Posted on 03/10/2008 10:55:06 AM PDT by Reeses
Vatican City (AHN) - In an attempt to give moral and ethical behavior more significance to current times, the Vatican has recently announced seven new deadly sins, published in an issue of the L'Osservatore Romano, the Vatican's official newspaper.
The revision of the list comes after 1,500 years, with Vatican officials explaining that the new items address a global "secular" society bent on the concerns in the age of globalization. The sins are said to be an address to the "decreasing sense of sin" in the modern world.
"The sins of today have a social resonance as well as an individual one," said Monsignor Gianfranco Girotti, head of the Apostolic Penitentiary. "In effect, it is more important than ever to pay attention to your sins."
Mgr Girotti named the new mortal sins to be (1)genetic modification; (2) human experimentations, (3) polluting the environment; (4) social injustice; (5) causing poverty; (6) financial gluttony; and (7) taking drugs.
The sins were added, according to the Telegraph, to the original seven, which Mgr Girotti described has having "rather individualistic dimenion(s)."
Mgr Girotti explained that numbers have shown that less Catholics in Italy go to confession, with 60 percent no longer participating in what is considered one of the most important sacraments.
In remedying this, he acknowledged that priests must also consider new sins, brought about by changes in the global community.
"You offend God not only by stealing, blaspheming or coveting your neighbor's wife, but also by ruining the environment, carrying out mortally debatable scientific experiments, or allowing genetic manipulations which alter DNA or compromise embryos," the Times quoted Mgr Girotti.
Girotti also recognized the growing problems of abortion, pedophilia, and a widespread habit of "making do without God."
"Those who trust in themselves and in their own merits are, as it were, blinded by their own 'I', and their hearts harden in sin," said Girotti.
“...They don’t obey the Bible much in that area (little or no biblical order in the home), nor do many people teach them that they should.”
LOL! Not biting. Our discussion is indulgences and that is what I will ask them.
Later.
"Satan clearly has made several footholds into the Vatican. The sin of envy is always the first to go as this is Satan's most successful franchise."
I take it that these "new" sins are in addition to the seven already in place. That would be fourteen all together.
The original Seven Deadly Sins may or may not be mortal, but there is no doubt that any one of them - pride, wrath, envy, lust, gluttony, avarice, and sloth - can ruin your earthly life.
Just ask Eliot Spitzer about lust.
When I was a kid a missionary came to our church to speak and ask for donations for his mission. He worked in a very poor area where people were desperate. My little sister said to my mother, why don’t they sell the gold we have on the altar to feed those people? Yeah, why not? God doesn’t worship or demand Gold. He isn’t pretentious or greedy.
But...he is...ever read the bible? according to the bible God made moses and aaron loot the cities they captured and make any women and children their sex slaves. all in his name. God does want money and riches, if you’re religious i’d appreciate if you read your own holy book thank you.
‘(3) polluting the environment’ = the catholic church’s adoption of the bogus world-government-inspired ‘man-made-global-warming crusade, led by european and american marxists
‘(4) social injustice’ = a term with as many definitions as there are political causes and agendas, demonstrating a massive degree of moral relativism unbecoming any professed spiritual-based organization
‘(5) causing poverty’ = the catholic church’s attack on free enterprise and capitalism, which, unlike socialism - the catholic church’s preferred politics - do not profess to be complete and utopian solutions for ALL problems, just purely economic ones, leaving it to moral free people and their free associations, not big government, to fulfill any moral mandates to society that free people in free markets leave undone
while professing chagrin at the ‘secular’ world, the catholic church now seeks to purchase the blessings of that world by openly adopting its secular political agendas, and calling disagreement with those agendas a ‘sin’
martin luther may or may not have been wrong in ‘why’ he took the route he did, but the route itself, out of a false orthodoxy was right
here’s a theoretical, but truly accurate scenario
two young boys grow up together, juan and jose
before their teens they grow up working with their fathers in the farm fields owned by others
both boys vowed a better life for their children when they grow up
both boys and their families were regular and faithful members of the local parish church
neither boy went beyond grade school, educated not much more than to read and write
both boys married by the time they were 21
both boys had two children by the time they were 23
they worked together and shared what they earned, over many years, to buy two very small farms
when juan’s wife got pregnant with their third child, juan went to his priest
he wanted forgiveness for both him and his wife practicing any number of birth control methods, as feeding and schooling his first two kids, now made more difficult by the third one would become much harder if they had any more kids
the priest told juan that condoms, the pill, a diaphragm, the morning after pill or similar means as those were immoral - that only the rythym method - followed carefully up to then by juan and his wife - unsuccessfully - could be used
upon return home juan told his wife what the priest said, but told her as well that he bought condoms, would always use them from then on and the two of them should also look at other medical means, besides abortion, to quit having children
when juan told jose, jose disagreed and said he would rather have ten kids than ‘sin’ with birth control
when juan’s oldest boy finished middle school, they made sure their youngest, a girl, went to grade school so that juan’s mom could take in a little work, to help pay for their eldest sons high school
meanwhile, jose’s wife was pregnant with their 4th child
when juan’s oldest boy finished high school, juan’s mom had converted her little bit of work into a small business and her and juan sent their first born to college
meanwhile, jose’s wife was pregnant with their 5th child and later their sixth child
starting from the same position, over the years, jose’s three additional children were a taxing dilema for jose
when juan was buying a new hog, jose was selling his only hog to keep food on the table for everyone
when juan’s middle son was working after school to help keep the older son in college, jose’s middle son had quit school to work full time to help pay the family debts
meanwhile, after a few years of confessional admissions, without shame, that he and his wife would not follow the church’s teachings on birth control, followed by sunday sermons on just that topic, juan had left the church
now jose and his family were in dire straits, about to lose their tiny farm and their children’s health problem’s mounting under nutritional stress
feeling the need of her faith and prayers as her oldest was nearing graduation, juan’s wife returned on her own to church one sunday
after the regular service ended, the priest made an announcement that the parish was making a special appeal for a special offering for jose and his family
at the end of the announcement, and looking directly at juan’s wife, the priest lectured how jose’s plight was a manifestation of the greedy economic system around them and worsened by those who took the fruits of their own success and left the church
when juan’s wife got home and told her story, juan said: ‘those bastards’
that night, he and his wife visited jose and offered their help
later that night, back home, they vowed together they would never go to or give anything to the church again
now, who will god look most in disfavor on
juan, who used birth control
jose, who took food out of the mouth’s of his existing children by having children he could ill afford
or the priest that told jose he was a better man than juan and then blamed juan for the misfortunes of jose - misfortunes that resulted in part from following, on pain of damnation, the priest’s advice
in all of latin america, the catholic church’s new proclamation that ‘causing poverty’ is a sin is a classic and hypocritical example of the pot calling the kettle black
as it continues to pronounce that the ‘poor’ of socialist
dominated latin america are poor because of the mean ole capitalists
yea, right /sarc
I'd still like to see the fine print. For example, there are plenty of "mortal sins" which are not directly and obviously included in the seven "Capital" or "Deadly" sins. If you look at the list, sfor example, murder is not included, though certainly it is a "Deadly" or "mortal" sin.
So presenting this as though the original 7 had been augmented is, possibly, misleading. I bet the fine print will be out in a day or so.
Before we double over with an acute case of gotchas, let’s wait until we see the details.
The more relaxed definition of mortal sin makes it pretty hard to commit one accidentally. It is easier to enter the state of mortal sin if you knew (r really should have known) that the deed was mortal. So this is kind of a "You have been warned," thing.
Personally the idea of "social injustice", is one I find difficult to wrap my mind around. But if somebody, especially a Catholic, had been saying "social schmocial, I don't care," what this amounts to is a, "Heads up. You'd better start paying attention. It matters."
It has to do, I think, not having, as I say, seen the fine print, with culpable and innocent ignorance. Something which might have been culpable before has a greater chance of being culpable now. Good, not perfect but good, moral teachers have delivered an opinion worthy of every Catholics serious consideration. A Cahtolic business man who is intentionally not showing mercy as well as equity in his dealings with labor in, say, Central America, just got told to check what's going on and think it over.
That's what I think it means "on the ground." I could be way off base on this. If this thread is still alive in a couple of days, I'll report back.
In the interests of opposition research I just submitted myself to the part of NPR's "All Things Considered" which dealt as superficially as possible with this, this, whatever it is. It was clear that they intended to make the news as incomp0rehensible as possible to further the notion of the Catholic Church as quaint, bizarre, and barbaric.
None of the things you listed were "indulgences". Not one. Not a single one. If those abuses, and they are shameful, were the source of the chaqrge that indulgences are still bought and paid for in the Philippines that would be a falsehood.
Secondly, the first place to go in the chain of command would be to the diocesan bishop. He has direct control over his priests. In general in the Catholic Church the principle called "subsidiarity" applies. And this means things devolved downwards.
And then you might wonder how the the bishop is going to get the information he needs, and how large his police force is to enforce his policy.
FIrst you guys envision a network of intelligence to put the KGB to shame, and on the basis of that fantasy, you blame everything that happens on the Vatican. It may be fun, byt it doesn't have much to do with the truth.
But, in the interests of truth, I will say that apparently the same sorts of abuses happen in Central America. It's an outrage, IMHO. I learned about it from immigrants (some legal, some not)(And no I did not report the illegals, because when I was a deputy I was told that when we report them "la Migra" doesn't do anything about it) to whom we ministered to -- for free -- and they were astonished.
Really? I think ‘causing poverty’ could be Hugo starving to death in a slum in Caracas. Human experimentation could involve Michael J. Fox growing a chimp out of his head.
Could be a good movie.
Here the false understandings are about (small scale) the context of Humanae Vitae and the prohibition of artificial birth control (ABC) and (large scale) the status of liberation theology in the Church and the non-existence of a unequivocal opinion about what "social justice" is, and the consequent false assumption that if Padre So-and-so delivers himself of a commie opinion, the Church is okay with that. The Vatican is pretty anti- "Liberation Theology" and has said so. The local bishops need to do some bishopping.
If Juan is knocking up his wife imprudently and she agrees, they are both guilty of a selfishness as grave if not graver than the use of ABC. IF Juan is knocking upo his wife against her will he is in serious violation of his marriage vows, which, while they may not say so explicitly, include honoring and cherishing one's wife.
I think most people here are missing the point.
The Vatican is looking at this from the point of view of self determination. If you choose not to volunteer for or give to charity fine, no one’s telling you to.
But it’s a sin in the eyes of God.
Let me be more generic - all good Christians should turn to their Bibles for questions such as these.
So ow much do you think the Sistine Chapel could bring? Who do you think would buy up the items in the Vatican Museum? Soros? Gates?
It’s preserved for all people to enjoy. You act like the Pope is running through the museums at night singing ‘mine all mine’.
I hate to quibble, but NFP <> rhythm method. Big difference. As to the success rate of NFP as compared to other methods, I am unsure.
In addition, the rest of your scenario is very ridiculous. The Church is in favor of personal property, etc. Priests are not supposed to rebuke people publicly. Our priests are, for the most part, very caring people. As is our Church.
Until the 1930s or so, all Churches condemned birth control. Somewhat of a change, huh? Deciding all of the sudden that something ISN’T a sin? Bending to the world instead of holding true to what has always been believed (and is logical given God’s rules)?
Our American Church supports the Latin American Church. This is a special collection and a direct transfer in the accounting books.
To read later
You win 1 internets.
“In addition, the rest of your scenario is very ridiculous.”
no the rest of the scenario is the past 200 years of latin america
the church’s contribution to the culture of latin america’s cultures has contributed to latin america’s poverty from two directions - population induced poverty and socialism
“The Church is in favor of personal property, etc.”
the catholic church speaks with forked tongue when it comes to personal property, wherein, it’s belief in the sanctity of it is as weak as the socialists and derived from their shared materialistic philosophy towards it
“Priests are not supposed to rebuke people publicly.”
the priest, the pope, everyone of them in my lifetime, has publicly rebuked capitalism and those who support it, directly and by name, and often
“Our priests are, for the most part, very caring people. As is our Church.”
if you had said ‘should be’, you would have been more honest and deserving of more respect for your position; the fact is that the generalization that many are not and are not rebuked when not is just as valid
‘Until the 1930s or so, all Churches condemned birth control.’
Until the 1950s all Churches condemned any form of marxism and now ‘democratic socialism’ is the leading philosophical lite of the Roman Catholic Church’s positions on secular issues.
Somewhat of a change, huh?
‘Our American Church supports the Latin American Church. This is a special collection and a direct transfer in the accounting books.’
sounds like your paying your debts for your sins
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.