gods, and we should not make ourselves one.
It is unfair to accuse the Church of male chauvinism for excluding women’s ordination. One is guilty of discrimination or marginalisation for something one caused, something caused by one’s ancestors, and something within one’s power to change but is unwilling to do so.
Last week, I discussed the differences between synod and synodality. Today, I explore if the concept of the synod of bishops neatly fits into the …
Last week, I noted that synodality is the way all members of Christ faithful participate in the mission of the Church and are co-responsible for …
An attempt to democratise the Church’s governance structure is a conundrum that can only lead to a democratised Church which does not fit properly into the modern concept of democracy and one which deviates from the governance structure willed by Christ.
The major difference between the governance structure of the Church and democratic institutions is the source of authority.
Co-responsibility demands a change in mindset especially concerning the role of lay people in the Church. They should not be regarded as “collaborators” of the clergy, but, rather, as people who are really “co-responsible” for the Church’s being and acting.
Do we collaborate with the laity in the mission, or is our relationship with them exploitative?
