Fritzz wrote:

"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:Fw_Ge.8520$_%4.3516@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...

Fritzz wrote:

"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:HuxFe.740$iM7.526@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...

The Church of Rome is finding it increasingly difficult to resolve
such conflicting views within its ranks.

That's why you'll never see a pope speak ex-cathedra on such
matters. Only things in the past like the assumption of Mary.
The last time they changed the rules, when they made the Pope
rather than a group infallible there was a schism.

Marriage of priests will be allowed sooner or later and the next
moderate to liberal (relatively speaking) pope will almost
certainly approve birth control in marriage.
Abortion will come along sooner or later.
The RCC has survived by changing and several things you went to
hell for when I was a kid are every day occurrences now. (Or once
a week in the case of meat on Friday)

Marriage of priest may happen, as priest marry in Eastern Church.
Contraception, never. The teaching of the Church against the evils
of contraception is one of the oldest 'doctrinal' issues in the
Church.

It's already been put forth. That contraception can be used in a
marriage if the overall intent is to procreate. Not every sex act
has to have as a specific goal pregnancy.
Since they already allow sex during times when pregnancy is almost
impossible there is some grounds for it in place already.

Source, please.

Hard to find on the web but http://members.aol.com/revising/law.html
covers it in general and the last few questions imply what I have been
saying.
You'll have to do your own digging to validate the following:
1. Pope Paul VI did not relax birth control because the vote was not
unanimous...
2. Pope John Paul I "said he was going to allow birth control... "
"In 1966, there was a Papal Commission on Birth Control. It voted 30-5 to
relax the concerns on birth control. But in 1968, Pope Paul VI in Humanae
Vitae reiterated the anti-birth-control stance. He said this was necessary
because the commission was not unanimous, that governments could force
sterilization if sterilization was "ok", and that men who used women for
sex would lose respect for them. His final point is that God created sex
to create children - and that man should not interfere with this system.
The ban includes all impediments with the sexual act - sterilization,
withdrawl, the pill, condoms, etc. Note that the rhythm method (not having
sex on certain days with the intent to avoid child-making) which once WAS
banned is now considered to be OK. The church called this "Natural Family
Planning". However there are priests who still argue that the rhythm
method - since it involves sex for pleasure while trying to avoid kids -
is therefore wrong. Even abstinence in a marriage is apparently wrong,
since married people should follow God's will to try to have children.

When Pope Paul VI died in 1978, Pope John Paul I was elected. He only
lasted 33 days before dying in mysterious conditions - after he said he
was going to allow birth control and do a sweeping reform of the Vatican.
"

"To summarize: when one compares the 1917 Catholic view of marriage -
"procreation" as a primary end, "a remedy for concupiscence" as a
secondary end - with the 1969 view expressed in both the Vatican
Council and encoded in canon law - "the community of the whole life"
that includes both the "unbreakable compact between persons" as well
as the "welfare of the children," one can see that the change in
Catholic doctrine and law has been nothing short of astonishing."

"On October 29, 1951 came a second important innovation in Catholic
views. In one of the most insignificant settings possible - i.e.,
not an encyclical or synod but rather an address to Italian midwives
- Pius XII suggested that couples, as long as they did not use
"artificial" contraception, could arrive at a moral decision to be
sexually active in a way that did not lead to procreation. "

I'd have to see this to believe it. Give me a source.

http://www.yawningbread.org/apdx_2004/imp-141.htm

Touching the host with anything but two consacrated fingers of the
right hand - and your mouth - used to be a mortal sin.
Now it gets dropped into your hand.
I would suggest that's a bigger change than using a rubber.

You come to my Church for Liturgy, you will not be allowed to touch
the Eucharistic Christ. It is on the tongue or not at all. Note,
I'm not Latin Rite and we haven't changed.

Then your church does not follow the teachings of Rome. You're not alone.

Personally I think arguing over the number of angels that can dance on the
head of a pin to be of more concern than what happens to the christ
crumbs.

There are those who try to claim that the Church's teaching against
Contraception is relatively new. That is not true. On the contrary,
the Church's teaching against Contraception is as old as the Church.

During the time of the Infant Church in the Roman Empire, there were
two companion evil practices commonly found throughout the Roman
Empire - which the Church equally condemned;

1. Contraception, and
2. Abortion

The earliest teaching Document of the Church about Faith and Morals
was the "DICACHE". It was begun about the year 80. It was revised
again later, and was being used by the Church throughout the world
by the year 125. [We know that because archeologists have found
copies of the DIDACHE dating from that time, from most of the major
Church sites of the time.

The Infant Church used this Document to instruct Catechumens in the
teachings of the Church.

That Document, the DIDACHE, condemns Abortion as mortally sinful,
and an offense for which someone is excommunicated from the Church.
They placed it right alongside baby-killing/infanticide, and all
other forms of murder. And they condemned Contraception in the same
breath. The question is, why did the Church place Contraception
alongside
Abortion as a sin? Why did they treat Abortion and Contraception as
companion sins.
St. Augustine and other Fathers of the Church go into this in some
depth. As St. Augustine tells us from the early 4th century, the
still common 'Pagan' practice of his time, was for women to go to a
practitioner of Pharmakei, and buy herbs to keep from conceiving.

By the way, the word Pharmakei means "poisoner". These herbs
contained natural contraceptive drugs/poisons which to a high
degree stopped conception.

But, as Augustine tells us, when such women conceived despite the
contraceptive herbs they had placed in their vagina, then they went
back to the "poisoner", to buy herbs with which to kill the baby.

As Augustine points out, no Christian can have anything to do with
either contraception or abortion.

There is nothing new about either Contraception or Abortion. And
there is nothing new about the Church's teaching that both are
gravely sinful.
Now you know the rest of the story.

Which is interesting but started to change in 1951.

I'm not sure what part of the Catholic Church you are from; however,
it is forbidden in mine.

I'm an atheist. The main body of the RCC allows it and has since 1980.

DOMINICAE CENAE (On The Mystery And Worship Of The Eucharist) Pope John
Paul II

http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2DOMIN.HTM

"In some countries the practice of receiving Communion in the hand has
been introduced"

Fritzz wrote:

"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:Fw_Ge.8520$_%4.3516@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...

Fritzz wrote:

"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:HuxFe.740$iM7.526@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...

...

2. Pope John Paul I "said he was going to allow birth control... "
"In 1966, there was a Papal Commission on Birth Control. It voted 30-5 to
relax the concerns on birth control. But in 1968, Pope Paul VI in Humanae
Vitae reiterated the anti-birth-control stance. He said this was necessary
because the commission was not unanimous, that governments could force
sterilization if sterilization was "ok", and that men who used women for sex
would lose respect for them. His final point is that God created sex to
create children - and that man should not interfere with this system.
The ban includes all impediments with the sexual act - sterilization,
withdrawl, the pill, condoms, etc. Note that the rhythm method (not having
sex on certain days with the intent to avoid child-making) which once WAS
banned is now considered to be OK. The church called this "Natural Family
Planning". However there are priests who still argue that the rhythm
method - since it involves sex for pleasure while trying to avoid kids - is
therefore wrong. Even abstinence in a marriage is apparently wrong, since
married people should follow God's will to try to have children.

When Pope Paul VI died in 1978, Pope John Paul I was elected. He only lasted
33 days before dying in mysterious conditions - after he said he was going
to allow birth control and do a sweeping reform of the Vatican. "

"To summarize: when one compares the 1917 Catholic view of marriage -
"procreation" as a primary end, "a remedy for concupiscence" as a
secondary end - with the 1969 view expressed in both the Vatican
Council and encoded in canon law - "the community of the whole life"
that includes both the "unbreakable compact between persons" as well
as the "welfare of the children," one can see that the change in
Catholic doctrine and law has been nothing short of astonishing."

"On October 29, 1951 came a second important innovation in Catholic
views. In one of the most insignificant settings possible - i.e.,
not an encyclical or synod but rather an address to Italian midwives
- Pius XII suggested that couples, as long as they did not use
"artificial" contraception, could arrive at a moral decision to be
sexually active in a way that did not lead to procreation. "

I'd have to see this to believe it. Give me a source.

http://www.yawningbread.org/apdx_2004/imp-141.htm

Touching the host with anything but two consacrated fingers of the
right hand - and your mouth - used to be a mortal sin.
Now it gets dropped into your hand.
I would suggest that's a bigger change than using a rubber.

You come to my Church for Liturgy, you will not be allowed to touch
the Eucharistic Christ. It is on the tongue or not at all. Note,
I'm not Latin Rite and we haven't changed.

Then your church does not follow the teachings of Rome. You're not alone.

Personally I think arguing over the number of angels that can dance on the
head of a pin to be of more concern than what happens to the christ crumbs.

There are those who try to claim that the Church's teaching against
Contraception is relatively new. That is not true. On the contrary,
the Church's teaching against Contraception is as old as the Church.

During the time of the Infant Church in the Roman Empire, there were
two companion evil practices commonly found throughout the Roman
Empire - which the Church equally condemned;

1. Contraception, and
2. Abortion

The earliest teaching Document of the Church about Faith and Morals
was the "DICACHE". It was begun about the year 80. It was revised
again later, and was being used by the Church throughout the world
by the year 125. [We know that because archeologists have found
copies of the DIDACHE dating from that time, from most of the major
Church sites of the time.

The Infant Church used this Document to instruct Catechumens in the
teachings of the Church.

That Document, the DIDACHE, condemns Abortion as mortally sinful,
and an offense for which someone is excommunicated from the Church.
They placed it right alongside baby-killing/infanticide, and all
other forms of murder. And they condemned Contraception in the same
breath. The question is, why did the Church place Contraception
alongside
Abortion as a sin? Why did they treat Abortion and Contraception as
companion sins.
St. Augustine and other Fathers of the Church go into this in some
depth. As St. Augustine tells us from the early 4th century, the
still common 'Pagan' practice of his time, was for women to go to a
practitioner of Pharmakei, and buy herbs to keep from conceiving.

By the way, the word Pharmakei means "poisoner". These herbs
contained natural contraceptive drugs/poisons which to a high
degree stopped conception.

But, as Augustine tells us, when such women conceived despite the
contraceptive herbs they had placed in their vagina, then they went
back to the "poisoner", to buy herbs with which to kill the baby.

As Augustine points out, no Christian can have anything to do with
either contraception or abortion.

There is nothing new about either Contraception or Abortion. And
there is nothing new about the Church's teaching that both are
gravely sinful.
Now you know the rest of the story.

Which is interesting but started to change in 1951.

I'm not sure what part of the Catholic Church you are from; however,
it is forbidden in mine.

I'm an atheist. The main body of the RCC allows it and has since 1980.

DOMINICAE CENAE (On The Mystery And Worship Of The Eucharist) Pope John
Paul II

http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2DOMIN.HTM

"In some countries the practice of receiving Communion in the hand has been
introduced"

duke wrote:

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 06:50:13 GMT, "Mike Painter"
<mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

Marriage of priest may happen, as priest marry in Eastern Church.
Contraception, never. The teaching of the Church against the evils
of contraception is one of the oldest 'doctrinal' issues in the
Church.

It's already been put forth. That contraception can be used in a
marriage if the overall intent is to procreate. Not every sex act
has to have as a specific goal pregnancy.

Maybe you'd like to explain your second sentence.

Until recent times the sole purpose of marriage and sex was to reproduce.
Even within your life time priests told people that the *only* reason to
have sex was to impregnate a female, not to jst do it for fun.

Since they already allow sex during times when pregnancy is almost
impossible there is some grounds for it in place already.

Nope. Artificial means are not acceptable.

Today.

...

Until recent times the sole purpose of marriage and sex was to reproduce.
Even within your life time priests told people that the *only* reason to
have sex was to impregnate a female, not to jst do it for fun.

Since they already allow sex during times when pregnancy is almost
impossible there is some grounds for it in place already.

Nope. Artificial means are not acceptable.

Today.

Touching the host with anything but two consacrated fingers of the
right hand - and your mouth - used to be a mortal sin.
Now it gets dropped into your hand.
I would suggest that's a bigger change than using a rubber.

Nope, now people have clean hands.

That's just stupid. Unless your nuns were stupider than I think you were
taught that a priest was the only person to touch the host and only with the
consecrated thumb and fore finger of the right hand.
Not the left, just the right.

St. Thomas Aquinas: ". because out of reverence towards this sacrament [the
Blessed Sacrament], nothing touches it but what is consecrated, hence the
corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest's hands,
for touching this sacrament. Hence it is not lawful for anyone to touch it,
except from necessity, for instance if it were to fall upon the ground, or
else in some other case of urgency" (SummaTheologica, III, Q. 82, Art. 13).