Posted on 05/04/2002 9:27:33 AM PDT by ppaul
ROFL
Understatement of the decade.
Regarding the Catholic teaching on contraceptives, I'm not an expert on this matter. I have never suggested that those who use birth control shouldn't attend mass; I simply stated that the Catholic Church should not change it's teachings simply because some .. even most .. in the church do not abide by its teachings.
On the "sin scale", I don't know where contraceptive use falls. Personally, I think it's a serious sin, but not a mortal sin unless the contraceptive is an abortifacient, in which case it is a mortal sin because it procures an abortion. However, I also believe that Catholics who are actively practicing should try their hardest to abide by the teachings of the church. There are sound moral and biblical reasons to not use contraceptives.
Finally, I just want people who don't agree to just stop trying to tear apart the church. They can silently dissent by not practicing what the church teaches, but to try and subvert the church by saying the TEACHING is wrong (when, in fact, it is a moral good, just not convenient) is doubly wrong.
I'm not explaining myself well, but I feel strongly about this. I try very hard to live by the teachings of the church because I believe they are inspired or demanded by God. Sometimes I fail. But when I fail, I don't expect the church to change because I did something sinful; I confess and repent and strive to not commit the same sin, through perseverence and prayer.
God bless.
The cardinals chose defiance over deference to the expectations of their devastated flock, which thought that celibacy, women priests and married priests might be discussed.
She is incapable of understanding that these "remedies" will exacerbate the current homosexual problem in the Church.
I skimmed her article (thats as much time as I can devote to her silly screeds with getting sick to my stomach) and noticed that she did not touch on the "root cause" of the problem - homosexuality in the priesthood. Rather, she goes out of her way to talk about her Catholic homosexual friends!
I dare say the overwhelming majority of Catholics do not have homosexuals whom they consider friends! They know some, to be sure and some may even be family relatives but to say they are amongst one's circle of friends is outlandish - except for Dowd and her ilk.
The Church has never proposed "eliminating" them. It has always offered them forgiveness, no matter how many times they commit this sin.
Those who want to take vote on what constitutes sin, rather than faithfully trying to follow the will of God expressed through His Church, are separating themselves from the Church, not the other way around. Even if they leave on this basis, the Church will continue to hold a place for them and pray for their return.
And there has been quite enough concentration on the "coffers" of the Church in the USA. These coffers are bursting, while the souls of the faithful are neglected. If it comes down to a choice of faithfully observing the will of God, or having a wealthy Chuch (a false dichotomy I believe), the correct choice ought to be obvious.
Are you implying that they are connected?
Has anyone?
And you seem confused about the commandments, so hear it is as you don't seem to know what you are referring to.
The Eighth Commandment.
Thou shalt not steal.
No, it is you who is confused. The Seventh Commandment is, Thou shalt not steal. Exodus 20:15, Deuteronomy 5:19. The Eighth Commandment is, Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor. Exodus 20:16, Deuteronomy 5:20
And if you're going to continue to vaguely infer that the Roman Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon, just come right out and say it. God doesn't appreciate cowards and neither does Jim Robinson.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.