Vatican adds 7 new mortal sins

[The_GreyPilgrim]

Normally I would be right in with the Vatican but every single one of these “new sins” can be applied to any of the seven original deadly sins.

1. polluting-sloth
2. genetic engineering-wrath, greed, envy
3. being obscenely rich-greed, gluttony
4. drug dealing-greed, Sloth
5. abortion-wrath, greed
6. pedophilia-Lust
7. causing social injustice-too vague, take your pick

I just don’t think that we need to name ‘new’ sins to acknowledge them as evils.

 

[planter654]

There is sense in those words, just ones that our modern world is finding harder and harder to listen to. We need to remember the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus. As we feast, others in the world starve. Too many of us are ready to believe that because we did not cause their starvation, that we are virtuous. We need to remember that to do nothing to help them (or practically nothing) is itself sinful.

Care to tell that to the people’s whose jobs are actually outsourced? There are many former textile workers in the Carolinas who will never make the same wages they made at the textile mills before their jobs were outsourced. Even if they recover, that is hardly a justification. Most people who are mugged recover and prosper afterwards, that doesn’t make mugging them right.

The basic problem with your assertion is that since as a whole we are better off, then the harm we did to others is ok. If we have to harm 1 person to make 100 better off, it does not matter what benefit the 100 receive, it is still wrong.

But again, crime is totally irrelevant. The rich can and do harm the poor and the middle class every day in the name of progress. It is all legal, but it doesn’t make it moral.

–
Bill

I agree with all you have said. But it is not legal it is just their own made laws for the rich. Soothsayers who do not speak the truth. There is no more justice or righteousness given by judges or lawyers. Like Jesus said. Woe to you lawyers!

Like Casinos legal way to steal, don’t you think?

God Bless

God Bless

 

[Sophie]

With the Catholic church sins come and go fairly quickly. When I was a girl it was a sin for any female to enter church without something on her head, God forbid!!! And if you ate meat on any Friday of the year you were hellbound! Around 30 years ago it was scaled back to just Friday’s during Lent. And saints preserve us if you dared to step into any church but a Catholic church! Satan lived in those churches!!! You also could not dare touch the Eucharist with your fingers! Only communion by mouth. If it stuck to the roof of your mouth you were to try to loosen it with your tongue only. Never with your fingers!! That was sinful and scandelous!!! The church taught these were incredibly horrible sins just 40 short years ago. They aren’t anymore. Most of these 7 “new sins” most likely won’t be around for very long either.

 

[Allyson]

ROME — Drug pushers, the obscenely rich, environmental polluters and “manipulative” genetic scientists beware — you may be in danger of losing your mortal soul unless you repent.

What is the basis for these decisions? Are they based on the pope’s authority? Or are they based on Scripture?

Don’t know if this has already been said here, but…

A. All sin is deadly; when Adam and Eve sinned they brought bodily death upon themselves - that is, after the first sin, God allowed for bodily death to happen to them and their decedents because of the Ancestral Sin. So there is nothing new being said. A sin is a sin is a sin. All sin is rebellion against God, and if that state of rebellion is serious - i.e. without repent - at the time of death. Then it is spiritually deadly too. The list you present sounds like example of sin, not a list of new sins.

B. I never trust the ability of the secular media to accurately represent ANYTHING that comes out of the Vatican. Frankly, most writers I have read (in general news articles) speaking about the Church or religion in general in the secular press come out sounding like idiots. (Note: *most *writter I have read)

How would you define sin? What examples of rebellion against God do you see in the world today? I see that you are Protestant, so I know that you must believe that there is sin in the world.

God Bless,
R.

 

[Sophie]

With the Catholic church sins come and go fairly quickly. When I was a girl it was a sin for any female to enter church without something on her head, God forbid!!! And if you ate meat on any Friday of the year you were hellbound! Around 30 years ago it was scaled back to just Friday’s during Lent. And saints preserve us if you dared to step into any church but a Catholic church! Satan lived in those churches!!! You also could not dare touch the Eucharist with your fingers! Only communion by mouth. If it stuck to the roof of your mouth you were to try to loosen it with your tongue only. Never with your fingers!! That was sinful and scandelous!!! The church taught these were incredibly horrible sins just 40 short years ago. They aren’t anymore. Most of these 7 “new sins” most likely won’t be around for very long either.

By the way, if one commited any of these awful sins, one needed to hurry and go to confession to clean them from your soul. Now you can do all this stuff and it’s A-o’k. Time changes ALL RELIGIONS. One testimony to the fact they are ALL man-made inventions!

 

[planter654]

With the Catholic church sins come and go fairly quickly. When I was a girl it was a sin for any female to enter church without something on her head, God forbid!!! And if you ate meat on any Friday of the year you were hellbound! Around 30 years ago it was scaled back to just Friday’s during Lent. And saints preserve us if you dared to step into any church but a Catholic church! Satan lived in those churches!!! You also could not dare touch the Eucharist with your fingers! Only communion by mouth. If it stuck to the roof of your mouth you were to try to loosen it with your tongue only. Never with your fingers!! That was sinful and scandelous!!! The church taught these were incredibly horrible sins just 40 short years ago. They aren’t anymore. Most of these 7 “new sins” most likely won’t be around for very long either.

God gave us the Ten Commandments period! Is the Church saying that God forgot a few? Place them in our Churches teach them period.

God Bless

 

[TOP]

14-March-2008 – Catholic News Agency

Media Wrong about 7 Social Sins, Says Cardinal
Guadalajara, Mar 13, 2008 (CNA).- The Archbishop of Guadalajara, Cardinal Juan Sandoval Iniguez, responded to inaccurate information in the media about the supposed “new sins” outlined by the Vatican this week and said, “The sins are the same, what has changed is the how they are applied.”

“The commandment is the same: thou shalt not kill,” the cardinal said, “and now there are many ways to kill if we apply this to the field of bioethics and scientific experiments,” in which human embryos are often destroyed.

Cardinal Sandoval stressed that the social sins are not an impediment to reaching heaven, but he noted that “going to heaven is not easy, the road is not downhill. The Lord said narrow is the door and few are those who find it.”

He also stated that excessive wealth “goes against social justice; the goods of the earth are for all,” and he explained that the Church’s “social doctrine teaches that wealth should redistributed between business owners and workers.”

The cardinals comments came in response to media coverage of a interview given to L’Osservatore Romano by Archbishop Gianfranco Girotti of the Apostolic Penitentiary of the Holy See, in which he explained that today there are social sins such as genetic manipulation, that undermine respect for life, drug use and social inequality.

The media incorrectly interpreted this application to the social sphere as an update of the Church’s seven deadly sins.

ewtn.com/vnews/getstory.asp?number=86923

 

[swariffin]

ROME — Drug pushers, the obscenely rich, environmental polluters and “manipulative” genetic scientists beware — you may be in danger of losing your mortal soul unless you repent.

What is the basis for these decisions? Are they based on the pope’s authority? Or are they based on Scripture?

If you see what has happened in the developing or under-developed country, you will agree if you are sincere. In Indonesia, a few people get rich by flattening the forests and digging the lands for coal irresponsibly, and bribing the government officers, at the cost of many lives in flooding, landslides, and soo many man-caused disasters.

 

[reen12]

Vatican adds 7 new mortal sins

Good grief. I read about the Super Seven,
and was under-whelmed. Anyone who
doesn’t “get” the moral bases of these redundancies,
simply hasn’t a clue about the application of principles
of justice, moral responsibilty, or the “law written in our hearts” -
which does not require of Rome an explication of same.
Rome comes off looking slightly ridiculous.

Human nature does not change, with the millenia.
And adult human beings may go on, serenely,
without Rome offering Christian adults adolescent,
partly trendy fare - with some “new” sins partly based
on “globalization.”

I ask Rome: Are you expecting me to take seriously
that drug dealing is a sin which we may not have
*known about? *Do you not realize that capitalism
generates the wealth that provides funds for
church attendees to place in the collection basket?
Wealth controlled by a few is hardly a “new” sin.
The whole effort smacked of the sophomoric.

I suggest that Rome spend far more time and energy
binding up the deep emotional wounds, inflicted on helpless children, by some errant clerics. Need I remind Rome of the
characteristics of sheer, plain, justice?
Is this not “speaking truth to power” ?

After consulting the list, I wanted to say…And?
What’s yer point? Oh, I get it. When Rome has
nothing new to say, under the sun, it announces the obvious -
trying to court afficianados of soi-disant" environmentalism?"

I once heard a Catholic say:

"Rome seems always to be 50 years behind “the new” fads.
Right. Green up, dump on capitalism, and talk trendy -
evincing no sense of gravitas whatsoever.

The next thing that might emanate from Rome -
akin to this latest fare - may be a stern exortation
about non-use of sun-blockers at the beach.

reen12 :coffeeread:

 

[swariffin]

At least Rome does not acquit the sins made by those clerics. I heard that John Paul II called the US Cardinal to discuss this issue (I don’t remember the exact date). Sins are sins, no matter who does that. By being a cleric does not mean a man cannot sins. BTW, if we want to be honest to ourselves, how do we know that a cleric really committed sins (such as child molestation, perhaps) and not just somebody made a false accusation against him? US Law (that is from an earthly country) itself has the presumption of innosence until proven guilty.

 

[latin_rite]

If it weren’t for the very very rich getting very very rich. then how many of us here would have jobs.

 

[swariffin]

If it weren’t for the very very rich getting very very rich. then how many of us here would have jobs.

One rich man may establish one coal mining business, and employing 1.000 people. What good it will get if that coal mine causes flood and landslides, destroying 10.000 homes, rendering 10.000 more new poverty.

 

[latin_rite]

One missionary, goes to a island to spread the word. What good does he do if he has small pox and wipes out the entire civilisation? You see. Anyone can say the worst possible Scenario. And as far as those big bad loggers logging out all the forest. What do you suggest as a way for all those villagers to make a living? You, me and even those villagers don’t won’t to see the forest cut down. But pretty trees and singing birds don’t mean much when your kids are starving.

 

[swariffin]

If the forest are utilized responsibly, and those people get paid as much as they should, not being cheated so they are much underpaid, so much that the beautiful trees will not all cut down for nothing. So, if the economic “law” is practiced as it should, then we have both hands scenarios, i.e. (a) Do not cut down the trees and they are jobless, or (b) They cut down all the trees, and they got rich. The solution economically is the equilibrium. The problem is, they cut down all the trees but remain poor, while someone else get rich. That is unfair even under the economic law, and that is not in equilibrium.

 

[CmGuy89]

I also am confused about how genetic manipulations are necessarily sinful. Obviously, in cases involving human DNA or embryoes, this is clearly an issue; but scientists use all sorts of genetic manipulations in research which do not violate the sanctity of human life. The wording of the articles I have read is quite vague: “You offend God … [by] carrying out mortally debatable scientific experiments, or allowing genetic manipulations which alter DNA or compromise embryos,”
allheadlinenews.com/articles/7010282589

Does anyone have any sources which clarify what is specifically wrong when it comes to genetic manipulations?

Hello, I would also really like an answer to this. While I understand that tampering with human life is a grave matter, the term, “genetic manipulation” is a rather broad term.

Also, if I were a biology student interested in studying genetics to experiment on plants and produce better crops and the like, would it be mortally sinful? Thank you!

 

[teancum79]

Hello, I would also really like an answer to this. While I understand that tampering with human life is a grave matter, the term, “genetic manipulation” is a rather broad term.

Also, if I were a biology student interested in studying genetics to experiment on plants and produce better crops and the like, would it be mortally sinful? Thank you!

Mendel’s peas

 

[RebeccaJ]

Hello, I would also really like an answer to this. While I understand that tampering with human life is a grave matter, the term, “genetic manipulation” is a rather broad term.

Also, if I were a biology student interested in studying genetics to experiment on plants and produce better crops and the like, would it be mortally sinful? Thank you!

googley goo

(looks like the concern is genetic manipulation of humans)