Should the catholic church change & listen to the voice of the people?

Because the Catholic church is the largest provider of health care in those areas most ravaged by the AIDS epidemic - like Africa.

They can do it, they choose not to. Condoms at that point are not being used to prevent conception but to save a life.

 

I think the stance birth control is one of the biggest things the Catholic Church needs to change. Millions of Catholics practice some form of birth control other than the approved "rhythm method" and doing so makes them no less Catholic.

 

Have you ever noticed that every time there is a religious post here on BigSoccer -- especially a post on Catholicism -- the house liberals chime in with some anti-Christian or Anti-Catholic thought or suggestion simply to make themselves antagonistic...like clockwork!

Hey Revolt: Christians don't use them... try abstinence!

 

I agree with this, and I worry a bit to see them in such a rush to canonize JP2. Are they hiding something about JP? Or is this a desperate attempt to capitalize on the goodwill the church has enjoyed his death before his body gets too cold? Or is this a cynical attempt to solidify JP's socially conservative views as the roman catholic platform?

Otherwise, why couldn't you wait 5 years?

And to awkwardly stretch the HoF comparison, the NBA could have let Magic and Bird enter the Hall at the same time. But to do so would signal that Magic was bigger than the Hall and devalue it for all other inductees. Magic had to come to the Hall, not vice versa.

 

*snicker*

 

They should get credit for that, no?

 

I just realized why you are as confused as you fvcking are... You need to get laid! You and Elizabeth/PopSportsEtc/DumbGirl202 need to make an appointment sometime.

 

Have you ever noticed that every time there is a religious post here on BigSoccer -- especially a post on Catholicism, ItN comes around, as regular as clockwork proclaiming what a great Catholic he is, even though he's not?

 

Yes, but the 5 year waiting period also exists to check all the boxes on the Sainthood checklist. They're not altering the criteria, simply speeding up the process.
And hey, they made a guy a Saint who didn't even exist and they wacked him from the books a few years ago.


The part you're missing on the other thing is that something does not become more or less moral over time. It either is or it isn't. As I said before, the Church cannot alter its stance on morality based on societal whims or acceptance. If you take the example of gay marriage:

Do I think gays ought to be permitted to be wed in civil unions? Absolutely.
Do I think the Sacrament of Marriage ought to include unions of same sex couples? No, I don't.

Do I think women should be priests? Absolutely. You're not changing a moral stance here, it's a procedural one.

The Church is permitted some room to change as its members continue to change, but part of the Church's function is to provide the moral compass, and that piece must remain static.

 

Get credit for the good works on the basic health care they provide? Sure.

Get credit for not encouraging husbands who are HIV positive to wear a condom so as not to infect their wives? No.

 

I agree.

I disagree. Catholicism holds that artificial means of contraception is wrong. Whether you choose to believe this is your own decision. The Catholic Church should not change its stance just because many people do it. What they should not be doing, however, is lying about the effectiveness of condoms as a means to prevent the spread of disease. That is beyond wrong and bordering on evil.

 

He'd have to leave his parents basement first.

 

You give him ******** for attacking ITN, who contributes nothing to this forum but aggravation and occasional unintentional comedy but that georgeplmr character and go around offering to beat up other posters without a word?

Apologies if you've said something to him and I missed it.

 

Go die a horrific death please. The Church has to do nothing because you say so. No one elected you pope.

While the NBA HOF doesn't waive waiting periods (if the posters are correct), the NHL HOF indeed has, most recently for Mario Lemieux and Wayne Gretzky. It doesn't happen often (7 times seems to come to mind), but it does occasionally.

Now whether the Church should follow suit is another matter. I'd be fine with waiting the 5 year period, but I'm not getting all worked up with them waiving it. There is still a significant vetting process JP2 has to go through before being named a saint, it will take a couple years at least.

 

But perhaps the Church could alter its position on married people not using condoms to prevent aids. Perhaps morality hasn't changed but physical reality has and the efforts of the church and the religious right to prevent contraceptive use in the third world is taking lives.

 

Well, if their position is that each sexual act with a condom destroys life, then the number of lives destroyed via this method is greater than the number of lives dead from disease.

Hmm. Hopefully that's not the gist of CC's reasoning.

 

I believe it is moreso along the lines of the "sex for fun is wrong" - and contraception disrupts the sole reason for intercourse (procreation) in their view.

 

doubt it as the alternative is death for a couple with aids.

 

although to be honest i'd quite obviously still be scared to have sex with someone who has aids, with or without a condom -- rightfully so.

 

Tell the bishops that.

 

The Catholic Church cannot advocate the use of condoms. This is a tragic thing for which there is no simple answer.
Unnaturally interfering with the conception process is a no-no according to the Church and you can't take the contraceptive nature out of a condom.