# Catholics, is it time for a new Ecumenical Council **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 26, 2016, 6:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholics-is-it-time-for-a-new-ecumenical-council/775637 "2016-12-26T06:37:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Some\_Call\_Me.Tim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@Some\_Call\_Me.Tim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Some_Call_Me.Tim)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2016, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholics-is-it-time-for-a-new-ecumenical-council/775637/21 "2016-12-29T20:03:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > From [Wikipedia:](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Benedict_XVI) > > The reference you made seems to imply something else. I’m not t-bonham, but how does that contradict what he said? The reference you provided confirms that he was indeed a member of the Hitler Youth. The additional context you mention is useful, membership was a formal legal requirement, and the evidence that he joined should be considered in that context. I would add, however, that the wikipedia article on Hitler Youth mentions that in spite of that requirement, 10-20% of young German males at the time avoided joining in spite of the possible legal consequences. The fact that he wasn’t among them should _also_ be considered as part of the context. The unsupported claim by his own brother that his membership was unenthusiastic is not worth much as evidence. ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2016, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholics-is-it-time-for-a-new-ecumenical-council/775637/22 "2016-12-29T20:56:36Z")
> [@John\_Lazarus](#): > > The issue of married priests in the Latin rite is a matter of discipline, not doctrine – married priests are common in the Eastern sui iuris Churches, as in the Orthodox Churches. There is no Church dogma against married clergy, except that the priest must have been married before ordination. And that “except” is again not dogma but a rule - it’s not a matter of faith. > [@Some\_Call\_Me.Tim](#): > > I’m not t-bonham, but how does that contradict what he said? The reference you provided confirms that he was indeed a member of the Hitler Youth. t-bonham didn’t merely state that Benny belonged to the Hitler Youth at one point, but stated it in a way that called Benny a Nazi without actually having the cojones to use the word. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2017, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholics-is-it-time-for-a-new-ecumenical-council/775637/23 "2017-01-03T06:36:41Z")
> [@FlikTheBlue](#): > > Catholics, at least in the USA, are no longer a culturally homogeneous minority group like they were in the 1800s . . . Basically, I think that at least in the USA, there are other more powerful cultural forces at play that shape people’s views more than what the Pope says. As such, I think a Vatican III would be useless. Useless as far as the US is concerned, possibly. But 95% of the world’s Catholics are in countries other than the US, and the attention of the present pope is firmly on Catholics in the global south - about 60% of all Catholics, and rising fast - the question of how a Council would play out in the US is probably not the main consideration. ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [January 3, 2017, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholics-is-it-time-for-a-new-ecumenical-council/775637/24 "2017-01-03T16:24:07Z")
> [@jacobson](#): > > I voluenteer in a Nursing Home and one non-Catholic lady told me the priest that says the Catholic mass just said that anyone who believed in the true presence could recieve Communion so she does. If that is a new rule i had never heard of it from any of my RC friends or relatives. That’s the priest’s rule, not the RCC’s. Could he get in trouble for encouraging that? Maybe, if somone complains about him to his Bishop. ---
**Author:** ![BlueMit11](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7feea3/32.png) [@BlueMit11](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BlueMit11)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholics-is-it-time-for-a-new-ecumenical-council/775637/25 "2017-01-12T03:56:34Z")
None of the documents of the Second Vatican Council state that the priest is to face toward the people. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholics-is-it-time-for-a-new-ecumenical-council/775637/26 "2017-01-12T04:15:15Z")
> [@FriarTed](#): > > That’s the priest’s rule, not the RCC’s. Could he get in trouble for encouraging that? Maybe, if somone complains about him to his Bishop. The “should be a Catholic” rule is not inflexible. In particular, it may be appropriate to give communion to other Christians who share a faith in the real presence, if they’re not in a position to avail of the eucharistic ministry of their own denomination. And of course a nursing home is precisely the kind of place where you might find people with a limited ability to go to other churches. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2017, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholics-is-it-time-for-a-new-ecumenical-council/775637/27 "2017-01-12T05:32:35Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > The fundamental doctrines of the Church are either true or not. They aren’t up for negotiation. > > If they’re true, “history” passing us by is of no consequence. If they’re not, a council to revamp them is pointless. Pointless? If they’re not true, a council to revamp them to be in line with what\* is\* true seems like it would be important. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2017, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholics-is-it-time-for-a-new-ecumenical-council/775637/28 "2017-01-13T03:02:28Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > The fundamental doctrines of the Church are either true or not. They aren’t up for negotiation. > > If they’re true, “history” passing us by is of no consequence. If they’re not, a council to revamp them is pointless. Since just about exactly zero of what emerged from Vatican II was actually doctrinal, I suggest you learn the difference between scriptural, doctrinal, preferred practice, and common practice. Then come back and tell the class what you’ve learned. We’ll wait here. But not for Eternity. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/catholics-is-it-time-for-a-new-ecumenical-council/775637.md?page=1)