The Pope: not using or possessing nuclear arms will be added to the Catechism

[vz71]

Well if one has to argue the logic of the immorality of owning a nuclear weapon then we cannot agree on any premise.

I think we already agree on a number of things.
Most known uses for a nuclear weapons are immoral, for instance.

I don’t think that anyone on CAF owns a nuclear weapon.

It would make a great conversation starter at parties though.

 

[graciew]

Why then would you have such a thing at home?
What was the purpose of buying or obtaining it in the first place?
Sounds dissociated for lack of a better word.
I wouldn t like to live next door or have my property next to a nuclear weapon station,would you?
It is one of those things that sound “ fine” as long at it affects others but not me, right?

 

[Pat_Albertson]

Intrinsically wrong means that there is no circumstance possible where it could not be wrong.
It always is and always will be.

Well, yes, that is the sense in which I meant it, and, so far as I can tell, that is what the Pope wants it to mean too, and that is why I am unable to understand how mere ownership of a nuke can induct one into a state of ‘nuclear mortal sin’, because I am unable to see or believe in the, for want of a better word, ‘intrinsic-ness’ of the sin.

 

[graciew]

I think if it as owning lions in our gardens.One has to feel very omnipotent to believe one can keep them under control. Let us start owning lions in our garden and increase the escalde .
The world has become a scary zoo…in the name of protection , we are more and more vulnerable in turn.
May not be the best analogy but that is very scary at least for me…at the end of the day we are all a piece of meat indistinguishable in the eyes of a lion…

 

[vz71]

Why then would you have such a thing at home?

If it is a sin simply to own one, why does it matter?

What was the purpose of buying or obtaining it in the first place?

Again, why should this matter?
If merely owning it is the sin, then my plans for the weapon are irrelevant.

I wouldn t like to live next door or have my property next to a nuclear weapon station,would you?
It is one of those things that sound “ fine” as long at it affects others but not me, right?

No, declaring mere ownership to be a sin effects all of us immeasurably.

 

[vz71]

I think if it as owning lions in our gardens

Except that they are not lions, do not act without someone doing something, and do not act independently.
Basically, a lion is unpredictable.
A nuclear weapon is not.

These differences alone make it much safer to own a weapon than a lion.

 

[graciew]

It is unpredictable too vz71… the lion lives inside of us or may very easily move inside
Be honest( not saying you aren’t): if I were in charge of NK or say Iran ,and I would be saying no to nuclear weapons, would you and I be arguing about this or maybe drinking coffee and having a nice chat about something “obvious” and out of the question or simply about something more pleasant perhaps?
I am not American so if by chance you think this is about politics and amendments, well no… only about our being zoon politikon

 

[vz71]

Be honest( not saying you aren’t): if I were in charge of NK or say Iran ,and I would be saying no to nuclear weapons, would you and I be arguing about this or maybe drinking coffee and having a nice chat about something “obvious” and out of the question or simply about something more pleasant perhaps?

Actually, yes. I still would argue the point.
I am looking at it as a question of error entered into the catechism.

This could just as easily have been declaration of a sin to own a space shuttle. It doesn’t really matter what exactly this object is, declaration of a sin when there is not one I find to be a significant problem.

 

[F_Marturana]

I’m off topic but I recently read there are more tigers in private ownership in the US than in the wild.

That is due to lax statutes and laws. Some states one pays a fee to become a zookeeper, and then they can own a tiger (or any other large cat)

 

[graciew]

Uh…I ve always had average neighbours with average pets… thanks God…

 

[graciew]

I am looking at it as a question of error entered into the catechism.

It normally goes to the Congregation of Doctrine and Faith too ( if I am not mistaken…)
Thanks for the honesty.It is sometimes difficult here with parties and politics.

 

[vz71]

It normally goes to the Congregation of Doctrine and Faith too ( if I am not mistaken…)

It may. And error could be stopped there.
But then we would have to address the Pope being in error.
And this is probably just as bad.

 

[graciew]

I tend to think it is more of the result of prayer, consultation, experience, knowledge, dialogue … than passing a sudden “ idea” to the “ next department “ but this is speculation , I don’t know how it works .

 

[Pat_Albertson]

This could just as easily have been declaration of a sin to own a space shuttle. It doesn’t really matter what exactly this object is, declaration of a sin when there is not one I find to be a significant problem.

Well stated; that is my problem too, I can’t ‘see’/understand the sin.

It also makes it seem like the Son of God was incomplete in communicating His deposit of faith to us.

 

[Feanor2]

graciew:

Be honest( not saying you aren’t): if I were in charge of NK or say Iran ,and I would be saying no to nuclear weapons, would you and I be arguing about this or maybe drinking coffee and having a nice chat about something “obvious” and out of the question or simply about something more pleasant perhaps?

Actually, yes. I still would argue the point.
I am looking at it as a question of error entered into the catechism.

This could just as easily have been declaration of a sin to own a space shuttle. It doesn’t really matter what exactly this object is, declaration of a sin when there is not one I find to be a significant problem.

I just try to listen and learn from the Pope- any Pope.

It is above my pay grade or station to question his wisdom.

 

[vz71]

It is above my pay grade or station to question his wisdom.

Hence the reason I am looking for an explanation.
Surely this has been thought through and some kind of solid theology is behind it.

But so far… nothing.

 

[Feanor2]

Feanor2:

It is above my pay grade or station to question his wisdom.

Hence the reason I am looking for an explanation.
Surely this has been thought through and some kind of solid theology is behind it.

But so far… nothing.

No, you seem to be questioning whether the Holy Father is in error instead of humbly seeking to listen and learn from him.

It’s not your- or my place.

 

[vz71]

No, you seem to be questioning whether the Holy Father is in error instead of humbly seeking to listen and learn from him.

Then perhaps I have been unclear.
“Because I said so” is an answer I accept from God.

For everyone else, I expect to see some solid theological foundation.

 

[graciew]

The Popes and the moral revolt against nuclear weapons - Vatican News

The development of the Catholic Church’s Magisterium on the tragic reality of war, in the light of the devastation of the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima ...

www.vaticannews.va

“ The Popes and the moral revolt against nuclear weapons “

 

[vz71]

I am relieved to see that at no point did anyone call the mere ownership of these weapons to be immoral.