That’s an outright lie. Pope Pius XII himself helped hide Jews during WWII. Lying in itself is not inherently sinful.I think the great majority of people would agree with you. But, apparently that goes against the church.
Situation 1: MoralI keep hearing that you should never use an immoral means for a greater good. I don’t agree with this at all. The philosophical example that seems to come up is always killing 1 person to save 100 or something like that. This has no practical relevance as the situation has probably never happened in all of history…but let me give you a few examples of things how things that are intrinsically “wrong” actually are for the better.
What are your opinions on these three things? Would you let your friend jeapordize lives, would you let your children die in a fire, and would you prevent the spreading of HIV?
- You are hanging out with someone that has had far too much to drink. They are continuing to drink despite your pleading with them. They are so drunk that if they keep drinking they will no doubt be out of control and hurt themselves, others, or even yourself. You have the oppurtunity to steal their alcohol from them so they cannot drink anymore. Stealing is something that is wrong, right? Would this be a bad thing to do because you are doing an evil thing for the greater good.
- I will use an example from a buddhist text entitled the lotus sutra. I will change it a little bit, but still keep in tact the message. A father comes home to see that his house is on fire. His three small children are within the house. They have started the fire and are worried that they will be in trouble, so they stay in the house despite their father’s pleading. He also knows that if he tries to go into the fire and save them, they will run even deeper into the house to try to hide. He realizes this and tells them that there is a special cart for each of them outside. They come running out of the fire excited for their presents, but the carts do not exist. This man was able to save his children from the fire by lying. Is this wrong? Should he have not lied to them?
- This one will be the most contreversial. Suggesting that a prostitute infected with HIV in Africa makes all of her clients wear condoms. There is no way that you can convince this protitute to pick another type of work. She has to eat and selling her body is the only way to make it happen. If you convince her to make her clients wear condoms, it will prevent hundreds of people a year from contracting HIV and dying in horrible agony. Also, one must consider that the act of being a prostitute or going to a prostitute is a mortal sin and using a condom while doing so could be considered another mortal sin, but it only takes one to send someone to hell, right? So either they confess two mortal sins, or confess none, and they are in the same exact boat if they didn’t use the condom (either forgiven or not forgiven for a mortal sin depending on if they go to confession) except they haven’t contracted HIV because of the condom.
I am sure that they teach not to have sex and to be faithful to their wife. But they ALSO preach not to use condoms. It would go against the church to preach otherwise. And they can’t just ignore the existence of condoms, because if they did people would likely ask them about it and they would tell them not to use condoms.Do you have anything to back this up besides anecdotal evidence? How do you know that they aren’t telling people to be faithful to their spouse and to not have sex before marriage? You’re just throwing out more “the Church is evil” statements based on nothing but your own biases.
So that would be a yes to having no actual evidence then?I am sure that they teach not to have sex and to be faithful to their wife. But they ALSO preach not to use condoms. It would go against the church to preach otherwise. And they can’t just ignore the existence of condoms, because if they did people would likely ask them about it and they would tell them not to use condoms.
Yes, no actual evidence. But are you saying they are telling people to use condoms? They might not actively preach against them (they very well might, I don’t really know) but they must tell people not to use them when the subject is brought up. Right?So that would be a yes to having no actual evidence then?
They have to adheare to Church teachings, so no contraceptives are allowable no matter what the reason is. Prevention of Aids or acne, no go. I am getting mixed messages on the acne/regulating a cycle thing. But, I know they cant distribute them or promote them.Yes, no actual evidence. But are you saying they are telling people to use condoms? They might not actively preach against them (they very well might, I don’t really know) but they must tell people not to use them when the subject is brought up. Right?
And remind me why it’s the Church’s fault that people don’t wear condoms when they also ignore the Church when it comes to adultery and sex before marriage? ABC is a sin and the Church will maintain that it is because the Church cannot change what is and isn’t a sin, just as it maintains that adultery and sex before marriage is a sin.Yes, no actual evidence. But are you saying they are telling people to use condoms? They might not actively preach against them (they very well might, I don’t really know) but they must tell people not to use them when the subject is brought up. Right?
If everyone had the discipline to stay celibate (even Paul admits that not everyone does) then people would have the discipline to stay away from drugs, alcohol, eating too much, and all of the other addictions that plague the world.And remind me why it’s the Church’s fault that people don’t wear condoms when they also ignore the Church when it comes to adultery and sex before marriage? ABC is a sin and the Church will maintain that it is because the Church cannot change what is and isn’t a sin, just as it maintains that adultery and sex before marriage is a sin.
If people live a moral life then these issues simply do not exist. All you’re doing is bashing the Church because you disagree with it.
But Paul recommends that if you can’t then you should get married so that you can still be within God’s plan for human sexuality.If everyone had the discipline to stay celibate (even Paul admits that not everyone does) then people would have the discipline to stay away from drugs, alcohol, eating too much, and all of the other addictions that plague the world.
In my opinion a person’s soul and their life after death is more important then the 100 or so years spent here. Which is why I’d never tell another person to sin, because I care too much for them to ever endanger their salvation. Eternity is something you don’t want to take lightly and gamble with.The majority of people will not be celibate, and it is unrealistic to think that they will be. In my opinion promoting condoms to these people is the lesser evil because it will help stop the spread of aids. In my opinion stopping the spread of aids is more important than the moral objections to condoms.
The difference is that we KNOW that people will die of aids if the use of condoms aren’t taught properly. We do not know what we need for salvation. We could let people die and hope that they get to heaven, but what if the church is wrong and promoting condoms was actually the right thing to do? We would be sinning and killing people at the same time.But Paul recommends that if you can’t then you should get married so that you can still be within God’s plan for human sexuality.
In my opinion a person’s soul and their life after death is more important then the 100 or so years spent here. Which is why I’d never tell another person to sin, because I care too much for them to ever endanger their salvation. Eternity is something you don’t want to take lightly and gamble with.
Coincidentally enough, we know that they will die anyways. Everyone dies in the end. We can’t prevent death indefinitely.The difference is that we KNOW that people will die of aids if the use of condoms aren’t taught properly.
Actually, we do. Christ gave us the Church to guide us to salvation.We do not know what we need for salvation.
Because the Church simply cannot err on issues of faith and morals. Christ promised us that the gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church, ever. I have faith that the Holy Spirit is protecting and guiding the Church.We could let people die and hope that they get to heaven, but what if the church is wrong and promoting condoms was actually the right thing to do? We would be sinning and killing people at the same time.
If the holy spirit was protecting and guiding the church, do you think that the crusades or inquisition would have happened?Coincidentally enough, we know that they will die anyways. Everyone dies in the end. We can’t prevent death indefinitely.
Actually, we do. Christ gave us the Church to guide us to salvation.
Because the Church simply cannot err on issues of faith and morals. Christ promised us that the gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church, ever. I have faith that the Holy Spirit is protecting and guiding the Church.
Don’t confuse faith and morals with earthly politics.If the holy spirit was protecting and guiding the church, do you think that the crusades or inquisition would have happened?
We can not prevent death, but we sure can prevent an early demise.Coincidentally enough, we know that they will die anyways. Everyone dies in the end. We can’t prevent death indefinitely.
Actually, we do. Christ gave us the Church to guide us to salvation.
Because the Church simply cannot err on issues of faith and morals. Christ promised us that the gates of Hell shall not prevail against the Church, ever. I have faith that the Holy Spirit is protecting and guiding the Church.
Well we can try and hold off death for a while, but not at the cost of someone’s immortal soul. Even a 1000 years of extra earthly life would not be worth loosing your own salvation.We can not prevent death, but we sure can prevent an early demise.
Maybe, maybe not.
Completely irrelevant and merely your dogma/ interpretation speaking there, anecdotal evidence.
In my opinion this is like saying "don’t help drug addicts, they should have listened when we said “don’t do drugs.”And remind me why it’s the Church’s fault that people don’t wear condoms when they also ignore the Church when it comes to adultery and sex before marriage? ABC is a sin and the Church will maintain that it is because the Church cannot change what is and isn’t a sin, just as it maintains that adultery and sex before marriage is a sin.
If people live a moral life then these issues simply do not exist. All you’re doing is bashing the Church because you disagree with it.
Obviously, at the time of the crusades, the church thought it was moral to go into Jerusalem and kill MANY people there. That IS morals. I guess everything the church does wrong and promotes is just earthly politics?Don’t confuse faith and morals with earthly politics.
If by “help drug addicts” you mean “help them to quit” then I’m all for it.In my opinion this is like saying "don’t help drug addicts, they should have listened when we said “don’t do drugs.”
People seem to forget that the first Crusade was initiated because of a request from the Byzantine Emperor who was being overrun by the Muslim Turks. This was during the time of the Divine Right of Kings where they promoted Christianity as part of their earthly duty. Obviously you have no understanding of the context and simply apply modern thought to ancient decisions, which you simply cannot do.Obviously, at the time of the crusades, the church thought it was moral to go into Jerusalem and kill MANY people there. That IS morals. I guess everything the church does wrong and promotes is just earthly politics?
Pope Urban II was the one that made the final decision to go to war.People seem to forget that the first Crusade was initiated because of a request from the Byzantine Emperor who was being overrun by the Muslim Turks. This was during the time of the Divine Right of Kings where they promoted Christianity as part of their earthly duty. Obviously you have no understanding of the context and simply apply modern thought to ancient decisions, which you simply cannot do.
It’s very obvious that all you want to get across is your hatred of the Church and this whole thread has been nothing but a bait so you can complain about how you think the Church is “wrong” and you are “right”.