1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderThat article probably doesnt cover the politicians that advocate the death penalty or aggressive war .
It is a fallacy to say pro-choice politicians i.e. those who oppose criminal laws against abortion are "advocating doctrines that oppose RC teachings" as I was unaware that the Catholic Church doctrine consisted of commandments ...[text shortened]... g into the criminal law to be imposed on ALL people is irrelevant.
but thats not whats wrong it's the concept that the pope can tell Catholics what their political beliefs are..
You'd think that the long history of how the church's meddling in secular matters has caused enormous human suffering, that the Church would understand by now:that religion and politics dont mix.
Originally posted by ivanhoeOn the protestant side of the isle I can tell you about churches where you are not worthy to take communion and clearly not saved if you go to see a movie.
People who publicly advocate doctrines that contradict the RC teachings in a serious and fundamental way and they insist on advocating them publicly, knowing that these teachings are clearly and fundamentally at odds with RC doctrine, place THEMSELVES outside of the Communion. It is not correct for these people to try and give another, a false impression ...[text shortened]... hould not become a plaything in the hands of politicians who clearly make a mockery of it.
Originally posted by kirksey957The Eucharist is God's gift to humanity through the Church. So yes, the Church does have the authority to determine who should and should not receive it.
One other question. Do you believe that the sacrament of communion belongs to the pope, bishop or priest in terms of determining who is worthy to receive it?
Originally posted by frogstomp
How dare they have an idea the pope dont like , maybe they should be burned at the stake after being sufficiently tortured into confessing that they are indeed in league with Satan.
and lets burn all the left wing books too since we'll have a nice fire going
C'mon stompy, don't make a fool of yourself. It is not about the Pope's opinion. It's about the Church's teachings.
Originally posted by lucifershammerLOL. An ass-whuppin' over a pie-throwin'? Are you quoting a religious conservative or Stone Cold Steve Austin?
Here's a nice article on a related subject:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=108&ncid=742&e=10&u=/ucac/20050414/cm_ucac/itsonlyfunnyuntilsomeonelosesapie
Liberals enjoy claiming that they are intellectuals, thrilled to engage in a battle of wits. This, they believe, distinguishes them from conservatives, who are religious fana ...[text shortened]... square with the fact that liberals keep responding to conservative ideas by throwing food.
Originally posted by frogstomp
That aint what the church is doing Ivanhoe . it's trying to force it's morality on non-Catholic's by force of law. And is selling its very soul in an ungodly alliance with the the rich and the Catholic hating Bible belt.
Where are the Mother Teresa's going to come from if the only Catholic's left are the rich and powerful?
What do you suggest the Church must do ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeQuestion: Let's say that at some future time, the Church (for whatever reason) decides to include condoms in the approved list of birth control methods.
Goodbye, fellow knight.
What happens to all the Catholics who used condoms before they were approved? Are they forgiven retro-actively? Or, do you think that changing Church policy on this (or any other) issue would create such a dilemma that the dilemma itself is a powerful incentive to keep policy the same?
Just wondering.
(BTW, you're not trying to convert me, are you?)
Originally posted by KneverKnightAnswer: The church is NOT going to include condoms in an "approved list" of birth control methods. Period.
Question: Let's say that at some future time, the Church (for whatever reason) decides to include condoms in the approved list of birth control methods.
What happens to all the Catholics who used condoms before they were approved? Are they forgiven retro-actively? Or, do you think that changing Church policy on this (or any other) issue would create ...[text shortened]... ive to keep policy the same?
Just wondering.
(BTW, you're not trying to convert me, are you?)
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
LOL. An ass-whuppin' over a pie-throwin'? Are you quoting a religious conservative or Stone Cold Steve Austin?
Well BDP, if I look at my experiences with certain people on RHP who call themselves liberal I must say that this description is frightfully correct ..... please don't take the pies to literal in this case.
2 edits
Originally posted by KneverKnightThe use of artificial birth control methods is not morally acceptable according to RC teachings. There are reasons for that. (See Paul the VI's famous encyclical "Humanae Vitae" below) The Church will never change the heart of those teachings.
Question: Let's say that at some future time, the Church (for whatever reason) decides to include condoms in the approved list of birth control methods.
What happens to all the Catholics who used condoms before they were approved? A ...[text shortened]... Just wondering.
(BTW, you're not trying to convert me, are you?)
Condoms will never be an acceptable birth control method. Only the method based on the woman's period is.
KKnight: " ....... issue would create such a dilemma that the dilemma itself is a powerful incentive to keep policy the same?
No that's not the reason.
HUMANAE VITAE
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PAUL VI
ON THE REGULATION OF BIRTH
JULY 25, 1968
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html
KKnight: "(BTW, you're not trying to convert me, are you?)"
(Jesus, deliver me !)
Originally posted by ivanhoeOK. I can't help but see someone painting himself into a corner here, a la rejection of the Heliocentric viewpoint, (ie what happens if bio-feedback or something unthought of could be made to work as a viable method of birth control?)
The use of artificial birth control methods is not morally acceptable according to RC teachings. There are reasons for that. (See Paul the VI's famous encyclical "Humanae Vitae" below) The Church will never change the heart of those teachings.
Condoms will never be an acceptable birth control method. Only the method based on the woman's period is.
...[text shortened]... ml
KKnight: "(BTW, you're not trying to convert me, are you?)"
(Jesus, deliver me !)
It's all very well for a group of virgin, male idealists who don't have to worry about where their next meal is coming from to lay down the law for downtrodden mothers in the third world ...
BTW, condoms can be used to prevent disease.
Anyways, soon there will be a smoking chimney and the future path of the Church will be pointed to.
Originally posted by KneverKnightThis would also be ruled out. Consider the following:
...what happens if bio-feedback or something unthought of could be made to work as a viable method of birth control?
"Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means."