Just when i thought the catholic church couldn't get any worse

cowzerp

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/fury-as-woman-outlines-abortion-at-mass-210541.html

This institute should be stamped into the ground, Total morons.

Abi

Fury as woman outlines abortion at Mass

By Claire O’Sullivan

Thursday, October 11, 2012

A priest has sparked controversy after he arranged for a woman to give a graphic account of her abortion at a children’s Mass and outline how she believed her special needs child was a punishment from God.

The speech was made in front of up to 100 children at the Church of Our Lady Conceived Without Sin in Mitchelstown, Co Cork. It coincided with the issuing of a pastoral letter by the Catholic Bishops of Ireland on abortion.

Parish priest Fr Michael Fitzgerald did not seek permission from the apostolic administrator of the diocese, Archbishop Dermot Clifford, to allow the woman to take to the pulpit.

Last night, the archbishop said he was "unhappy this speech took place". He contacted Fr Fitzgerald about the guest speaker this week after he received complaints from parishioners who were disgusted the speech was made in front of children and that a special needs child was described as "punishment from God".

Many of the parishioners were parents and relatives of children with special needs.

Fr Fitzgerald said he believed "the woman’s comments around her special needs child were misinterpreted". He defended his actions but said allowing her to speak at Mass "was possibly bad judgment".

"I did not know what hurt it would cause," said Fr Fitzgerald. "I was contacted by an organisation who said they had a woman who could speak of her experience.

"At the time, I thought this is a story that not a lot of people get to hear. I knew the woman’s story but I did not know what hurt it would cause. She explained to the congregation that it was the guilt inside of her that made her feel like that. She was hurt at the time. She had not yet healed after the abortion.

"A central theme of her address was that all human life is sacred, that all children are precious and should be equally cherished and supported. It is a matter of regret that a small number of people were upset at some aspects of the lady’s address, especially as they related to children with special needs. I can assure you that was never intended."

The woman gave her talk at several Masses last Sunday. There were children with special needs in the various congregations.

The woman, who lives in the Cork area, was a representative of the Rachel’s Vineyard organisation. Set up in the US by the pro-life Priests for Life organisation, Rachel’s Vineyard provides counselling and retreats to women who have had abortions. An Irish representative for the group said it "too believed the comments were misinterpreted".

One of the parishioners, a parent of a child with special needs, said he was "gutted" and "horrified" by the speech. He described the decision to allow the woman to speak as "crazy".

Inclusion Ireland said the woman’s comment was a "ridiculous statement with no basis in fact". A spokeswoman said "it will cause great hurt to parents". "This talk should never have taken place," she added.

Last Sunday, a pastoral letter on abortion was delivered to the country’s 1,360 parishes. In the letter, the Catholic Bishops of Ireland argued the Government "is under no obligation" to legislate for abortion due to a 2010 European Court of Human Rights ruling.

.

Seaneh

cowzerp wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/fury-as-woman-outlines-abortion-at-mass-210541.html

This institute should be stamped into the ground, Total morons.

Seeing as his superiors have condemned both the priest and guest speaker and her language, how is this the churches fault?

say_who_now?

cowzerp wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/fury-as-woman-outlines-abortion-at-mass-210541.html

This institute should be stamped into the ground, Total morons.

So the whole of the Roman Catholic Church are now responsible for the actions of one incredible numpty?

It's bad enough for them that they are represented by the incredible numpty in Rome, and I'm pretty sure a lot of RC's are embarrassed enough by the Pope already, but there's no need to tar them all with the same brush!

JohnMarston

Seaneh wrote: »

Seeing as his superiors have condemned both the priest and guest speaker and her language, how is this the churches fault?

Isnt the priest supposed to represent the Catholic Church in his area. Its not correct to say its the churchs fault directly.

Rabidlamb

Last time Glenn Hoddle will be the guest speaker.

Remmy

Crikey.. I wonder will he get the sack for that.

cowzerp

Has he been sacked? If not then they are tolerant to this behaviour, in any other walk of life this would not be allowed.

meoklmrk91

People seem to pick and choose what they like about the catholic church, they want the wedding, communion, christening etc. but many of those people wouldn't agree that homosexuals are all going to hell, that women shouldn't use birth control and a good deal would also be pro-choice as its called. But that stuff usually isn't thrown in your face at usual mass, but in all fairness everyone knows what the church stands for, just because you don't like hearing it because you only wanted the nice bits.

I agree it shouldn't have been done in front of children, thats a fuppin disgrace. But this is what the Catholic Church preaches, it's not like it's come as some big surprise to people. For instance say I decided to join a Neo Nazi organisation really liked some parts of it but whenever anyone said anything anti-Semitic I would get really pissed off. It is exactly the same thing, to me anyway.

Maybe the parents should take some responsibility as well, they chose to bring their child to mass, to christen them etc. knowing well what the Catholic Church preaches.

fishy fishy

Seaneh wrote: »

Seeing as his superiors have condemned both the priest and guest speaker and her language, how is this the churches fault?

seanah, don't be so naive (no offense). Do you honestly believe anything that the "superiors" have to say on the matter. Have we not learned anything about the abuse the church caused and how it went straight to the top superiors covering up and hiding the fact. The catholic church is a business and a very shady one at that. Everythign they do must be questioned.

Riddle101

It's easy to blame the catholic church for everything, but I don't think they can be blamed for this. Hell I believe the priest Fr Fitzgerald made a mistake as well. The woman wanted to talk about her expierence with abortion, he did not know what she was going to say. Simply put it was the woman who was at fault. It was poor judgement on his part, and I don't think the catholic chuch should be blamed.

1ZRed

Remmy wrote: »

Crikey.. I wonder will he get the sack for that.

Doubt it. They're really cracking down on the kiddy fondling these days.

Ellis Dee

That priest is clearly going solo, as the church he belongs to is nowadays a bit less "American religious fundamentalist" in the way it likes to present itself to the public.:rolleyes:

It's all a bit amateurish to have a selected layperson give the flock a tendentious talk about her experience of abortion and try to inflict shock, horror, guilt and fear. Fire and brimstone seem to have lost their effectiveness.:)

I wonder when they'll invite someone who survived child sex abuse by a priest to give a talk to the congregation on their experience of kiddy-fiddling?:D:D

Thinkingaboutit

say_who_now? wrote: »

So the whole of the Roman Catholic Church are now responsible for the actions of one incredible numpty?

It's bad enough for them that they are represented by the incredible numpty in Rome, and I'm pretty sure a lot of RC's are embarrassed enough by the Pope already, but there's no need to tar them all with the same brush!

Yes. His superiors have condemned this malevolent Fr Dougal, so wider condemnation is out of order.

tony81

cowzerp wrote: »

Has he been sacked? If not then they are tolerant to this behaviour, in any other walk of life this would not be allowed.

Hmm, I feel the need to write a hateful and moronic Catholic-bashing thread. I know, I'll post in AH so maybe if I feign anger or humour I'll get away with it...

People are always saying how pompous and elitist the church is to exclude lay people, yet when someone is given a chance to speak the newspapers seize on it. And then the hate mob descend.. picking up on stories from every small parish around the country and blowing them out of all proportion.

In any other walk of life, the most I would push for would be a verbal warning, perhaps some sensitivity training... which no doubt the priest will now receive.

Walks of life that probably would justify a sacking... James Reilly is coming under fire for his Swords health centre but he's far from being sacked. When Iarnrod Eireann engineers were almost responsible for 100s of deaths because of the Malahide estuary viaduct collapse, I didn't see too many heads rolling at Iarnrod Eireann.. they're just some examples off the top of my head. Even this post, Cowzerp. Shouldn't you be banned for it? Probably, because it's disrespectful to Irish Catholics and many others who may be reading boards.ie.

Boombastic

Catholic Church preach what they believe in shocker :eek:

So the woman is out of order because she believed her disabled child was a punishment from God? But it's absolutely fine for the church to say that homosexuality and abortion will send you to hell.

Einhard

Priest is in idiot.

But...people who advocate abortion aren't following the Catholic Church's teaching, so why keep up a charade by pretending they are Catholic?

tony81

Ellis Dee wrote: »

I wonder when they'll invite someone who survived child sex abuse by a priest to give a talk to the congregation on their experience of kiddy-fiddling?:D:D

I like the way you threw a few 's in there to try to sound humorous rather than ignorant.

But can you imagine the headline "horror as insensitive priest invites child sex victim to give talk"; "scandal as children were present when child sex abuse victim gave graphic account..." etc etc

Really, this discussion isn't suited to AH in my opinion, and neither is church-bashing. I'm sure Stormfront have more suitable forums for bashing various religions.

Einhard

tony81 wrote: »

I'm sure Stormfront have more suitable forums for bashing various religions.

Ah yes, because criticising the Catholic Church is now akin to the activities of StormFront members, such as alternately denying the Holocaust and celebrating the Holocaust, and of course engaging in violent attacks on people of colour. An entirely appropriate analogy to be sure...

Mint Sauce

Seaneh wrote: »

Seeing as his superiors have condemned both the priest and guest speaker and her language, how is this the churches fault?

Is and it isn't. With the X-case, the passed abortion referendum still not put into legislation, and the now so called expert panel discussing it. The church are now getting in on the debate to pressure its congregation to somehow protest against abortion ever going through in any circumstances.

I was in my local parish church for the first time a couple of months ago for the first time in years, other than funerals and xmas, and left horrified and disgusted at what I had witnessed and heard. They had used the pulpit as well to promote a pro life group, that would provide help, advice, and even respite care for families whose unborn child may not survive childbirth, or where the life of the mother was at risk, due to pregnancy, child birth complications, or a diagnoses of the foetus.

Whislt I have no issue with the prolife/choice debate, I dont feel a church is a place to debate or promote it, for two reasons, its going to be a totally one sided debate to a majority of ears that are more than likely going to be prolife, and secondly, my ingrained catholic beleive (dispite being a lasped one my self) that the church was a place for worship and not political debate.

Einhard

irish-stew wrote: »

Is and it isn't. With the X-case, the passed abortion referendum still not put into legislation, and the now so called expert panel discussing it. The church are now getting in on the debate to pressure its congregation to somehow protest against abortion ever going through in any circumstances.

I was in my local parish church for the first time a couple of months ago for the first time in years, other than funerals and xmas, and left horrified and disgusted at what I had witnessed and heard. They had used the pulpit as well to promote a pro life group, that would provide help, advice, and even respite care for families whose unborn child may not survive childbirth, or where the life of the mother was at risk, due to pregnancy, child birth complications, or a diagnoses of the foetus.

Whislt I have no issue with the prolife/choice debate, I dont feel a church is a place to debate or promote it, for two reasons, its going to be a totally one sided debate to a majority of ears that are more than likely going to be prolife, and secondly, my ingrained catholic beleive (dispite being a lasped one my self) that the church was a place for worship and not political debate.

So, lemme get this straight...you went to a Catholic Church, and left horrified and disgusted when Catholic teaching was expounded from the pulpit? I think the problem here is clearly with you, and not with the Church. You find Church teaching offensive; you rarely go to Mass- you're obviously not a Catholic so why not just stop pretending?

tony81

irish-stew wrote: »

Whislt I have no issue with the prolife/choice debate, I dont feel a church is a place to debate or promote it, for two reasons, its going to be a totally one sided debate to a majority of ears that are more than likely going to be prolife, and secondly, my ingrained catholic beleive (dispite being a lasped one my self) that the church was a place for worship and not political debate.

What you don't realise is the Church does not view abortion as a political issue.

While societies become more liberal as political leadership changes, the church is keeping the same position as it always held.

The Church is not just a place for worship. If you just want to worship, you can attend the church building, clear your mind, and say 200 Hail Mary's when no one else is there! Maybe even light a few candles.. very spiritual

fishy fishy

Riddle101 wrote: »

It's easy to blame the catholic church for everything, but I don't think they can be blamed for this. Hell I believe the priest Fr Fitzgerald made a mistake as well. The woman wanted to talk about her expierence with abortion, he did not know what she was going to say. Simply put it was the woman who was at fault. It was poor judgement on his part, and I don't think the catholic chuch should be blamed.

the same woman who is part of a pro-life organization in the USA set up by priests? - not some "random" person who wanted to share. :roll eyes: how convenient

meoklmrk91

meoklmrk91 wrote: »

People seem to pick and choose what they like about the catholic church, they want the wedding, communion, christening etc. but many of those people wouldn't agree that homosexuals are all going to hell, that women shouldn't use birth control and a good deal would also be pro-choice as its called. But that stuff usually isn't thrown in your face at usual mass, but in all fairness everyone knows what the church stands for, just because you don't like hearing it because you only wanted the nice bits.

I agree it shouldn't have been done in front of children, thats a fuppin disgrace. But this is what the Catholic Church preaches, it's not like it's come as some big surprise to people. For instance say I decided to join a Neo Nazi organisation really liked some parts of it but whenever anyone said anything anti-Semitic I would get really pissed off. It is exactly the same thing, to me anyway.

Maybe the parents should take some responsibility as well, they chose to bring their child to mass, to christen them etc. knowing well what the Catholic Church preaches.

In fairness I think a lot of people feel pressured into these events. I wouldn't necessarily want my child baptised but if it limits the schools he/she can attend in a couple of years i suppose I should.

I wouldn't want my child to have communion but if you have chosen to send the kid to a school(based on quality of education) that includes this as part of their curriculum so to speak and all the other kids are doing it I don't want my child to feel left out.

I dont really want to get married but the probability is my future wife will probably want a big "traditional" wedding as it is a huge thing for a lot of girls (not all)

And on top of this family pressure to keep up these traditions.

Boombastic

tony81 wrote: »

What you don't realise is the Church does not view abortion as a political issue.

While societies become more liberal as political leadership changes, the church is keeping the same position as it always held.

The Church is not just a place for worship. If you just want to worship, you can attend the church building, clear your mind, and say 200 Hail Mary's when no one else is there! Maybe even light a few candles.. very spiritual

One political issue they should address is the state giving free money for the communion dresses

tony81

Einhard wrote: »

Ah yes, because criticising the Catholic Church is now akin to the activities of StormFront members, such as alternately denying the Holocaust and celebrating the Holocaust, and of course engaging in violent attacks on people of colour. An entirely appropriate analogy to be sure...

That's just some StormFront members.
Many others will not be so bad, but will begin sentences with "I'm not racist but.."

And I'm sure there's a special place in their hearts for Catholic Church Bashing threads. "just when i thought the church couldn't get any worse... any random non-event... This institute should be stamped into the ground, Total morons.

cometogether

Special needs children are a punishment from God? What the hell is wrong with some people?

tony81

Boombastic wrote: »

One political issue they should address is the state giving free money for the communion dresses

I know this is AH and I'm taking this too seriously, however..

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/1002/1224324728487.html

In fact, the Republic’s families collectively spent about €45 million celebrating First Communions this year, with a further €26 million collected by children in the form of cash gifts from friends and family.

The church wants to see that spending dramatically reduced and yesterday the Archdiocese of Dublin published a policy document aimed at addressing the issue. “I believe there is something wrong with extravagance,” Archbishop Diarmuid Martin said.

Mint Sauce

Einhard wrote: »

So, lemme get this straight...you went to a Catholic Church, and left horrified and disgusted when Catholic teaching was expounded from the pulpit? I think the problem here is clearly with you, and not with the Church. You find Church teaching offensive; you rarely go to Mass- you're obviously not a Catholic so why not just stop pretending?

No, its beacuse it does not allow for equal or balanced debate. And whislt I'm fully aware that the church would be prolife, and that am rarely in one, I still did not expect such a presentation, that is essentially suppose to be a place of worship and prayer.

eviltwin

I feel sorry for this woman. She obviously never dealt with the abortion and that has led to her thinking her SN child is a punishment. Rachels Vineyard are disgusting for allowing this to happen, they would have seen how vulnerable that poor woman is and still exploited her by letting her talk.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

In fairness I think a lot of people feel pressured into these events. I wouldn't necessarily want my child baptised but if it limits the schools he/she can attend in a couple of years i suppose I should.

I wouldn't want my child to have communion but if you have chosen to send the kid to a school(based on quality of education) that includes this as part of their curriculum so to speak and all the other kids are doing it I don't want my child to feel left out.

I dont really want to get married but the probability is my future wife will probably want a big "traditional" wedding as it is a huge thing for a lot of girls (not all)

And on top of this family pressure to keep up these traditions.

Plenty of children opt out of communion.

Marriage is a legal thing and does not have to have the slightest little thing to do with a church if you don't want it to.

say_who_now?

meoklmrk91 wrote: »

People seem to pick and choose what they like about the catholic church, they want the wedding, communion, christening etc. but many of those people wouldn't agree that homosexuals are all going to hell, that women shouldn't use birth control and a good deal would also be pro-choice as its called. But that stuff usually isn't thrown in your face at usual mass, but in all fairness everyone knows what the church stands for, just because you don't like hearing it because you only wanted the nice bits.

I agree it shouldn't have been done in front of children, thats a fuppin disgrace. But this is what the Catholic Church preaches, it's not like it's come as some big surprise to people. For instance say I decided to join a Neo Nazi organisation really liked some parts of it but whenever anyone said anything anti-Semitic I would get really pissed off. It is exactly the same thing, to me anyway.

Maybe the parents should take some responsibility as well, they chose to bring their child to mass, to christen them etc. knowing well what the Catholic Church preaches.

I don't blame you personally for perpetuating a popular opinion du Jour, but speaking as a Roman Catholic myself, the original ideals and beliefs of the Catholic Church have been twisted and corrupted beyond all recognition by centuries of abuse of power and authority within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church. The desperation of the Vatican to cling to power over people has turned them into nothing but merely a spectacle of ridicule and derision, and rightfully so, but by all means aim your criticism at the hierarchy, not at the Catholic Church itself, as for many Roman Catholics, the Vatican's outdated and ignorant preachings do not represent the views of their congregation.

Many modern day Roman Catholics no longer take their instruction from the Vatican and have no interest in being preached to from the pulpit, but they use their intelligence to be able to read Church doctrine and interpret it for themselves and extract their own meaning from it, which of course means they're going to pick and choose what suits them. Is this not the very foundation of a belief system? To always question your beliefs and interpret scripture as it relates to you, and may mean something completely different to the person beside you?

However the intrinsic belief remains the same- tolerance and understanding of those around you, and I can see why people deride the Catholic Church for what they see as intolerance and ignorance displayed by them. However, as I've previously mentioned, save your scorn for the hierarchy, and not the Roman Catholic Church as a whole in and of itself.


If you think I'm just talking out my àrse, then have a look at the atheism movement and see how now there is yet a new movement called "atheism+", which derides atheists for not holding the same opinions they do on matters stretching way beyond just a lack of belief in a deity. Now they want to incorporate other social constructs in their mantra and if you don't go along with them, then you are derided as an ignorant and beneath their superior enlightened intellect. It's a good thing though that atheists too are intelligent enough that they can pick and choose what from the atheism movement and rightly ridicule this nonsensical extension of what it is to be an atheist, the very same as the Roman Catholic hierarchy should be held up for ridicule and derision for their corruption of the original doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church.

Penny Dreadful

meoklmrk91 wrote: »

People seem to pick and choose what they like about the catholic church, they want the wedding, communion, christening etc. but many of those people wouldn't agree that homosexuals are all going to hell, that women shouldn't use birth control and a good deal would also be pro-choice as its called. But that stuff usually isn't thrown in your face at usual mass, but in all fairness everyone knows what the church stands for, just because you don't like hearing it because you only wanted the nice bits.

I agree it shouldn't have been done in front of children, thats a fuppin disgrace. But this is what the Catholic Church preaches, it's not like it's come as some big surprise to people. For instance say I decided to join a Neo Nazi organisation really liked some parts of it but whenever anyone said anything anti-Semitic I would get really pissed off. It is exactly the same thing, to me anyway.

Maybe the parents should take some responsibility as well, they chose to bring their child to mass, to christen them etc. knowing well what the Catholic Church preaches.

I don't think the Catholic Church, for all its misdeeds, has ever stated that it thinks special needs children are a punishment from God. :eek:

cowzerp

tony81 wrote: »

Hmm, I feel the need to write a hateful and moronic Catholic-bashing thread. I know, I'll post in AH so maybe if I feign anger or humour I'll get away with it...

I'm not faking anger, my 1st son has Down's syndrome and for this cretin to make out he is anything to do with god punishing us is a disgrace and 1 of a all the reasons why this church is hated.

Einhard

irish-stew wrote: »

No, its beacuse it does not allow for equal or balanced debate.

You'd expect the Catholic Church to provide room for debate of one of their most fundamental principles in their own Churches? Why not invite an atheist up as well every Sunday, just to balance things out a bit...

Apologies if that's a bit sarcastic, but I find your stance really odd.

say_who_now?

say_who_now? wrote: »

Is this not the very foundation of a belief system? To always question your beliefs and interpret scripture as it relates to you, and may mean something completely different to the person beside you?

No, it's the foundation of being a protestant. It's the complete antithesis of catholic belief. That's why historically you weren't allowed to read the bible for yourself under catholicism.

If you want to interpret the bible yourself, if you don't like the RCC, then find a christian denomination that suits you.

Boombastic

tony81 wrote: »

I know this is AH and I'm taking this too seriously, however..

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2012/1002/1224324728487.html

You can celebrate without wearing a dress costing a lot

"The government is planning to cut the payment to a maximum of €110. Parents are currently able to apply for a payment of between €200 and €305 to help cover the costs of the religious occasions"

Plenty of dresses in the second hand shop, worn once. In other countries, they just wear their normal clothes with maybe a white top or trousers, others don't wear anything white. No justification for the state handing out money to cover expensive dresses.

fishy fishy

Boombastic wrote: »

Catholic Church preach what they believe in shocker :eek:

you really think so? I think the CC preaches at will and changes the rules whenever they want. I suppose you may not remember the torture they put mothers through when their babies died before getting "baptized" - where was it they were, LIMBO. How cruel. Only a few years ago they then decided that LIMBO was not real at all and to forget about it. idiots.

hurpederp

If a priest were to walk into a typical mass and outline, clearly, and with no vague language, the tenets of the Catholic Church, what must be believed, what ( and who!) must be obeyed, including abortion, marriage, homosexuality and contraception, people would be shocked.

In Ireland, many people attend mass as an a la carte Catholic, because they feel it is the right thing to do, even if they disagree with many fundamental beliefs espoused at said mass. Many priests won't challenge this, for fear of alienating those people.

The truth is, the popular image of Catholic belief is at odds with what is truly Catholic canon. When people are confronted with the true, unminced beliefs they are shocked. They shouldn't be really, it's there in the Bible or the catechism, if one cared to read them.

So when this woman says her SN child was a punishment form God, it has a sound foundation in Christian belief. Everything is the will of God, and it is the will of God for a reason. God has a very good track record of punishing people. God chose that her child would have special needs. Why is it so illogical, if you agree with the Christian premise outlined above, that the baby was a punishment?

fishy fishy

Boombastic wrote: »

You can celebrate without wearing a dress costing a lot

"The government is planning to cut the payment to a maximum of €110. Parents are currently able to apply for a payment of between €200 and €305 to help cover the costs of the religious occasions"

Plenty of dresses in the second hand shop, worn once. In other countries, they just wear their normal clothes with maybe a white top or trousers, others don't wear anything white. No justification for the state handing out money to cover expensive dresses.

the govt and the church should be separate entities. not tangled up with one another.

tony81

cowzerp wrote: »

I'm not faking anger, my 1st son has Down's syndrome and for this cretin to make out he is anything to do with god punishing us is a disgrace and 1 of a all the reasons why this church is hated.

If you read the article, it seems her comments were misinterpreted. Mainly, her feelings of guilt made her feel like she was being punished, as she had not recovered from the psychological effects of abortion.

Einhard

fishy fishy wrote: »

you really think so? I think the CC preaches at will and changes the rules whenever they want. I suppose you may not remember the torture they put mothers through when their babies died before getting "baptized" - where was it they were, LIMBO. How cruel. Only a few years ago they then decided that LIMBO was not real at all and to forget about it. idiots.

Actually, the Catholic Church has been remarkably consistent in their teachings for over a millenia. They're possibly the most conservative organisation on the planet. If there's one charge that can't be laid against the Vatican, it's changing its minds about things in a willy nilly fashion. I think it's a tad unfair for people to condemn the Church for being out of step, and then condemn it even more when they finally, eventually take a small progressive step.

tony81

fishy fishy wrote: »

the govt and the church should be separate entities. not tangled up with one another.

On one hand, you have a Church saying "do not spend too much money"

And on the other, we have people looking for state support so they can spend a lot of money on communion dresses and a party.

Where's the entanglement? There's just greedy people and a government trying to keep every idiot happy.

Mint Sauce

Einhard wrote: »

You'd expect the Catholic Church to provide room for debate of one of their most fundamental principles in their own Churches? Why not invite an atheist up as well every Sunday, just to balance things out a bit...

Apologies if that's a bit sarcastic, but I find your stance really odd.

Whilst I dont expect someone from a prochoice group to get up on the alter, my stance was that I thought it was a misuse of the alter, and not nessesarly their teachings or believes.

Its possible that it was my own thoughts on the prolife/choice debate that caused my reaction, the fact that I havn't been to a church service for a while other than the examples I named, and maybe probably never paid much attention for the few years up until when I did stop going, I just was not expecting such a presentation on a Saturday evening.

Boombastic

fishy fishy wrote: »

you really think so? I think the CC preaches at will and changes the rules whenever they want. I suppose you may not remember the torture they put mothers through when their babies died before getting "baptized" - where was it they were, LIMBO. How cruel. Only a few years ago they then decided that LIMBO was not real at all and to forget about it. idiots.

No they didn't.
Media reports that by the document "the Pope closed Limbo"[29] are thus without foundation. In fact, the document explicitly states that "the theory of limbo, understood as a state which includes the souls of infants who die subject to original sin and without baptism, and who, therefore, neither merit the beatific vision, nor yet are subjected to any punishment, because they are not guilty of any personal sin. This theory, elaborated by theologians beginning in the Middle Ages, never entered into the dogmatic definitions of the Magisterium. Still, that same Magisterium did at times mention the theory in its ordinary teaching up until the Second Vatican Council. It remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis" (second preliminary paragraph); and in paragraph 41 it repeats that the theory of Limbo "remains a possible theological opinion".

fishy fishy

Einhard wrote: »

Actually, the Catholic Church has been remarkably consistent in their teachings for over a millenia. They're possibly the most conservative organisation on the planet. If there's one charge that can't be laid against the Vatican, it's changing its minds about things in a willy nilly fashion. I think it's a tad unfair for people to condemn the Church for being out of step, and then condemn it even more when they finally, eventually take a small progressive step.

would differ on everything you stated above.
the catholic church is a business - a business that preys on the vulnerable in the most tortuous way (sp), by exploiting their emotional wellbeing in order to gain "followers". absolutely nothing to do with living "right" or living "wrong". Their teachings have been consistent alright - consistently anti-women, and cruel. Thank goodness people have woken up to them and now they HAVE to come in line with modern times to keep the money rolling in. While their are "teaching" and "preaching" to the "flock" they seem to think they can do whatever they want themselves, again preying on the vulnerable and making sure about the "secrecy". Vultures.

fishy fishy

Boombastic wrote: »

No they didn't.
Media reports that by the document "the Pope closed Limbo"[29] are thus without foundation. In fact, the document explicitly states that "the theory of limbo, understood as a state which includes the souls of infants who die subject to original sin and without baptism, and who, therefore, neither merit the beatific vision, nor yet are subjected to any punishment, because they are not guilty of any personal sin. This theory, elaborated by theologians beginning in the Middle Ages, never entered into the dogmatic definitions of the Magisterium. Still, that same Magisterium did at times mention the theory in its ordinary teaching up until the Second Vatican Council. It remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis" (second preliminary paragraph); and in paragraph 41 it repeats that the theory of Limbo "remains a possible theological opinion".

they actually did - I was there and I heard it right from the horses mouth. Just one of their backtracks in recent years.

Boombastic

fishy fishy wrote: »

they actually did - I was there and I heard it right from the horses mouth. Just one of their backtracks in recent years.

What horse would that be?

fishy fishy

Boombastic wrote: »

No they didn't.
Media reports that by the document "the Pope closed Limbo"[29] are thus without foundation. In fact, the document explicitly states that "the theory of limbo, understood as a state which includes the souls of infants who die subject to original sin and without baptism, and who, therefore, neither merit the beatific vision, nor yet are subjected to any punishment, because they are not guilty of any personal sin. This theory, elaborated by theologians beginning in the Middle Ages, never entered into the dogmatic definitions of the Magisterium. Still, that same Magisterium did at times mention the theory in its ordinary teaching up until the Second Vatican Council. It remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis" (second preliminary paragraph); and in paragraph 41 it repeats that the theory of Limbo "remains a possible theological opinion".

The fundamental importance, in Roman Catholic theology, of the sacrament of water baptism gives rise to the argument that, because original sin excludes from the beatific vision enjoyed by the souls in heaven, those who have not been freed from it either by the sacrament or by baptism of desire or baptism of blood are not eligible for entry into heaven.


you forgot this bit in your quote above.

tony81

fishy fishy wrote: »

you really think so? I think the CC preaches at will and changes the rules whenever they want. I suppose you may not remember the torture they put mothers through when their babies died before getting "baptized" - where was it they were, LIMBO. How cruel. Only a few years ago they then decided that LIMBO was not real at all and to forget about it. idiots.

Limbo was never an official doctrine of the church. Theologians dreamt it up to explain what probably happens to babies who have not sinned but who die before they're baptised (stillborn, miscarried or aborted)

This probably explains why the Catholic Church is so unfashionably "pro-life"