Pope Benedict and the Mystery of Two Worlds

If Chopra's going to wax eloquent about Papal infalability then he should do his homework. Really Deepak give it a shake, you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to Church doctrine. Stick to what you do know a lot about, bilking the disaffected 'seekers' in Beverly Hills for 'services' of a 'spiritual' nature. I jest maybe it's malibu or wherever. You know, the oil running down my forehead treatment.
There's no doubt Deepak's a bright guy, one who just may wake up on the 'other side' cleaning urinals.

It's too bad Chopra doesn't understand the idea of infallibility. The pope is only infallible in cases of faith and morals, and only when he declares that he is speaking "ex cathedra." Which has only happened twice. With that being said, his entire analysis of the Church falls a part...

Perhaps, the fact that Mr Chopra's facts were not checked for errors and falsehoods, (Papal Infallibility)-say's more about The Washington Post than about Mr Chopra. Naturally, there is a good possibility the Mr Chopra has a bias against the Catholic Church, as he must against every other Christian institution. Hundus in India are also killing Christians of any denomination just as the Muslums are likewise doing.

If there is anyone who thinks the Catholic church rightfully rules Christendom through a chain of popes going back to Jesus and Peter, you might want to read about Pope Formosus. Pope Stephen VI had his corpse disinterred, clad in papal vestments, and seated on a throne to face charges. The verdict was that the deceased had been unworthy of the pontificate. All his measures and acts were annulled, and the orders conferred by him were declared invalid. The papal vestments were torn from his body, the three fingers from his right hand that he had used in consecrations were cut off and the corpse was dragged through the streets of Rome and thrown into the Tiber river. Never heard that before? -- check it out for yourself, even in sources published by the Vatican.

Dear Dr Chopra

You wrote: "the Church has become too tainted by scandal to offer answers that might satisfy a new generation of seekers."

Any seeker who chooses to define the Catholic Church strictly based on the scandal of sex abuse by a few priests, then for sure they are going to have to look to other Churches or religions or spiritual path for the right answers. I must admit that I am yet to be convinced about that perfect Church or religion or spiritual path which is not tainted by limitations of human nature in its practice.

The Catholic Church is two thousand years old, has 1.2 billion followers worldwide to date and has literally thousands and thousands of priests who have NOT been involved in the sex scandal.

The Catholic Church is truly universal and has an incredible capacity to adapt to the needs of the society. Much like the Hindu tradition, there are different spiritual paths to suit different personalities and spiritual levels to be found within the Catholic Church, in the Christian context, for anyone who cares to seek seriously.

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

Dear Dr Chopra

As a Catholic I have not given much thought to the concept of Papal Infallibility. I'm able to practice my Christian faith in full in the context of the Catholic Church, and truly appreciate being a Catholic and the universal nature of the Church, without giving thought to such matters.

I'm fully aware of the mistakes (some being true atrocities) made by the Catholic Church in its two thousand year history without denying the great good it has done and the spiritual wealth it has accumulated in that time as a result of the selfless work of thousands and thousands of Catholics. It is my fervent hope and prayer and conviction that the Catholic Church will renew itself in order to meet the spiritual needs of its followers, as it has done time and again it its long history.

Since some bloggers expressed the view that you should have informed yourself a little more about Papal Infallibility here a bit more information:

From the Catholic Encyclopaedia:

The Vatican Council has defined as "a divinely revealed dogma" that "the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra -- that is, when in the exercise of his office as pastor and teacher of all Christians he defines, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, a doctrine of faith or morals to be held by the whole Church -- is, by reason of the Divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, possessed of that infallibility with which the Divine Redeemer wished His Church to be endowed in defining doctrines of faith and morals; and consequently that such definitions of the Roman Pontiff are irreformable of their own nature (ex sese) and not by reason of the Church's consent" (Densinger no. 1839 -- old no. 1680). For the correct understanding of this definition it is to be noted that:

· what is claimed for the pope is infallibility merely, not impeccability or inspiration (see above under I).

· the infallibility claimed for the pope is the same in its nature, scope, and extent as that which the Church as a whole possesses; his ex cathedra teaching does not have to be ratified by the Church's in order to be infallible.

· infallibility is not attributed to every doctrinal act of the pope, but only to his ex cathedra teaching; and the conditions required for ex cathedra teaching are mentioned in the Vatican decree:

o The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians, not merely in his private capacity as a theologian, preacher or allocutionist, nor in his capacity as a temporal prince or as a mere ordinary of the Diocese of Rome. It must be clear that he speaks as spiritual head of the Church universal.

o Then it is only when, in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible (see below, IV).

o Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense (see D size=-2>EFINITION). These are well-recognized formulas by means of which the defining intention may be manifested.

o Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church. To demand internal assent from all the faithful to his teaching under pain of incurring spiritual shipwreck (naufragium fidei) according to the expression used by Pius IX in defining the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin. Theoretically, this intention might be made sufficiently clear in a papal decision which is addressed only to a particular Church; but in present day conditions, when it is so easy to communicate with the most distant parts of the earth and to secure a literally universal promulgation of papal acts, the presumption is that unless the pope formally addresses the whole Church in the recognized official way, he does not intend his doctrinal teaching to be held by all the faithful as ex cathedra and infallible.

It should be observed in conclusion that papal infallibility is a personal and incommunicable charisma, which is not shared by any pontifical tribunal. It was promised directly to Peter, and to each of Peter's successors in the primacy, but not as a prerogative the exercise of which could be delegated to others. Hence doctrinal decisions or instructions issued by the Roman congregations, even when approved by the pope in the ordinary way, have no claim to be considered infallible.

To be infallible they must be issued by the pope himself in his own name according to the conditions already mentioned as requisite for ex cathedra teaching...

Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia

unable to post, as usual.

I think Dr. Chopra does address the issue of the 'sanctity' of Church doctrines, at least in passing.

Papal Infallibility holds the same dubious distinction as any of the many declared Church doctrines, whether the doctrine in question pertains to the Resurrection, the Holy Trinity, the divinity of Jesus, the Immaculate Conception, or the Assumption of Mary bodily into heaven - to name a few of the better known articles of Church dogma.

These various declared infallible truths are the foundation of both Catholicism and Protestantism, in spite of the disagreement on what doctrines are literally true, and what may be metaphorically or symbolically true.

For example, all Christians accept the literal truth of the Resurrection as being the essential foundation of Christian beliefs, but other doctrines are not so literally accepted by Protestants. If, in fact, you do not accept the Resurrection as literally true, it is doubtful that you would be considered a Christian, in the nominal sense of the word - even so, these days certain elements within Christianity today disagree - e.g. Dominic Crossan, et al support the symbolic value of doctrinal declarations while doubting of veracity of their literal occurance in the real world.

But perhaps this all misses the point. As with any beaurocracy (see Max Weber) the Church and it's hierarchy become self-sustaining entities that seem to forego essential spirituality in favor of maintaining traditional structures and functions.

Thus, the whole point of religion as a system and methodology of spiritual development for individuals is largely lost through the rigidity of organizational considerations, including the over-stated importance of the clergy and the Pope himself.

The trappings of religion have thus supplanted the true function - and bouyed up by now-questionable doctrines that have little or no basis in fact or that even remotely comport with what we now know about the material world these days - and what we don't know is not likely to be defined by either the Pope or a multitude of Church doctrines based on primitive tendencies toward superstition and the supernatural - and far more suited to the 'mysterious' world of past centuries.

True spirituality promises to reveal a living reality that is not necessarily compatible with that which has been set in stone by the Catholic Church.

Aurora: "I greatly admire people who can see beyond fixed beliefs and dogma, religious or otherwise. People who can question themselves openly and allow themselves to grow instead of attacking as soon as someone questions their beliefs.

But I do understand and love the people who are holding tightly to their known world, no matter how contradicting and painful it becomes. We all do that at times. Some day they will let go and discover a larger, more free perspective."
~~~~~~~~~~

All faiths are "contradicting and painful" regardless what belief it is, otherwise we would be talking about perfection.....which in this world we know does not exist.

I greatly admire people who can see beyond fixed beliefs and dogma, religious or otherwise. People who can question themselves openly and allow themselves to grow instead of attacking as soon as someone questions their beliefs.

But I do understand and love the people who are holding tightly to their known world, no matter how contradicting and painful it becomes. We all do that at times. Some day they will let go and discover a larger, more free perspective.

As much as I appreciate Mr. Chopra's attempt to understand the dichotomy that is the spirit and the flesh, it has nothing to do with Pope Benedict XI. This article was not written with even an elementary understanding of what the Papacy is. The Pope is not infallible. Everything the Pontiff says is not infallible. In fact, there are only a very few infallible statements that have ever been made by the over 400 Successors to St. Peter in the Catholic Church's history. I'm sure that Mr. Chopra is very respected in the field of spirituality, but this entire article had nothing to do with Pope Benedict XI and everything to do with Mr. Chopra's own comments about the pedophilia priest scandal on the Larry King show. Mr Chopra wrote more about himself, and very little about the Pope, and what was written about the Pope was ill-informed. I would think such a high profile writer would be held to a much higher standard.

After reading some of these comments I am curious to know if there is any divine principle or belief like "papal infallibility" in Catholocism?

The Pope is not infallible unless it's a matter of faith. That means that other than theological pronouncements, Catholics are free to disregard the church's strictures. Which they apparently already do to a large extent. Just as well, since the Church has a pretty bad track record.

I am a private language instructor who teaches business leaders and politicians in Copenhagen. On occasion I have had the good fortune to teach scholars involved in psychological research. There stands out in my mind one great researcher here who spent hundreds of hours in post doctoral work studying pedofiles ... independent of the state. What she discovered was that (after looking at the official prison records), the pedofile would be saying how that through therapy they were making good progress and that they had lost their interest in sex with children. What this psychologist found out independently was that these individuals were fantastic liers and that they couldn't wait to get out of prison and repeat acts which were so depraved that she frequently felt nausea. Like many social scientists before her she stated that it was a gross understatement to say that the cure rate is low. Her conclusion. "When the crime is pedofilia, put the offender in jail and throw away the key !" More to the point, the Catholic Church must own up to the fact that about 25% of their priests are homosexuals (and some are indeed pedofiles)! PERMITTING PRIESTS TO BE MARRIED MAY NOT BE THE WHOLE ANSWER TO THE CHURCH's DILEMMA, BUT IT WOULD GO A LONG WAY TO CONVINCE THE WORLD THAT PROTECTING CHILDREN IS BECOMING A TOP PRIORITY. Not far behind pedofilia as one of the sickest perversions, the celibate priesthood stands out as something much worse that an innocent anachronism. Is it really too much to ask the Catholic Church to clean up its act (Won't it be cheaper than continually coughing up billions of dollars to victims of pedofilia) ?

America was ready for Hindu metaphysics ...pulled those bill folds out and 'voila'!
It's all about the money. The kingdom of Deepak.
Serpentine...oily. It's everywhere though I agree. I worked on the professional staff of a Catholic treatment centre that 'encouraged' closeted Priests to head downtown on the week-end and give the whole carnival a try. I wasn't Catholic at the time and really had a dificult time figuring out how the executive director of the institute could rationalize what was going on. I later learned that Jesuits are trained specifically to ratonalize anything. I ended up having a 'breakdown'. As far as i know the 'Jesuit' continues to garner acclaim for his forward thinking on matters of faith and buggery.
Imagine whats the church going to to with all thses 'lavender' seminaries? It's a mess, but not one that God's Rottweiller isn't up to.

Mr. Chopra,

You should not be opining on Catholicism as you do not know it.

Example: Your gross mis-representation of "Infallibility" was an elementary error and beyond on the pale.

Mr. Chopra, predicate your opinions on correct facts and not distortions least you (intentionally?) mis-lead your readers especially non- Catholic readers.

Shame, Mr. Chopra.

The Catholic Church has nothing to do with The Creator, Mother Nature, the Great Intelligence, or a spiritual concept of God. It is the oldest and most successful corporate cult in human history. It maintains its power and vast wealth by political intrigue, tax free status, pillaging primitive indigenous peoples, and brainwashing its flock at a very early age with fear and guilt. It is an awful fraud. The Pope needs a new outfit; that 12 century garb doesn’t scare anybody any more.

Just one question: since when is Deepak Chopra's opinion relevant? He's an entrepreneur and a hired talking head, not a spiritual leader. When I need to find a literary agent or a great hotel suite in Manhattan, I'll ask Chopra. When I have questions about how to go on book signing tours, he's the man. Otherwise, let's get the perspective of someone with expertise and wisdom.

It's most unfortunate that you are right for when a civilisation looses its references to moral values and transcendental potential vectors,the end is near . As Valery wrote "we ,civilisation knows that we are mortal".
Nobody's in a hurry , but no one has displayed a credible alternative yet!

Worth repeating:

The Crises (pl) in the contemporary Catholic Church:

1. The inappropriate conduct of many priests, the emotional stress on the victims and the resultant billion dollars in lawsuits.

2. The lack of talent in the priesthood.

3. The lack of Vatican response to the historic Jesus movement.

4. The Church's continuing cling to original sin and the resulting subsets of crazy ideas like limbo.

5. The denial of priesthood to women.

6. The restriction of priesthood to single men (unless you are former Episcopalian priests),

7. And the continued chain of Vatican "leadership" by old European white men.

The Pope is not always infallible. He speaks with infallibility only under a very special set of circumstances, which has only happened three times in the history of the Catholic Church, all regarding the nature of the Virgin Mary.

"Catholicism was instrumental in the abuse of native American peoples and stood by during the era of slavery without protest ..."

The same can be said of protestants or jews - liberal or conservative...exploited the frontier and then all stood by for slavery.

However, it was Christian leadership with in the abolitionists movement that also helped bring down the practice.

What exactly is your point, "Rev.?" That you are a disgruntled former-Catholic

I think that Deepak Chopra's comments regarding the Pope's infallibility, speak not so much to the Church's doctrine of what this means, but also, how the Pope's words are received by the people. The following is an example of how the Pope's words conflict with the teachings of the Church. In this speech he is referring to the promises of America: "To be sure, this promise was not experienced by all the inhabitants of this land; one thinks of the injustices endured by the native American peoples and by those brought here forcibly from Africa as slaves."

Catholicism was instrumental in the abuse of native American peoples and stood by during the era of slavery without protest ... also, one would want to ask, how about the promise to gay and lesbian people? ... people that the Catholic Church and especially this Pope continues to abuse through the doctrine of the Church based on a teaching that is no less gruesome than the Church's teachings centuries past?

I have no idea what faith Deepak is so I suppose I shouldn't be shocked that he knows nothing about mine but to comment on papal infallibility in such a snide way and obviously have absolutely no idea what it means is really lame.

Would it kill you to Google, wikipedia, library...anything before you offend millions of Catholics?

A mystery of the Catholic Faith is that sinful humans (of course) must lead it on earth. That has been the case from Peter to Benedict so I puzzled why Chopra states it has become "...too tainted.." Saying the Church is in decline is frankly not a controversial assertion on 2008 America (secular factor) but it is ignorant of its 200 year history.

For faithful Catholics who receive grace through sacaraments such as baptism, communion, reconciliation, on a spiritual basis, Chopra's assertion is even more non-sensical.

Finally, I would call on an analysis of the Catholic church's growth in China and Africa and perhaps conclude that maybe materialism and secular cultural have more an impact in Church participation in Westernized nations (US and Europe). I think this is fairly obvious.

People seem to get hung up nuance and perception. There's the church and the Church inside us. When one is tainted, so is the other. That is all he was saying, not arguing.

The only argument that can be constructed against Dr. Chopra's article is that he said the Pope is infallable, which he is not. Its the only argument you all have. Why not focus on the other statements he has made. Are you all advocating that priests should not be punished for abusing children? Do you agree with the church paying off people to keep quiet? I'm not sure what the argument is. The Catholic church needs to stop putting its head in the sand and deal with this. How would you like if your child was abused by his/her priest? Since when is someone a bigot for saying that all men should be punished for abusing children, whether they are a priest or not?

The Church is not the government. Any member of the Catholic church who committed a crime should be tried and punished by existing legal system/process. The Catholic Church should not interfere with this process, but at the same time, it should not take the matters in its own hands. The Catholic Church does not cuddle any alleged criminal by counseling them and praying for them. Attending to have fallen their way is just being true to its mission.

BTW, as stated above, the pope is only infallible in matters of faith.

"John The Bostonian:
When the logic fails, some people resort to faith/belief -- Bertrand Russell
The Catholic church/doctrine persecuted Galileo, burnt alive as heretics who questioned its teachings; It invented ‘indulgence’ – sin now, pay now and you will be on the way to heaven -- doctrine. It took Martin Luther to check the Catholic Church (papal) tyranny.
The present kinder/gentler version of the Church does a good job protecting and defending the poor and powerless. But like any tyranny if allowed, it will go back to seeking power for sake of power.
The church is losing its Caucasian members and looking to Hispanics to fill its ranks."

man did all those injustices not the Church. The Catholic Church, from the 12 apostles, is for all the people and filled with all the people.
martin luthor may have been a christian, though I have my doubts about so called Christian churches, but he had no influence on the Catholic Church, the Catholic Church today does not preach hate but others do. we don't even preach hate against gays, we call them sinners and immoral and yet their are catholic gays. crossovers of all denominations becaume catholics, why, because the Catholic church can be traced back to the 12 apostles to Peter, the rock.

Dr. Chopra,

I always assumed that you were a well read and a contemplative writer and was very surprised when you incorrectly opined on infallability. The Pope, much less his comments, is not always infallible as you stated.
The last time that the Pope made an infallible statement was in the 1950s. Please study a subject before you make another uneducated and biased statement.

The church has been able to hold on to power by intimidation of imposing the fire of hell on dissidents. Whether God exists or hell exists has never been proven ,faith is hope that there is a reason for life. The good works the church has done [and does] is great, there are many fine good hearted caring clergy however the church can be irrational and out of touch especially in the area of sex. Contraception in an overpopulated world is a good thing not sinful, abortion is nasty business but a woman's choice takes priority over a fetus and should not be taken lightly. Homosexuality has been with us from the beginning and exists in the animal kingdom so calling unnatural is an oxymoron as it happens in nature including mankind. By making gay life sinful and open to criminal penalties, discrimination, blackmail and violence the church's teaching are archaic and obsolete and inhuman. Men never marrying or engaging in sex is closer to unnatural than gay sex as supresses the natural instinct which has caused widespread preists to act out their repressed sex cravings on those who cannot resist god's representatives. Dogma and infalliabilty lead to dictatorships as all big daddy religions dimish the role of women. The church should keep the good things it does and revise those dogmas that are actually against society as it is now.

Deepak Chopra takes four long paragraphs to address basic topics.These are Papal infallibility,crime or wrong-doing,penalty and decline in religious involvement.One wonders whether his 50 books could have been easily condensed into single figures or less.
As regards the first,the Pope is still fallible except in matters of dogma(one for Deepak to research). The Pope cannot forecast the weather more than anyone else.He may be able to forecast whether Obama will be a better leader than Clinton,but then we all know this is true,without dogma.
As regards wrong,the concept of right or otherwise is implanted in all of us.If someone strays from the right path it does not imply that the path is wrong.Neither do we know whether the stray will return to the right path,but we pray that this will be the result.
Penalty speaks for itself.Eat too much and you get obese or sick.Drink too much and you get drunk and offensive.Wrong too much and you spoil your sense of values or morality.A blow against our "religio" or moral code(another one for further research?)
As to religious decline,it would take someone truly infallible,or a fool, to state that religious observance will continue to decline.
There are no atheists in foxholes,as the man said,and there may be many more foxholes in the world before terrorism and natural calamities have run their course.
Think again,Chopra.

I have learned so much just from reading others' responses (as a Protestant,that is). I used to believe that Catholicism taught papal infallibility just as the writer today. I can't say too much about the writer or his credibility (even though I've heard that he propagates New Age which I do not espouse), however the priests should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The Bible teaches that we should subject ourselves to the laws of man as people of God. We should only resist compliance when the laws dictate that we should deny our own faith and our own Creator, and this is not the case here. Those priests should be in jail serving long sentences. They can pray and ask for God's forgiveness there.

Why does Mr. Chopa consider himself qualified to comment on the Church and the pope when he knows so little about them? This is a drive-by.

The pope is not infallible, nor does Church doctorine claim he is. What the Church does claim is that under specific and very rare circumstances, the pope may issue a statement of faith that is regarded as infallible. This is very different. It has also been discussed extensively here in recent days.

Lawsuits are not filed against the "Church", they are filed against specific diocese. Judgements aren't paid by the Church, but again by specific dioceses. They draw on the funds tithed by all parishoners of the diocese, draining it of funds that would have been used for other missions, such as education. In other words, it is not the guilty who pay the victims, but other innocents.

The Church is not the clerical hierarchy; the Church is the entire body of its membership. It is the clerical leadership that has been tainted, not the whole of the Church - except possibly in shallow thoughts.

Deepak- know your facts before you discuss these issues.

As defined by the First Vatican Council of 1870, the Pope is infallible on issues of Faith and Morals, not administrative actions.
The Church is the giver of law and administer of the sacraments. Administrative failure is an unfortunate fact of life through out its history.
The bigger failure in the child abuse scandal, which is world-wide not just America, was the failure to contain the problem and deal with it openly. In virtually every diocese, these predators were not stopped and kept away from children. It is this failure that is the most inexcusable. Further, those who exposed these problems often suffered retaliation, and even banishment. These issues have been barely addressed, let alone solved.
The spiritual dimensions are far greater than the civil aspects. The Pope must lead a comprehensive spiritual renewal of the Church, which in my opinion begins with Fatima.
The Fatima Apparitions address the problems of the "deluge of impurity", the rise of communism and the failure of "bad marriages",as the result of sin and the lack of prayer.
It is these failures that constitute the current and yes, growing crises.

The pope is NOT infallible. The use of infallibility applies only when used in instituting a doctrine of faith - which means itis/becomes a core item of faith for all Catholics believers. Infallibility has been invoked less than a dozen times over the last couple of centuries. Again, the Pope is NOT INFALLIBLE.

My God! Seems as if many believe that the Pope is infallible, but only when he speaks "ex Cathedra", that is from a SPECIFIC, PHYSICAL CHAIR ???
WHERE DOES ALL THIS NONSENSE COME FROM?

The longest running profitable corporation, with trappings of an outdated empire - the Roman Catholic Church, has long enjoyed tax exempt status in USA. It is therefore reasonable that the Church be required to open its financial and personnel records in its entirety allowing the tax-paying public full access to it. With full knowledge, wisdom can prevail among concerned citizens.

The basis of the problem, of course, is that the entire Pope/God concept was created by fallible men. Not very distant from worshiping the Sun or the Moon or forest spirits, etc.

I found it difficult to take this article seriously when Mr. Chopra started out with a misunderstood and incorrect notion of the pope and "infallibility".

John:

Nice distinction without a difference. Get a dictionary!

"the vast majority of the molestation cases were ones of pederasty! In fact there were few cases of pedophilia"?????

What a pathetic attempt to be a stoic philosopher.

Chopra's commentary opens with a statement betraying his overall ignorance of church teaching. The pope is only infallible when he speaks from the chair of St. Peter, and only when he speaks to matters of faith. No pope has spoken "ex-cathedra" ("in the name of the Church") since the 1800s.

Chopra should actually learn about the church before he engages in his bigoted attacks.

These victims are probably(not in every case), but probably being victimized by people who themselves may have been victims.

Once a child or person has been tramautized, there are marks in their thinking and beliefs. If they were sexuallly abused early enough, they may believe that the wrong is the right and that this lifestyle is ok. They may now believe and try to pass off this secret lifestyle( either heterosexual or homosexual activity done in secret) as ok.

The church should instruct that this is against the plans of GOD. Additionally, the 'hardware' of men and women shows that they are male and female. There is no plan for male and male or female and female in nature as there is no reproduction in such cases.

There is still a need to 'borrow' equipment from another sex(eggs, or sperm), meaning that this is only a 'software' solution, not a 'hardware' solution.

Obviously( for those who marriage is for), there is only a design plan made by GOD, for male and female interactions sexually(in marriage).

In relationships, the 'software( the thinking feeling parts)' should follow the hardware, but
too often there are perverse and unnatural feelings and emotions that do not come from GOD, but the perverter of all good things, the devil. Too often people do not use the truths( see what nature shows for the largest part of creation-there is no entire race of asexual humans. Human beings are male and female) of GOD to fight those feelings that are contrary to nature.

GOD DOES NOT have marriage for everyone, but for those whom marriage is for, there is the design plan by GOD for male and female relationships.

The office of the Priest is a special place before GOD and man. It elicits a certain trust from people and places men in the place of being a pure person to connect to GOD and to teach and instruct in His ways.

A true statement is that any sex outside of marriage is against the law of GOD. It makes the priest impure, whether people hide it, or in some other fashion try to make it ok as this church did.

This church, these men(supposedly called by GOD to provide care for the innocent) took advantage and betrayed these innocent children. Even if they are passing on the hurt that was done to them, someone must stop the hurt.

Someone must say that even if this happened to me, someone must say that the buck stops here.

This is not ok, not now, not ever.

Every Priest trying to live single is not meant to be single. That is really a gift from GOD. If that is not natural to the person to be single and then to stay pure sexually, they should not be in this particular office of priest, who this church seems to categorize as single males.

Sir: The statement that the (Holy Father) is "infallible" is just plain incorrect, and is typical of many whose knowledge of the Church and Her teachings is gleaned from the media or some other secular source.

The Church makes no claim that the Holy father is infallible; rather, under a limited and defined set of circumstances, he "speaks infallibly." This is a rare occurrence.

Making misleading remarks like this one undermines the speaker's credibility.

1. God is Love
2. We are all Gods children.
3. These are truly the "Last Days"(within 5 yrs.).
4. Just as in the time of Jesus, the ruling religeous leaders of his day (and presently) could not recognize the messiah even if they tripped over him.
5.The Lord of the Second Advent is alive and on the earth "NOW".
6.If the odds were 1 in a billion that the above statement is true, then we all owe it to ourselves and God to see if this is true.
7.I am testifying to everyone who reads this, before God and Humanity that Sung Mung Moon is the Lord of the Second Advent.
8.As a child of God who has seen that this is true
I pray that all will investigate for themselves.
9.This is truly the time to take responsability for this earth and everyone on it.
10. Heavens "standard" is coming to this world within 5 yrs. It is time to "give" for the sake of others and forget that you have given.

Peace

Anytime I need a good laugh, I'be sure to read another Deepak Chopra piece. A message to you, Mr. Chopra: did you see the faithful gather to see the Holy Father in Washington today? Do you really think their Catholicism stops at papal infallibility? It's really too bad that tetherless, new-age wankers like you don't understand that moral clarity and submission to the will of God are precisely the reasons why the Catholic faith is undergoing a risorgimento. In a world dominated by materialism, lasciviousness, relativism and atheism--foisted on us by charlatans like you and other vacuous baby boomers from the 1960s--my fellow Catholics and I are willing to put our faith and trust in Pope Benedict.

In 1870, the French dictator sponsoring the Pope was overthrown. As a result, the Papal States became part of the newly unified Italy. The Pope responded by retreating into the Vatican and declaring himself infallible. The office was not so distinguished until then.

He didn't come out until a deal was struck with Mussolini. Roughly a decade later, a deal was struck with Hitler.

The Pope's world view has little to recommned it.

Mr. Choprah needs to find out what 'Papal Infalibility" really means. He is human like the rest of us.

I too stopped reading after the first paragraph. Why should I read his thoughts about Catholicism when he clearly didn't do his homework? To all critics of the Catholic church: There are many good reasons to criticize the church. Just make sure you actually know something about the church before you articulate these criticisms.

John Connolly wrote:
"The Church has not become too tainted by scandal. You are an idiot. Get an honest job."

Agree, 2 billion dollars means nothing to the Church. It can take much more hits.

I read only the first few lines of Mr. Chopra's remarks and stopped after "the Church's position is that the Pope is "infallible." This is not correct! I'm shocked that a person as educated and high-profile as Mr. Chopra is ignorant of this fact. The Church doesn't consider the Pope "completely infallible," and the Pope, as a human being, doesn't turn from ordinary or "psychopathic" one moment to "infallible" the next. This is ridiculous. The Church considers some (a very few) of any Pope's pronouncements (and these on limited matters) as "infallible" or unquestioned. Before making such a misstatement on a forum like the Post, would authors please "do some homework?" Maybe truth doesn't matter, however, if the intent is simply to advance one's own views or agenda, regardless of the facts. I don't put this past all authors.

It is apparent that the Washington Post has no Catholic employees whom Dr. Chopra could consult about Catholicism as he shows total ignorance about Catholicism or maybe he is too lazy to do his research homework.

Even though the argument is OK it is a bit narrow.
1) There might be other reasons why attendance comes down, for example new religion.
2) Sheer lack of religious interest

The conclusion is ambiguous.
1) They can go away and be good catholics privately
2) Attendance numbers need not represent the real strength of faith.

God bless all. May compassion overcome divisiveness (life/choice). May all the lord's children live in harmony.

Unfortunately, you misunderstand the notion of Papal infallibility, a common misunderstanding. Infallibility attaches only to certain pronouncements, not to day to day activity and talking. Those certain pronouncements are few in number and come only after wide consultations and under very special procedural circumstances ... in the last 150 years I believe there have only been 3 such pronouncements. As for the balance of your article, you raise very interesting points, including I might suggest by implication the question whether the Pope, towering intellect that he is, is so steeped in the theology of the Church that he cannot step back far enough from the subject to see it all. It may be that God is trying to tell the Church something that the Holy Father is not able to hear.

Yes, the Church addressed the abuse scandal with transfers and counseling. Yet it never hesitates to call in civil authorities when theft of Church funds are at issue. Embezzeling priests are not quietly transferred from parish to parish, they are turned over to the authorities quickly.

So it's an elegant argument that Mr. Chopra makes regarding a balancing act between two worlds, but when the Church sees its financial well-being at risk, it moves clearly and quickly to the world of secular law enforcement.

The Pope is infallible only when declaring an article of Faith. Last time that happened was in 1954 by Pope Pius XII.

John the Bostonian - "The longest running profitable corporation -- the Roman Catholic Church. It does not produce anything." ????

I guess unless you count that the American Catholic Church educates 2.6 million students per year at a cost to the Church of $10 billion, a savings to the American tax payer of $18 billion.

or Perhaps the non-profit hospital system of 637 hospitals which account for hospital treatment of 1 out of every 5 people in the United States today.

Or maybe the institution that feeds and clothes 1 of 5 indigents in the United States at a cost to the Church of $2.3 billion a year.

Or on Health and Human Services, the homeless, adoption, drugs, adult care and so on, where we save the county $170 million a year.

We could go on......and you know what? We don't ask people to be Catholic before we clothe, feed, education, heal and PRAY for them!

The abuse was delivered, of course, by individual priests. But that was only the beginning. Soon it was the entire church organization --other priests who knew and kept silent, then bishops everywhere -- our so-called "pastoral" leaders, then the red-hatted cardinals safe in their lovely but isolated and, therefore, out-of-touch sanctuaries who all "climbed on" the victims. That's an intentional and accurate image. All in the name of God's church. But when the pope called Cardinal Law to the Vatican to hide him from the consequences of his actions, that sin was shifted from individuals to the church itself. It is the entire organized church hierarchy -- including Benedict, perhaps most of all -- who is smart enough to understand all this -- which is to blame. Until Benedict or the next pope or the pope after that accepts this responsibility, there can be no healing. John XXIII told us that we are the church. But then that principle was hijacked as the hierarchy closed the windows, one by one. Recall John Paul II telling us that the church is not a democracy?Well, they are the church now. And they are the embarassment, the shame, the sin. And they know it.

The abuse was delivered, of course, by individual priests. But that was only the beginning. Soon it was the entire church organization --other priests who knew and kept silent, then bishops everywhere -- our so-called "pastoral" leaders, then the red-hatted cardinals safe in their lovely but isolated and, therefore, out-of-touch sanctuaries who all "climbed on" the victims. That's an intentional and accurate image. All in the name of God's church. But when the pope called Cardinal Law to the Vatican to hide him from the consequences of his actions, that sin was shifted from individuals to the church itself. It is the entire organized church hierarchy -- including Benedict, perhaps most of all -- who is smart enough to understand all this -- which is to blame. Until Benedict or the next pope or the pope after that accepts this responsibility, there can be no healing. John XXIII told us that we are the church. But then that principle was hijacked as the hierarchy closed the windows, one by one. Recall John Paul II telling us that the church is not a democracy?Well, they are the church now. And they are the embarassment, the shame, the sin. And they know it.

I would have expected more sophisticated analysis from a man with such a broad reputation for wisdom. A few points:

1. The pope is not infallible in everything he says or does. In fact, if I am not mistaken, infallibility has only been invoked in two instances in the history of the Church. None of the popes in Mr. Chopra's lifetime have claimed infallibility for any of their teachings.

2. Because popes and bishops and priests and sisters and lay people are in fact quite fallible, we can and should acknowledge the grave mistakes made in handling the pedophilia scandal. It appears that Pope Benedict has taken the first steps in this direction. We will see if this is just a first step of a longer process, or if he feels his statements to date are sufficient.

3. If the Pope leads the Church into full accountability for the scandal (I'm not sure what that would look like, but I would love to see the equivalent of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission within the Church), then bringing together the "two worlds" of God and humankind would in fact be possible.

4. Bringing together these two worlds is what we, as people of faith, are challenged to do, and we are at our best when we rise to this challenge.

Gary Gardner

I can't believe someone who's written so many books on religion can say something like "the catholic church believes the pope to be infallible. I am not much of a practicing catholic anymore, but I easily know that is a ridiculous statement which someone could easily research and find totally untrue. How can we expect different religions to talk to each other if they don't even take the time to find out basic information about the other's faith and engage in constructive discussion! I also found that these statements against the catholic church seems to go entirely against the teachings of healing I heard from Deepak Chopra in one of his videos. You've lost my interest Deepak Chopra.

When the logic fails, some people resort to faith/belief -- Bertrand Russell

The Catholic church/doctrine persecuted Galileo, burnt alive as heretics who questioned its teachings; It invented ‘indulgence’ – sin now, pay now and you will be on the way to heaven -- doctrine. It took Martin Luther to check the Catholic Church (papal) tyranny.

The present kinder/gentler version of the Church does a good job protecting and defending the poor and powerless. But like any tyranny if allowed, it will go back to seeking power for sake of power.

The church is losing its Caucasian members and looking to Hispanics to fill its ranks.

Chopra has expressed an interesting opinion.

Its a tribute to US society that inspite of blatant attempts to cover up, the sexual abuse scandals of the clergy have surfaced and indeed have been followd up.

However, abuse on the scale as evidenced in the US cannot be an exclusive US phenomenon-what about the rest of the world?

What is the papal solution to address this issue? The vatican has long been very secretive-but this secrecy is man-made and not a divine mandate-the historical Jesus was very simple and transparent.

The tumultous history of the papacy is indicative of the fact that catholism has long been tainted.

Rituals, elaborate costumery and Prado are not answers.

John from Boston - "The longest running profitable corporation -- the Roman Catholic Church. It does not produce anything." ????

I guess unless you count that the American Catholic Church educates 2.6 million students per year at a cost to the Church of $10 billion, a savings to the American tax payer of $18 billion.

or Perhaps the non-profit hospital system of 637 hospitals which account for hospital treatment of 1 out of every 5 people in the United States today.

Or maybe the institution that feeds and clothes 1 of 5 indigents in the United States at a cost to the Church of $2.3 billion a year.

Or on Health and Human Services, the homeless, adoption, drugs, adult care and so on, where we save the county $170 million a year.

We could go on......and you know what? We don't ask people to be Catholic before we clothe, feed, education, heal and PRAY for them!

The handling of the molestation cases within the church leave me with the worst taste in my mouth. Should we let the people that break all laws, simply pray for themselves, and admit sin, ask for forgiveness? NO. This will not stop anyone from breaking the law. It is disgusting how the church has tried to link homosexuality with child molestation - there is no connection. These are straight men, under the cloak of the church who have sexually violated children. Psychology will show that they cannot be stopped doing this - castration sometimes helps - but there is no 'cure'. Praying, no matter how faithful one might be, will not help.

As a father, the only question of who will be healed, is the children, and any effects on thier children.

There is no other word but disgusting - for both the actions of the priests, and the actions of the church to hide these vile men. I sincerely hope that those involved go directly to hell, if there is such a place.

Interesting article. I'm with you right up until the last assertion that the Church cannot do anything about the crisis due to its closeness to and involvement in the crisis. To the contrary, the Church can start the process of inspiring a whole new generation by taking full responsibility for the scandal and implementing steps to solve the problem (which is what Pope Ben seems to be finally doing).

Chopra should talk about credibility! How many homes and Rolls Royces does he own? Yet he wants people to be more spiritual...haha. Sure, as long as they buy his books and keep him in the dough. What a phony. He has nothing anyone needs to hear.

The Pope's infalibility only refers to matters of doctrine and not his every word, deed or gesture. Any journalist should review this theological principle before attempting to conjure up any analysis. The Church guards, protects and proclaims the truth of Jesus Christ and no man or mens failings can add nor subtract from that truth. It is scripture that offers truths and since Christ is perfect so too follows his words. If Christ's message depended on the perfection of any man his word would have faded away with long ago. Do not place your trust in any man is what the word admonishes us to do.

As a non-Catholic, what I find upsetting with the majority of the church's response to their child sexual abuse problems is that they fought for so long to deceive and deflect criticism, until monetary punishment drove them to make more reconciliatory gestures. It leaves a sense that they prefer to deny or bully their way out of problems, until it is impossible to do so -- hardly spiritual or therapeutic. All churches, as all people, are flawed, but to cling so long to a position of 'super-status' above all the citizenry is what lengthens and makes even more toxic these conflicts. The early Christians were frequently of quite humble origins and met in caves or other non-glossy places, with little fanfare or prestige -- but stuck quite closely to the critical purpose of seeding love and wisdom into their followers, not mystery and guilt.

The pope is only infallible if he speaks ex cathedra. Otherwise, complain all you want--please. They don't listen to us little people, but since you've made a celebrity of yourself, they might listen to you.

Any religion or religious belief/faith should be approached with curiousity and critically but also with respect. Religion, throughout our history, has created a lot of problems. But it has also provided a rallying point for people to come together. Their devotion to god has been the unifying factor.
Beating the Catholic church for the acts of some of its members (even if justice has not been carried out by the higher authorities in the church)is not fair. Then you are ignoring several other excellent things it is doing. On the other hand, the followers of Catholic church should not attack the faith of Deepak Chopra, just because he has raised some questions. After all, there are reformation movements in Hindu and other religions also. Some of the commentators have handled this question so politely and therefore so convincingly. A few have not been able to temper their vitriolic attack.
We are always in a state of evolution. See how the church has changed over the years under different leadership: from its proselytizing mission to a readiness for an inter-faith dialogue. At any moment of disagreement, we should not abandon love and compassion for each other -- this is what I have learnt as the message of Jesus. I have been raised in a Hindu family with Hindu values, if there is any such thing.
When any religion has organized and consolidated itself to such an extent that it begins to look down upon others and when it cultivates the zeal to convert everyone else, by force or by material inducements -- from that point on the trouble starts brewing. I hope all of us who claim ourselves as people of faith should agree. As I write this, I'm also watching the Mass going on in Washington DC graced by the Pope Benedict XVI.

Binoy Shanker Prasad
Thur 17 Apr 08 11:24 pm

Mr. Chopra, I recommend you at least take a cursory look at the facts before you comment on the Papacy. The Pope is NOT infallible. He can speak infallibly on matters of doctrine and faith when he speaks ex Cathedra (from the Chair). This type of communication is rarely, if even ever by several Popes, actually employed. The Pope does not speak infallibly in every day conversation or even his homilies. It is not the Pope who is infallible, it is certain proclamations that can be infallible, not the man himself.

And, not in any way to excuse the horrific crisis, but don't kid yourself into thinking this is a Catholic only problem. The percentages relative to the entire population are virtually dead even. And, when the pedophilia numbers come out on our public school system, they will dwarf those in the Church

"John The Bostonian:
DWIGHT: “He talks about a faith he does not belong to yet”
ARE YOU SAYING ONE HAS TO BE A CATHOLIC TO TALK ABOUT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH?
I HAVE SEEN HIS VIDEOs CRTISING MANY ASPECTS OF HINDU RITUALS. YOU ARE ACTING LIKE A TALIBAN -- NO ONE IS SUPPOSED TO QUESTION OR DISAGREE WITH THE DOCTRINE OTHERWISE YOU ARE ANTI CATHOLIC..

April 17, 2008 11:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments"

he doesn't question he shreds from a viewpoint of ignorance. we are told to tolerate religious differences, and we do, yet fakes like chopra don't and continue to have a license by means of the media. he doesn't attacks rituals he attacks the people as if they were the religion and they are not. in the Catholic Faith, JESUS CHRIST is our GOD and whom we worship, not the pope or the priests, we are all children of CHRIST, can you get that.

I find the replies extremely interesting but also disturbing. As someone raised in 'traditional' Christianity, and who has received revelations that turned the theological dogma on end, I am aware that Mr. Chopra is not responsible to know the minute details of individual religious organizational doctrine/policies.

Yes, most people are sheep, as described in holy writings. Sheep are not cute cuddly smart creatures. They are dumb, dirty and operate in a mindless pack mentality, not thinking for themselves. That being true, they need to be told what to do, need traditions. They often also need negative constraints and boundaries, and are easily brainwashed to believe whatever they are told...to the extent that they even believe that questioning such propaganda is another sin! God/Allah/Yhwh/the Universal or Great Spirit is far too simple/pure and simultaneously beyond full comprehension by our limited minds that questioning can only lead to partial understanding....what is it that the political organization called the church does not want it's sheep to learn? Question. Use the mind that you have been given!!! It is imperative. It is good.

Mr. Chopra has his own beliefs. We must respect each spirit's interpretations. We must not, however, tolerate, condone or ignore devastation of the children. Jesus warned people of this...all true Spiritual Masters have recognized this basic truth to rise above animalistic behaviors and love the children in a pure and nurturing manner. Agregious behavior must be punished, not swept under the carpet.

Another point, the doctrine/belief/idea that the Pope can be considered 'infallible' within any parameters -- either a smokescreen or at least a virtual oxymoron in light of the conditions placed on this infallible status. It is self-serving corporate job security to not let the Board of Directors change the MVG of the organization withour due process.

Much like Supreme Court Justices, the Pope is charged with interpretation of existing documents...the only caveat is that the documents that have been carefully trimmed, modified, edited and interpreted over 1700 years in order to meet the perceived political needs of the most powerful institution/fraternity on earth. Figurehead of a corporation that specialized in ruling with fear, guilt and deception, the Pope is still primarily
an administrator.

Pope John Paul was indeed a loving and well-meaning man, and obviously enlightened above his peers (see the Miracles of Light that he added prior to his death). Time has yet to reveal the legacy of this Benedict, who turned 81 yesterday.

I wish each of you who read, each who have responded, peace and love.

I have heard Mr Chopra speak and read some of his books.He is a first class charlatan. One could pose the same question about Mr Chopra.

Why should anybody care what Deepak Chopra thinks about the state of the Catholic Church? New Age "religion" is already getting very, very old.

DWIGHT: “He talks about a faith he does not belong to yet”

ARE YOU SAYING ONE HAS TO BE A CATHOLIC TO TALK ABOUT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH?

I HAVE SEEN HIS VIDEOs CRTISING MANY ASPECTS OF HINDU RITUALS. YOU ARE ACTING LIKE A TALIBAN -- NO ONE IS SUPPOSED TO QUESTION OR DISAGREE WITH THE DOCTRINE OTHERWISE YOU ARE ANTI CATHOLIC..

Deepak is as confused as many on the position of infallibility but he could have corrected it before he built a column around it! This is what is discouraging with ersatz spiritual leaders who do not do their basic homework before they sound off. I don't defend the pope's history on the scandal or many of his positions, but let's be correct and honest about this complex doctrine of infallibility. Deepak, you should know better.

Tim wrote: "If the church would follow the real teachings of Jesus they would tell people that they need no priests or popes." One cannot be more mistaken!

St. Ignatius of Antioch (ca. 35-110), one of the Apostolic Fathers, of whom tradition says that he met Christ in person, once said that "no Church exists without bishops, priests and deacons."

It's them, who have been set apart to teach the word of God, to expound the deposit of faith once delivered to the saints. The faith that was transmitted both by "the epistle and the word of mouth" (2Thes 21).

They are not perfect (the popes included), just as layfolks aren't, for we are all fallen creatures. We all sin and pray for forgiveness and mercy from God. Clergy are set apart and commissioned the extra job, for which they receive special charism by virtue of sacramental ordination. Yes, they may refuse co-operate with it, just as any of us may refuse it now and then, here and there. And many of them do refuse, just as many of us laymen do not respond to the grace of God. Lord have mercy on us all.

"John The Bostonian:
To Mr DWIGHT: YOU ARE AN IDIOT!
Mr. Chopra’s subject is not Hindusm or Islam. He does not attack the Catholic faith. He is just points out the difficulty reconciling GOD’s law and man’s law.
April 17, 2008 10:16 AM | Report Offensive Comments"

No, that honor is yours, chopra has a history of attacking the Catholic faith. He talks about a faith he does not belong to yet I have never heard him speak of hindu or islam...maybe he should...

"NY:
Mr. Chopra is an Anti Christ. He is a man living in this world. We need not say more.

April 17, 2008 10:26 AM | Report Offensive Comments

actually, chopra is a false prophet, attacking the word of GOD at every turn. The antichrist is his master to whom many answer to.

Mr. Chopra, the vast majority of the molestation cases were ones of pederasty! In fact there were few cases of pedophilia and I do not understand why journalists, et al, continue to define these cases as such! Also, there is very little discussion of the molestation and rape of women and young girls! I wonder why?

He does not understand the doctrine of infallibility. The Pope take advice all the time. But Benedict is a brilliant man, and I doubt he needs much advice from Deepak Chopra.

Mr. Chopra is an Anti Christ. He is a man living in this world. We need not say more.

The statement that the Pope is infallible is really such a gross misstatement that it leaves me with 2 possible thoughts about Deepak.

1. You are so poorly informed about A. the Catholic Church and B. the Pope's thinking, that you should not be writing articles for the Post.

2. Your intention was to promote bias against the Catholic Church...

I sincerely don't know which is worst, but I will say this. Your lack of knowledge taints this article and any valuable points you might have made.

To Mr DWIGHT: YOU ARE AN IDIOT!

Mr. Chopra’s subject is not Hindusm or Islam. He does not attack the Catholic faith. He is just points out the difficulty reconciling GOD’s law and man’s law.

Major error in the very first sentence "...the Church's position is that he is infallible to begin with."

Uh, no. The doctrine of infallibility only applies to very few *theological* issues. He could have figured that out in five minutes on the web.

I am not impressed.

The church has acted with its customary arrogance relating to the sex abuse scandals. Its main response, other than removing Cardinal Law and appointing him to a Vatican office, has been to declare war on potential seminarians who are gay. In this way, the church can reposition the issue as being a "gay problem" (when it is not), and use the issue to continue to wage its doctrinal war against gay and lesbian people -- a prejudice that regretfully many rank and file Catholics still harbor themselves. It's cynical, manipulative, and beside the point.

The rest of the argumentation in this thread would be humorous if it were not so pathetic. As someone raised in the Catholic faith (12 years of Catholic education) and someone who spent quite a few years as a Catholic religious educator before finally having the presence of mind and strength to see through the nonsense and embrace the truth of simple reality by rejecting the lies of the church, I can say quite honestly that it's disturbing how many people continue to allow themselves to be hoodwinked by these charlatans. I understand the need for comfort in a chaotic universe, but lies -- even when comforting -- are always a road to nowhere.

The Church has not become too tainted by scandal. You are an idiot. Get an honest job.

As far as the bodily assumption of Mary is concerned, I see no proof one way or the other for an event that would have happened 2000 years ago anyway. Since he's decided to make that a matter of faith, and won't, or can't, provide any proof, I'm willing to give him the benefit of doubt on this until someone comes up with Mary's actual body (better hope that The Da Vinci Code, and the material it's loosely based on, have no basis in reality - if it does, then I see a real need for the Vatican to employ lethal means to prevent the information from getting out).

Infallability is also applied to Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. Which basically says that the teachings of the catholic church are infallible. Which I know to not be true by an even stronger faith.

"The tragedy is that the mystery of the two worlds affects us all, and the Church has become too tainted by scandal to offer answers that might satisfy a new generation of seekers."

I disagree. The Church's failure to act properly in many, if not most, of these horrific cases is inexcusable, however, I have seen the church finally (in the last several years) move vigorously to avoid repetition in the future. Most of the cases of abuse now are many years old. A handful will trickle in to remind us of this stain, but the systematic tolerance of abuse and abusers has ended.

The Church will continue to suffer the taint of the scandal, but to say that it cannot overcome the scandal or reinvigorate future believers is naive and incorrect.

The Church has never operated comfortably in the temporal realm. When crimes occur within the Church, especially among the clergy, the church moves to treat the sin (through confession, counselling, and repentance) rather than report the crime. A huge failing, that I feel will rarely happen in the future.

The Church has outlasted many other challenges (the rise of Islam, the fall of the Holy, Roman Empire, the Protestant Reformation) - I am confident that it will continue to thrive in the future.

You can't have two taints! That's just silly!

I travel quite a lot to Asia, and read recently about an Abbot at a Monestary in Thailand - was found to be driving a Mercedes, and had a number of underage girlfriends he was secretly keeping. Basis that - Mr. Chopra, I should conclude that all Buddhists are hypocrites? I suppose Thailand would be better off without Buddhism? Should that tell me that the tradition you were raised in (and the basis of much of your present philosophy) is false?

I am encouraged by the many clear and intelligent Catholic commentaries regarding this unworthy article.

I would like to add another point or two. In my comment yesterday I neglected to define the "deposit of Faith." I criticize Dr. Chopra in my book review of The Third Jesus for not defining, so I must be more careful. Simply stated, the sacred deposit includes the doctrinal teachings that Jesus Christ committed to His Apostles and which they, in turn, committed to the Church. The matter of that deposit of Faith is found in both holy scripture and universal tradition.

Infallibility is only engaged when the pope, or a defining council whose decrees are approved by the pope, draws from this deposit. Any doctrine, therefore, that is communicated to the whole Church ex cathedra (from the chair) had to have been found in scripture (at least implicitly) and tradition (believed by the faithful of every generation in every time and place.

"Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle." (2 Thess. 2:14)

It is this ORGANIZED visible society, founded by Christ, which St. Paul calls "the house of God" and the "pillar and ground of truth." (1 Tim. 3:15) Why do people demand everything else be organized accept the one true religion?

Some confuse infallibility with impeccability. The pope, as a private theologian, is certainly not infallible, nor is he incapable of sin. He can fail in his duties and lose his soul. The first 33 popes were martyrs. The first sixteen of these popes were not gentiles, but Hellenized Jews. They had Latin or Greek names, but they were Jews.

If Christ is God, He certainly can protect His Church from teaching error by granting, in the "keys" given to Peter and his successors, the negative protection of infallibility. This is NOT inspiration. It is a charism that prevents the pope from defining a false doctrine and binding the consciences of the faithful to believe an error.

I have read several of Chopra's books, so I am VERY surprised by his recent attacks on the Pope and the Church. His recent articles have been snide and smug, and portray none of the appreciation of diverse spirituality his books gave us. In fact, Chopra's articles for Washington Post seem to be just another secularist's random and ill-informed attacks on the Catholic Church. More of the same. You have greatly disappointed me Mr. Chopra.

It is surprising that Mr. Chopra shows himself so terribly ignorant of the true significance of "papal infallibility" as understood by Catholics.

In Catholic theology, papal infallibility is the position that, by action of divine assistance, the Pope is preserved from the possibility of error when he solemnly declares or promulgates to the entire Church a teaching on faith or morals as being contained in divine revelation, or at least being intimately connected to divine revelation.

Obviously, every religion has something similar to infallibility, because they all claim to be true. It is when religions turn fanatic that they inflict more harm than good.

So, before critiquing a religious belief it might be wise to find out exactly what it is really about.

The longest running profitable corporation -- the Roman Catholic Church.

It does not produce anything. Only thing it does -- it markets a mysterious product : “Salvation”
And here is a catch -- get that product one has to die (so no one can ask for refund)

Advice to Bill Gates: Forget about Yahoo. Just market a new ‘Heavenly Vista’ to be delivered after a customer dies.

1. Papal infallibility is almost universally misunderstood. People who want to comment on it really should understand exactly what it means and what it does not mean.
2. Respect for legitimate authority (render unto Caesar..) is something the Church has always taught. So.. the church teaching would be that criminals go to jail. Forgiveness at the spiritual level does not mean you are legally off the hook for your crimes.
3. Deepak is right, I think, about the two ways- we are called to be "in the world but not of the world" An extremely difficult challenge, and we all fall short to some degree or another, some monstrously so.

It is better to stay away from critising,commenting or evaluating Religious beliefs.

Deepak Chopra knows as much about the papacy as I do about the theory of realtivity.

The 2 views are more of a structural problem with the Catholic Church and its theology .

Heaven is accessible only thru the sacraments . Only Priests can provide the sacraments . If the Church is forced to choose between a Priest and an individual they believe they must always support the Priest . More " good " is achieved thru the Priest continuining his ministry ( how ever flawed ) than would be achieved thru his banishment .

Religion is nonsense .

Mr. Chopra has realistcally described the circumstances surrounding the church scandals. He is precise is assessing the problem that will nag the organization for time to come. Emotion does not cure anything and neither does religion.

Pedofile Priests who have committed a horrible crime against innocent children need to accept the consequences for their actions. In this country, we have laws to protect, discourage and prevent anyone from behaving immorally. We elect fellow cititzens to make these laws and expect all to abide by them.

All religion and belief in the world, God or saints does not put anyone "above the law" in this country. Pedofiles in the Islamic world often endure a death sentence for such a crime.

Psychological counseling can help the victims but NOT cure them. The victims are scarred for life. The church has an obligation to care for the victims and absorb the cost for that care within reason.

Chopra, a New Age guru, has a vested interest in tearing down the credibility of THE major traditional established church.

Also, he fails to realize that the vast majority of the cases did not involve pedophilia (pre-pubescent children) but relationships between adult males and young adults/adolescent youths.

The real problem is one of recruitment, of strictly enforcing long-standing Church rules banning anyone from the seminary who might be tempted by teenage males. Unfortunately in the 1960s when so much collapsed, so did a great deal of discipline and willpower because of a fear of seeming judgemental.

Finally the Church got bad advice from psychiatrists; many of the repeat offenders had been certified as cured.

I agree. Priests should be held 100% accountable. If this happens in Vatican city, then let the Pope enforce his laws. But, here in the US, they should be treated as any other normal citizen.

There are MANY things that are wrong with the Catholic religion amongst many of the other religions. I am sure that Vatican city is as corrupt as Capital Hill, Africa, India and Russia.

I think that each individual should believe in their friends and family and not fall in the to black hole of religion.

I could go on forever but will let someone else take over.

Some of these comments about how the Church should cultivate love (Nerakami) or should be involved in various efforts to help the poor (Richard Thomas) show such a complete ignorance of the Catholic Church that you'd think the authors were stashed away in some monastery without any contact with the outside world. Have you never heard of the thousands of Catholic hospitals and clinics world-wide? Of that fact that Catholic institutions take care of more AIDS patients than any other, way beyond the Catholic population proporition? Never hear of the St. Vincent de Paul Society, Catholic Relief Services, Catholic Charities, et al., that do a tremendous amount of work for the poor? Not to mention the many Catholic religious orders that serve the poor and give aid to those in need.

As for Richard's thoughts on what Jesus would do, it's amazing he thinks Jesus would promote the goddess--this would be the same Jesus who said the first and most important commandment is "Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is One! And you shall love the Lord your God with your whole heart and mind and strength?"

Believe as you will, but don't be so dishonest as to put your own "spiritual" ramblings in the mouth of the Messiah. At least try to be honest when you make public pronouncements.

Witchdoctor, Shaman, Ravi, Mullah, Reverend, Priest, Pope. They all fall into the same catagory: snake oil salesmen. Only with the pope, he's also infallible. So really send him your money!

Welcome to our country, Ratso. Good luck sheering your flock here.

An interesting post with a lot of value in it. Still, Chopra's recounting of the tragedy of priest sexual abuse shows only a modest grasp of the picture, one that could be readily gleaned from newspaper and media stories which are, to say the least, shallow, over generalized and mostly sensational.

Here is an example:

"The public was outraged at the leniency of the Church toward child abuse in the priesthood, their policy being to quietly whisk the offenders off for rehabilitation through prayer and counseling."

The language here is universal (dare I say "catholic")-- the church, the priesthood, their policy. It is simply not true that there was uniformity amongst archdioceses, the priests, and the policy. Many archdioceses had strong anti-abuse policies in place years before the problems that plagued the Boston Archdiocese hit the media circus and those policies were being enforced when there were known instances of abuse.

None of this is to say that sexual abuse of children was NOT glossed over, ignored, or covered up in some places or that the Church should NOT atone for its own sins. I just wish folks who have biases against the church would be called into account for their own overly broad statements and indictments of the church. It never occurs to folks that many people are motivated against the church and religion more generally solely because those people see religion as hypocritical and what better way to demonstrate that hypocrisy than churches that are fleecing their flocks.

The sex abuse scandal in the Church is neither universal NOR is it limited to the Catholic faith. One needs to merely do a simple Google search to find the pervasiveness of the problem of child abuse in religious, cultural, educational, governmental and other settings.

So, let’s deal in facts. Let’s not let our passions or anti-Catholic or anti-religious biases cloud them.

Infallibility is only concerned with interpretation of scripture. This is a common misunderstanding.

Mr. Chopra, please correct your statement and article today on what is "papal" infallibility. You have lost all credibility with this democrat, Catholic voter.

According to The Complete Idiot's Guide to Understanding Catholicism: "In reality, the pope seldom uses his power of infallibility......rather than being some mystical power of the pope, infallibility means the church allows the office of the pope to be the ruling agent in deciding what will be accepted as formal beliefs in the church."[2] Since the 1870 solemn declaration of Papal Infallibility by Vatican I, this power has been used only once: in 1950 when Pius XII defined the Assumption of Mary as being an article of faith for Roman Catholics.

no more tainted than you. stop attacking the catholic religion and explain why hindu's or whatever you are, kill your daughters at birth to avoid paying a dowry for them to get married. seems your kind is more degenerate surpassed only by islam and their urge to kill non muslims.

"The Pope sits on a throne that belongs to Jesus when he returns, and this symbolizes a duty to care for the Kingdom of God here on earth. " ~Deepak

I didn't know that.

You know what Jesus would probably say, “the Church has assets worth many billions, and there many living in poverty, what is wrong with this picture?”

Perhaps the Church should be helping them to plant Amaranth, provide potable water and sustainable extreme weather housing and a channel through which every one can contribute and create value in the economic system. Further more it would not be silent in support the few that usurp the wealth of the many.

I doubt you would find Jesus or any character like him sitting on a physical throne, he would be ruling From the Air in a way most would not understand, not by force but by gravity, you might not even know he was there working behind the scenes, which with the Internet could be everywhere and anywhere. The last thing he would want to become is a public spectacle. Rather he would point you to a mirror your own divinity.

I also seriously doubt he would be involved with any organization that repressed the feminine rather he would be mounting the goddess on the throne.

I think the Church, which no doubt played a divine role as everything does, there are no other types of roles, would be rather disappointed unless it’s leadership evolved rather quickly. I also suspect that role that served the old consciousness is no longer fitting for the new consciousness.

The truth is the authority, not some men fabricating fictions, illusionary frameworks or claiming a monopoly on the Divine, and you don’t need to believe the truth; once exposed to the awareness, it simply becomes self evident, creating a knowing from direct experience. In other words if you are really speaking for the divine there is no need for a declaration, claim, or validation with name, you will know the source of the words, your heart will validate them. The words from the divine produce love, the words from the ego produce fear. Not to be confused with words of caution and solution that implore change meaning there is nothing to fear, except a rough ride if one resists evolution.

The divine does not speak of scarcity and sacrifice; it speaks rather of abundance for all.

In a world of truth there is nothing to fear; in a world of fiction they fear the truth.
~Infinite Play

If the church would follow the real teachings of Jesus they would tell people that they need no priests or popes. They need no doctrines. That there is a place within that is more sacred and where all the answers are. There would be no church, for god should not be organized. Either way people are waking up at a tremendous rate. The truth always stands strong and people are waking up and brushing off the dust of lies that have been created.

I must say, Deepak, that as an ex-Catholic the Pope and Catholicism did not speak to me spiritually, emotionally, or intellectually. As soon as I was of an age to really, question faith, god, morals, beliefs, I realized that the Catholc Church was not an authority on God, faith, or morals and that if I wanted answers I needed to look for them other places and I must say your books have been a most helpful guide on that search.

I might add that, now, when I see the Pope, I see a man, only, and, not, in my estimation, a spiritually enligtened individual, but a man who holds on to beliefs, dogmas, rituals, that do not change or evolve and that the seat of power and authority that the Pope occupies is probably more a detriment to the Church's ability to grow in true spiritual, emotional and intellectual wisdom than anything else.

One moment infallible, the next, infallible. Only God is infallible. Only God is Reverend. This man made doctrine of infallibility is contrary to Jesus' teachings. There is no one perfect. The Bible says that ALL, I repeat ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Not some, not few, not the majority, ALL.

Panelist for "On Faith" or not, why is Deepak Chopra being asked to comment on the pope? He betrays culpable ignorance on things pertaining to Catholic doctrine every time he writes about it. His first two sentences in this archived piece are ridiculous. If he really wanted to know what the doctrine of papal infallibility truly is, you'd think he would at least look it up in the Catechism or Catholic encyclopedia. Infallibility is only engaged when the pope defines a doctrine of faith or morals that is already found in the deposit of faith. He cannot "invent" a new teaching. Nor can he define infallibly unless he is addressing the universal Church. He must then declare that the definition is taken from the sacred deposit (scripture and tradition) and that he intends to pronounce the doctrine for all time, thereby declaring it to be irreformable. How rare have such definitions been in modern times? Very. I need not list them for my purposes here. Unless the conditions defining an ex cathedra papal pronouncement are met, as were laid out at Vatican I,then the pope is, of course, fallible. If it were as Chopra implies, then a Catholic would be wasting his time praying for the pope, that he stands firm in the faith. It would be guaranteed. I did write a review of Dr. Chopra's new book if you are interested.

The Catholic Church has created a role for the Pope with certain expectations which most Catholics believe the Pope achieves and maintains. Well, he certainly carries out his duties diligently and since most of us see only with the physical eyes, conclude that the Pope embodies the qualities they expect. He may or may not be authentic as we are unable to see in his heart and mind, but God does. For me personally, the human psyche has outgrown organized religion. Historically, Christianity has condoned some of the greatest atrocities in our existence and today, we continue to murder in the name of religion. It has become a fight over dogma and theology with very little focus and effort placed on cultivating, assimilating and ultimately living the quality of God = LOVE. Today, humans require a more relatable and personal approach to God. Religion in my mind is the choke-hold on the human spirit, all in the head and not in the heart. Ritualistic words are repeated over and over without ever seeping in to be-ing of the individual. For every action, there is consequence... it is reaping what is sown and if a man breaks the laws established by man to maintain the peace, then the consequence is he has to pay the price. On the other hand there has to be a compassionate approach to our punishment, in that if a man because of his biological or environmental upbringing has developed certain psychological disorders, then it becomes our Godly obligation to ensure that along with fulfilling that punishment this person receives therapy for his disorder. In light of our ONE-ness, discarding this individual is essentially discarding a part of our own selves. Understanding, compassion, forgiveness, tolerance are the qualities we all should meditate on if we are to ever evolve beyond mere words....

"Because the Church's position is that he is infallible to begin with"

This is a gross misrepresentation of Catholic doctrine.

The Church's position is not that the pope is infallible, say, as a person.

The church's position is that the Pope is able to make a true (infallible) statement of faith, in a matter of formal church doctrine.

Since the 1870 solemn declaration of Papal Infallibility by Vatican I, this power has been used only once: in 1950 when Pius XII defined the Assumption of Mary as being an article of faith for Roman Catholics.

I'm disappointed in Mr Chopra for propagating this unfortunately common prejudice against Catholicism.