Cardinal Kasper: Pope Wants a Hierarchy who Listen to Laypeople

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Have you read Benedict XVI's explication of it? Primacy of Conscience does not imply that we can ignore Church teaching and it does not allow us to confuse longings of the flesh with genuine concern of conscience. Yet it is true that if you concience tells us that something as wrong, we must follow it.

Let me ask you this. If you lived during the age when the church thought the burning to death of heretics was ok, and you were convinced that such malicious torture was wrong, what would you follow? The predominant view of the Church that this was morally justified, or you conscience that said this was wrong?

Likewise, I find it morally repugnant to tell a woman, who's doctor has told her that another pregnancy could kill her, that she can't use non-abortive contraceptive methods to prevent pregnancy. Considering Paul, in 1 Corinthians 7, tells husbands and wives to not deny each other their "conjugal rights", ordering them to simply abstain from sex does not suffice. In such conditions I see non-abortive contraception as morally justifiable. In such cases we must follow our conscience, and I am convinced that such a couple is NOT in sin for using such methods. The same goes for poor or even destitute couples for whom NFP is not effective.


Did they? I think the most common excuse during the Nuremburg Trials was that they were following orders. So in fact, the problem was that they were not following their conscience, they were merely following orders. Much like some extremely conservative Catholics who think it heresy to ever disagree with the Church on something, would have us to do. Blind obedience without concern for critical thought or one's conscience is usually a recipe for disaster.

why would I side with heretics over the Church?
sorry, just having a hard time getting into the mindset of your hypothetical question, heretics caused social unrest and led other humans to eternal damnation

1 Corinthians 7 tells husbands and wives to not deny each other,
I am not telling them to deny each other, if they want to have sex, they can choose to have sex
now if they think that the risks to their health or that they can not afford more kids and NFP is not enough of a guarantee, they can choose not to have sex
1 Corinthians 7 says nothing about birth control being permissible
sex is naturally unitive and procreative, to remove the procreative aspect turns it into an unnatural act, to have two people use each other in such a base fashion is not loving, it is taking advantage the other person, and is a selfish act
it boogles the mind that any Christian would try and say such a thing is good

as for the Nuremburg issue, yes they used the excuse of "I was only following orders" because they wanted an excuse that made sense
the defense strategy of "well at the time it did not seem to be wrong" would not have worked at all
 
Upvote 0

ALoveDivine

Saved By Grace
Jun 25, 2010
972
228
Detroit, MI
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
why would I side with heretics over the Church?
Did you see that video of ISIS burning that man alive? I did, it was absolutely horrible. No one deserves to die like that, and I mean no one. So you're telling me that to oppose BURNING A MAN TO DEATH is the same as siding with heretics?!

sorry, just having a hard time getting into the mindset of your hypothetical question
So you have a hard time understanding how inflicting hideous torture on other human beings is wrong?

to have two people use each other in such a base fashion is not loving
How arrogant is it to claim a loving husband and wife who have sex without the intent of having kids are "using" each other. Does it dawn on you that sex can be an expression of love without needing to bring forth children?

it is taking advantage the other person, and is a selfish act
I dare you to tell that to a loving married couple who must avoid pregnancy for serious reasons. Sex is an expression of love and a means of spousal bonding it is not just about procreation. I agree that is a huge part of it, but in a situation where serious reasons exist to render that procreation dangerous or irresponsible, it doesn't follow that sex then becomes evil for that couple.

it boogles the mind that any Christian would try and say such a thing is good
Yeah and it boggles my mind that any Christian would try to justify torture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michie
Upvote 0

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
How arrogant is it to claim a loving husband and wife who have sex without the intent of having kids are "using" each other. Does it dawn on you that sex can be an expression of love without needing to bring forth children?
if a husband really loved his wife, he would not want her to sin by using contraceptives
and if a wife really loved her husband, she would not want him to sin by using contraceptives

true love seeks what is best for the other person, in mind, body, and soul
not just looking for an [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]

Sex is an expression of love and a means of spousal bonding it is not just about procreation.
I never said it was JUST about procreation
I said that the procreative side was a part of it
and it is not like I just made that up on my own, that is the teaching of the Church

but in a situation where serious reasons exist to render that procreation dangerous or irresponsible, it doesn't follow that sex then becomes evil for that couple.
well if it is dangerous or irresponsible, I guess that is kind of an evil?
I mean, it is risky if it is dangerous


Did you see that video of ISIS burning that man alive?
no, I do not like watching that kind of stuff
 
Upvote 0

ALoveDivine

Saved By Grace
Jun 25, 2010
972
228
Detroit, MI
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
if a husband really loved his wife, he would not want her to sin by using contraceptives
Unless he is among the overwhelming majority of the church that does not see contraceptive use as intrinsically sinful.

and it is not like I just made that up on my own, that is the teaching of the Church
The notion of the "intrinsic evil" of contraception is a teaching of the magisterium alone and is not a view held by the Church as a whole. In fact the vast, and i mean vast, majority of the church rejects this teaching. I stand with the 95% of the Catholic Church that does not view contraception as "intrinsically evil". And I am confident that the magisterium will in time come around on this issue....probably around the same time we start allowing married priests. Its all too easy for celibate men to think they can micromanage the sexuality of married couples.

well if it is dangerous or irresponsible, I guess that is kind of an evil?
Sex is good and is a gift of God, and unites and man and woman deeper in love. Just because one of its potential consequences may be dangerous or irresponsible in certain circumstances, it does not follow that the good and gracious act itself is therefore void of value.

no, I do not like watching that kind of stuff
Maybe you should watch it. It may make you less apt to try to justify burning human beings to death for theological error.

I must ask. Do you think the Catholic Church was in the right for supporting the burning to death of heretics?
 
Upvote 0

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
The notion of the "intrinsic evil" of contraception is a teaching of the magisterium alone and is not a view held by the Church as a whole. In fact the vast, and i mean vast, majority of the church rejects this teaching. I stand with the 95% of the Catholic Church that does not view contraception as "intrinsically evil". And I am confident that the magisterium will in time come around on this issue....probably around the same time we start allowing married priests. Its all too easy for celibate men to think they can micromanage the sexuality of married couples.
well it only seems to be the contemporary Catholics that hold that contraception is ok
there were times when Arianism was the majority belief among Christians
when we look for consensus, we can not look only at those who are alive at this very moment, we have to look at Christian history
historically, most Christians thought that contraception was sinful

there were times when most Catholics in the USA thought chattel slavery was ok
if we limit it to who happens to be alive at this moment, you get all kinds of crazy beliefs

and it is true, most priests are celibate
most priests do not own businesses either
does that mean the Church should shut up about business ethics?

and where do you get the statistics that 95% of Catholics do not think contraception is sinful? just wondering

I must ask. Do you think the Catholic Church was in the right for supporting the burning to death of heretics?
heresy was destructive to the social order and to individual souls
do governments have a legitimate right to stop revolutions? you have to remember that most of these heretical movements also came along with political rebellion
look at the hussites for example
 
Upvote 0

ALoveDivine

Saved By Grace
Jun 25, 2010
972
228
Detroit, MI
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
and where do you get the statistics that 95% of Catholics do not think contraception is sinful? just wondering
It is a rough estimate based on data I've seen. The actual number is somewhere between 88 and 98 percent. The fact of the matter is, a celibate male leadership can preach on the evils of contraception all day long, and the overwhelming majority of the flock will continue to use it. This is a position utterly rejected by the faithful, and that is simply not sustainable.

heresy was destructive to the social order and to individual souls
do governments have a legitimate right to stop revolutions? you have to remember that most of these heretical movements also came along with political rebellion
look at the hussites for example
I agree with all of that and I still believe the many in the Church sinned gravely by supporting such cruel and unusual torture and death. Also, you deliberately did not answer my question. It was a very simple question. Do you think the Catholic Church was in the right for supporting the burning to death of heretics? Yes, or no?
 
Upvote 0

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
It is a rough estimate based on data I've seen. The actual number is somewhere between 88 and 98 percent. The fact of the matter is, a celibate male leadership can preach on the evils of contraception all day long, and the overwhelming majority of the flock will continue to use it. This is a position utterly rejected by the faithful, and that is simply not sustainable.
yeah, you are right, lots of Catholics use contraception
lots of Catholics also lie
lots of Catholics are unforgiving
lots of Catholics are greedy
lots of Catholics are lustful

the popularity of these vices do not speak to their legitimacy

also , how can you call them "the faithful" when they do not listen to the leaders?
how about "the rebellious"? would that not be a more accurate description to those who ignore the Vicar of Christ?

Luke 10:16
"Whoever listens to you listens to me; whoever rejects you rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me."

I agree with all of that and I still believe the many in the Church sinned gravely by supporting such cruel and unusual torture and death. Also, you deliberately did not answer my question. It was a very simple question. Do you think the Catholic Church was in the right for supporting the burning to death of heretics? Yes, or no?
sorry, I thought I was being clear
yes
the State gave a severe punishment to people who sought to destroy the social order and lead people to hell
and the Church saw this an appropriate punishment
 
Upvote 0

Martinius

Catholic disciple of Jesus
Jul 2, 2010
3,573
2,915
The woods and lakes of the Great North
✟60,225.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
oh you are only looking at Catholics who are alive at this moment
how quickly we disregard the wisdom of ages past

I think this primacy of the conscience does not make much sense
I mean, if you view another race as subhuman, is someone innocent of genocide?
are all those guards in Auschwitz free from sin because they followed their conscience?

it just seems crazy, makes my head spin to think about it too much
Those guards most likely followed orders and suppressed their conscience. If we only followed rules and orders or our basic instincts and made no conscious, rational decisions would we have free will? Would we be truly human?
 
Upvote 0

Martinius

Catholic disciple of Jesus
Jul 2, 2010
3,573
2,915
The woods and lakes of the Great North
✟60,225.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
.
the State gave a severe punishment to people who sought to destroy the social order and lead people to hell and the Church saw this an appropriate punishment
This statement is incorrect. Most "heresies" were not disruptive of the social order, and in most cases those who disagreed with the established church or theology were not punished severely. They were usually banished and had to move to friendlier and more tolerant areas. Several of the original American colonies or communities within colonies were settled by groups who were seeking to live without persecution. If they were leading anyone to Hell, it was only themselves. Many who were tortured and executed were totally innocent of anything, other than being amongst people of hatred, prejudice and ignorance.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Good point, most heretics did not have harsh sentences
it was not a one size fits all type thing
it was used with discretion and wisdom
with only the most dangerous heretics being put to death

@ALoveDivine why do you call people who are pro-contraception "the faithful"?
also , how can you call them "the faithful" when they do not listen to the leaders?
how about "the rebellious"? would that not be a more accurate description to those who ignore the Vicar of Christ?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ALoveDivine

Saved By Grace
Jun 25, 2010
972
228
Detroit, MI
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Rhamiel, you're such a fundamentalist I honestly can't continue this conversation with you. You approve of the burning alive of human beings, so I can only conclude you are neither moral nor reasonable.

I'm done. Carry on.
 
Upvote 0

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Rhamiel, you're such a fundamentalist I honestly can't continue this conversation with you. You approve of the burning alive of human beings, so I can only conclude you are neither moral nor reasonable.

I'm done. Carry on.

but I am only following my conscience?
doesn't that make it ok?

and I resent the term Fundamentalist being applied to me
I do not think it is a factual term
you could call me an extremist, or maybe zealot used in a negative way
but to say I am a Fundamentalist mean that I only stick with the Fundamentals
then we would have to debate about what the Fundamentals of the Catholic Church are
and then the debate would be how closely I conform to those Fundamentals

oh, maybe you could call me a Radical Traditionalist
that would show your displeasure with my world view and lump me in with a group that you are dismissive of


more to the point, I am sorry that you can not have an open, honest, and respectful conversation with people who you do not agree with
I might be a "Fundamentalist" (though I doubt that term would apply to me, but I am open to the possibility)
so yeah, I MIGHT be a Fundamentalist
but I can have open, honest, and respectful conversations with Agnostics, Atheists, NeoPagans, Liberal Protestants, and Catholics of all stripes

if you have a problem talking with people who do not agree with you, well maybe that is more on you then me?
 
Upvote 0

ALoveDivine

Saved By Grace
Jun 25, 2010
972
228
Detroit, MI
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
I am in utter shock and awe that there are still Catholics out there, in this day and age, who think the church was right to condemn the torturous murder of heretics. It's this kind of evil, maniacal nonsense that makes me seriously consider converting to Eastern Orthodoxy.

If this "Radical Traditionalism" is what Catholicism is all about, then count me out of it entirely.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Come on brother.....do you REALLY not see how burning a human being to death is immoral?! I don't care what they did, no one deserves that fate.

this is actually similar to the topic of Artificial Birth Control

in the middle ages, burning people to death might not have been seen as a "good thing" but it was accepted
it was seen as something practical that just "had to be done for the good of society"
many of the same arguments for burning at the stake are now being used to support birth control
"yeah it might not be good.... but we NEED it" "it is the lesser of two evils"
 
Upvote 0