I think Jerry what finally pulled the wool from my eyes was the Pope's answer to the question of the Lutheran woman about receiving the Eucharist. The great difference between this and other troubling events is that his replies were done in public and on the record. So the Vatican Press Office and others could not say, 'He didn't really say this', or 'He didn't mean that'. The Lutheran's lady question and the Holy Fathers response are both cut and dry. So whilst on other occasions it was hard to evalute things that were as slippery as an eel, it was not so on this case. In either case it is the Pope we're speaking of and I would naturally be very,very hesitant indeed to reach a negative conclusion . Such things take a very great deal of time and care. In either case it seemed so incrdeible that such a thing could be. But gradually since the start of his Ponticficate a large body of very troublng evidence has been building against him. I guess in some respects the answer to the Lutheran lady was the straw that broke the camel's back ,so to speak. I think also the Pope himself is a difficult guy to pin down, he likes to be a little of all things to all men, something of a chimera. He likes so much to be liked. So he can appear to do or say one thing in the morning and quite the opposite in the afternoon. This makes him quite a complex character, something of a moving target so to speak. But at the end of the day two and two always equals four and I did my sums and came up with the right answer. Horrible as that answer may be.
There are some acts that are intrinsically evil and the character of the act cannot be changed. Direct abortion is always an intrinsically evil act. The character of the act cannot be changed irrespective of intent.
Is the Pope a Catholic? (rhetorical question, Padraig, Aviso, Brian and Mac) As a Catholic he is bound by the rules of the Church. The Pope can break these rules and so is not impeccable: he can sin. If that sin means automatic excommunication then it follows he can excommunicate himself.
I am uncomfortable even considering such things. Better to Cross these bridges if they arise. I have no doubt that that Pope Francis is really Pope. ..and that, short of heresy we have a duty of obedience.
Direct abortion as per definition includes the intent to kill it is built into its decription. I am well aware of the nuances
The difficulty is in assessing the nature of the moral object as JPII highlights in veritatis splendour. I teach the subject and known this causes huge problems
Is this a wind up? Mother Church is wise in her decrees. She is not having the hysterectomy to purposefully render herself infertile therefore absolutely no problem no problem at all with having marital relations.
I was referring to Blessed Paul VI. According to your story this saintly (as confirmed by the Church) Pope acted in such a way as to excommunicate himself. As for Pope Francis and the Lutheran woman. To me the Pope was perfectly clear and, as always, humble. He says thoughtfully and without equivocation that he cannot of his own volition give Lutherans permission to receive. He knows this was forbidden at the council of Trent. He says quite clearly again, "this is not my competence." He tells the woman to "talk to the Lord and go forward." He does not say "Go forward and receive communion." He means go forward in your own journey of faith. Don't get stuck on this. Love God. Love your husband. Keep seeking God's will. Keep as close as you can to us in your journey of faith. What else could he mean. He's a Catholic. She can, like us, pray, "I cannot now receive you in the Blessed Sacrament but please come spiritually into my heart." Pope Francis in his conversation with the Lutheran woman (makes me think of Jesus with the Samaritan woman at the well) refers to The Eucharist as the Viaticum that helps us to journey on. He tells her to journey on but does not permit her to go the whole way. This will only be possible when her heart, with Jesus, tells her to convert and she gives her fiat. What's your problem Padraig and all you doubters. Shame.
No need to be so obtuse. How do you know that part of her motivation was not contraceptive? I don't expect an answer. Go and wind yourself up.
So ask serious questions, and they will be answered...so many today!, None answered ! A walk down the forum pages tonight, and NOTHING, no serious question addressed! Notta one Peace
If anyone is being sensitive it's you sir. Now in your post you stated if she had hysterectomy would she be in violation of Church teaching. This was the simple statement there was no talk of ifs or maybes. I answered this simple statement thinking it obvious and hence a wind up. I shall have a whiskey instead but thanks for your concern
Sometimes a discussion doesn't come to a formal answer on anything, but it can be informative nonetheless. I actually learned a lot today about a variety of subjects. I think today was great. No big yelling matches. People put up links to intelligent articles, canon law, etc.
My comment is more abstract P....nothing against most of the Posts today. I learned a lot myself, So many good and wise souls on MOG.
I also just want to note that I really like all of the new people who are posting. Lots of intelligent fuel for the discussion. Some of you may not be "new" but you have just been more active lately. So I guess you're new to me. I won't go through and name everybody but to all all of the people who have been on this thread and others the last week. Thanks.
The posts today are all connected. What makes this forum special is that the believers on this forum are on the search for truth. That is not surprising because Jesus is the truth and ultimately when we search for truth we search for the Lord. Unfortunately, most of our Catholic theologians do not search for the truth but new novelties and are imbued by the spirit of the world. They do not desire to know the truth because they do not know the Lord. They have made a God in their own image and likeness.
This is a really easy question to answer. We taught NFP for ten years but it really wasn't asked. Most Catholics already understood that if you had a hysterectomy because of an unrelated disease condition God wouldn't possibly find you at fault. On the other hand, when doing Catholic apologetics on a large conservative political forum for many years the fundamentalists and anti-Catholics often posed this question as a "gotcha," thinking the argument actually had some merit. It doesn't. It's no different than a woman passing through menopause and can no longer conceive as a result. No one would ask if a post menopausal married woman sinned in this respect. Likewise the only ones who would ask this of a woman who had a hysterectomy are those trying to make a bigger point - or make trouble.
Sometimes i find your comments rather facile Brian. Surely you don't consider me to be anti Catholic or fundamentalist or a "gotcha" merchant, point scorer or a trouble maker. What a lot of name calling. I have no time or tolerance for that nonsense. I have just been to confession but right now I feel like swinging a few punches. Not good, and anyway my arthritis would let me down, like an old labrador, willing to fetch but not too fast. Until recently you were regarded as a trouble maker on this forum. I was pleased to see you back but..... The answer to the question is not always as simplistic as you say if the motive for hysterectomy included contraception. With adenomyosis there are other remedies. But this is off thread except that it would have a bearing on worthy reception of the Eucharist. I will stop here.
Great homilies from a very holy and fearless priest, also a great theologian. He is Father Alfonso Gálvez Morillas. A good help to protect our faith from the attacks of the new and exotic theologies in fashion at the moment inside the Catholic Church. It’s also available in English. http://www.alfonsogalvez.com/en/
