What is the solution?

[John_oxios]

I

Historically, the Church has firmly and resolutely embraced moral relativism when it has been at its best, and rejected it when it has been practicing immorally. Yet, we have a pope who identifies moral relativism, the most positive force in Church evolution and progress, as being dangerous and a principal challenge to the integrity of the Church. This has some very serious implications if you consider the history of the Church and care about its vitality and survival. .

Hi R-Happy
Vague and ambiguous, Do you bother to read Scripture at all?

Moral relativism? That’s more vague!! You’ve stated absolutely nothing above!
Where do you receive this garbage from?

The Roman Catholic Church is for about the rights of Human beings, each and every one as an individual.

Moral relativism may be any of several descriptive, meta-ethical, or normative positions. Each of them is concerned with the differences in moral judgments across different people and cultures:

They argue that meta-ethical relativism implies that we ought to tolerate the behavior of others even when it runs counter to our personal or cultural moral standards.

argue further that their system often does justify tolerance, and that disagreement with moral systems does not always demand interference, and certainly not aggressive interference…
states that truth and reality are perceived differently from diverse points of view, and that no single point of view is the complete truth.

No single view a complete truth??? that’ anti Christ.

Roman Catholicism
Catholic and some secular intellectuals attribute the perceived post-war decadence of Europe to the displacement of absolute values by moral relativism. Pope Benedict XVI, Marcello Pera and others have argued that after about 1960, Europeans massively abandoned many traditional norms rooted in Christianity and replaced them with continuously evolving relative moral rules. In this view, sexual activity has become separated from procreation, which led to a decline in the importance of families and to depopulation. As a result, currently the population vacuum in Europe is filled by immigrants, often from Islamic countries, who attempt to reestablish absolute values which stand at odds with moral relativism.[17] The most authoritative response to moral relativism from the Roman Catholic perspective can be found in Veritatis Splendor, an encyclical by Pope John Paul II. Many of the main criticisms of moral relativism by the Catholic Church relate largely to modern controversies, such as elective abortion.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veritatis_Splendor

It expresses the position of the Catholic Church regarding fundamentals of the Church’s role in moral teaching.

Are you saying the Church ought to abandon Christian values to become ‘cool’ inline with the world?? Like allowing contraception and abortion so the Zero population people can lower the earths population so the 'world elite can better enjoy the fruits of the earth 50 yrs from now? That’s your religion correct? What of Faith in Christ? Have you no faith that the Lord provides?

         The Church and i.e. Christians are not of the World.

Mat 16:26 For what will it profit a man, if he gains the whole world and forfeits his life? Or what shall a man give in return for his life?

Jhn 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world knew him not.

Jhn 7:7 The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify of it that its works are evil.

[Jesus Prays for the believers in Him, because the World will persecute them as they persecuted Christ]

Jhn 17:14 I have given them thy word; and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

Jhn 17:16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

1Cr 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their craftiness,”

James 1:27 Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world

Pe 2:20 For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first.

1Jo 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life, is not of the Father but is of the world.

God bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

Historically, the Church has firmly and resolutely embraced moral relativism when it has been at its best, … I** find this troubling**.

Relax what you say is not true no trouble at all

Wrong again grasshopper! Or ought we call you the lone Ranger? Tonto hailed him as “Quien No Sabe” translation 'One Who Knows Not]

Hi R-h, aka quien no sabe, the truth is: always has been always will be!

the Bible says: 1Jo 5:17 All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.

You can’t cover it up with falsehood with rhetoric

The Church is against Moral relativism::
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veritatis_Splendor

Response to moral relativism
Veritatis Splendor begins by asserting that there are indeed absolute truths accessible to all persons. Contrary to the philosophy of moral relativism, the encyclical insists that moral law is universal across people in varying cultures, and is in fact rooted in the human condition. Pope John Paul teaches that no matter how separated someone is from God, “in the depths of his heart there always remains a yearning for absolute truth and a thirst to attain full knowledge of it.” He goes on to say that the splendor of truth “shines forth deep within the human spirit.”

Human freedom and divine law

John Paul teaches that there is no true conflict between human freedom and God’s law. The true end of human freedom is growth as a mature person into how each is created by God. Furthermore, God’s divine law governing human behavior is not opposed to human freedom, but rather “it protects and promotes that freedom.”
The encyclical affirms that today’s respect for human freedom “represents one of the positive achievements of modern culture.” However, he cautions, though it is a good, human freedom is not in itself an absolute. Merely deciding for oneself that one may do something is not at all a true substitute for determining whether something is in fact good or bad. Because God is the true author of good, it remains of critical importance to understand how the divine Law, as expressed by the authoritative magisterium of the Church, considers an issue before determining absolutely for oneself.

Human freedom and divine law
John Paul teaches that there is no true conflict between human freedom and God’s law. The true end of human freedom is growth as a mature person into how each is created by God. Furthermore, God’s divine law governing human behavior is not opposed to human freedom, but rather “it protects and promotes that freedom.”
The encyclical affirms that today’s respect for human freedom “represents one of the positive achievements of modern culture.” … Merely deciding for oneself that one may do something is not at all a true substitute for determining whether something is in fact good or bad. Because God is the true author of good, …

The judgement of conscience
John Paul reiterates the longstanding Catholic teaching that people are obliged to follow their conscience, and that if they do not, they are condemned by their own conscience.
… John Paul insists that conscience is emphatically not a replacement for the divine law. Rather, it is the process by which a person may apply the divinely revealed law to the concrete situation at hand.

Veritatis Splendor states that because conscience may err in its judgment, a person is obliged to do his best to inform his conscience. Hence, it remains crucial for a person to make an effort to understand what the divine law on a matter is, as expressed by the Church, and the reasons behind it. Even if a person is not condemned by his conscience for a morally wrong act, committing that act nevertheless causes damage in other ways, and if done habitually it can progressively make it harder for a person to perceive the truth. Furthermore, habitual sin enslaves us, so following a wrong judgment of conscience is in the end a step away from freedom.

[edit]The “fundamental option,” sin, and salvation
The encyclical also responds to the idea of the “fundamental option.” In this way of thinking, a man’s particular actions do not necessarily affect his ultimate salvation – what is important is his fundamental orientation towards or against God.
John Paul firmly opposes this view, stating that it is contrary to Scripture as well as to long-held Catholic teaching on sin and salvation. He also opposes it on philosophical grounds, writing, "To separate the fundamental option from concrete kinds of behaviour means to contradict the substantial integrity or personal unity of the moral agent in his body and in his soul…

Reality of intrinsically evil acts
The encyclical also insists that certain acts are intrinsically evil. In the language of Catholic moral theology, this means that certain acts are always wrong, and that there are never circumstances in which they may be permitted if done knowingly and intentionally. …certain acts are so destructive to the human person that there are no extenuating circumstances that would allow them. As an example, John Paul specifically reaffirms the teaching of Pope Paul VI in the encyclical Humanae Vitae concerning contraception that there are no circumstances in which the practice is licit.

 

[John_oxios]

St Francis;8339172:

And why did they say that?
Because Church teaching can be changed from a literal Adam & Eve to a symbolic Adam & Eve? Indeed, that has been implied by more recent Church documents
.

Hi razor edge,

What Church documents??? We can wipe the bible clean off the map? what happened to the inerrant Word of God?

'The six days of creation… do not have to be taken as literal days" ( St Augustine)

But a symbolic Adam and Eve??? 'A Symbol to a Jew is ‘reality distilled’ meaning actually happening" Herman Wouk]

Word Origin & History **symbol **
c.1434, “creed, summary, religious belief,” from L.L. symbolum

people tend to throw symbols aside as meaningless… Like the Eucharist [by protestants] merely a symbol.

The Apostles taught Jesus flesh and Blood, and Divine… descended from Mary, David Abraham, Adam.

This stuff went down with Wellhausen, who theories were proved wrong 1895… next you’ll tell me Moses didn’t write torah. Who was also anti-catholic.

The Church believes in a literal** Adam** and Eve, Whom God breathed his image and likeness into, given a soul.

As stated in the Bible, in fact Luke extends

Christ genealogy from:

Luk 3:23 Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,

to

Luk 3:38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

start to make imaginary people up and then we get an imaginary Christ. didn’t really happen, etc…etc…

David Guzik commentary:

blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Luk&c=3&v=1&t=RSV#comm/38

The son of Adam, the son of God: Luke traces his genealogy all the way back to Adam, to show that Jesus belongs to all mankind, not just to the Jewish people.

i. A genealogy may not seem like much, but it exactly establishes Jesus’ credentials as a member of the human race. A Bible translator to a distant tribe saved the genealogies for last, because he thought them the least important part of the gospels. But when he finally finished them last of all, the tribesmen were astounded - they told the translator, “You mean to tell us that this Jesus was a real person, with real ancestors? We had no idea!”

Jerome Biblical commentary,(Which has an Imprimatur & Nil Obstat)

luke 3:38:

• son of Adam, son of God*
  
  The universal significance of Jesus for all - men and women, rich and poor, slave and free- is emphasized. looking back over Luke’s genealogy, one realizes that the line, begun with Adam, and flowing through Israel’s history of faith and failing; has come to its definitive fulfillment in Jesus, As God’s eschatological beginning, Jesus is the leader of those who belong to God…"

The CCC :
Part 1, Section 2, Chapter 1, Article 1, Paragraph 6, SubSection 1

359 “In reality it is only in the mystery of the Word made flesh that the mystery of man truly becomes clear.” 224

St. Paul tells us that the human race takes its origin from two men: Adam and Christ. . . The first man, Adam, he says, became a living soul, the last Adam a life-giving spirit. The first Adam was made by the last Adam, from whom he also received his soul, to give him life… The second Adam stamped his image on the first Adam when he created him. That is why he took on himself the role and the name of the first Adam, in order that he might not lose what he had made in his own image. The first Adam, the last Adam: the first had a beginning, the last knows no end. The last Adam is indeed the first; as he himself says: “I am the first and the last.”

Part 1, Section 2, Chapter 1, Article 1, Paragraph 6, SubSection 4

375 The Church, interpreting the symbolism of biblical language in an authentic way, in the light of the New Testament and Tradition, teaches that our first parents, Adam and Eve, were constituted in an original “state of holiness and justice”. This grace of original holiness was “to share in. . .divine life”.

Part 1, Section 2, Chapter 2, Article 5, Paragraph 2, SubSection 3

655 Finally, Christ’s Resurrection - and the risen Christ himself is the principle and source of our future resurrection: “Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. . . For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.” 528 The risen Christ lives in the hearts of his faithful while they await that fulfilment. In Christ, Christians “have tasted. . . the powers of the age to come” 529 and their lives are swept up by Christ into the heart of divine life, so that they may “live no longer for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.”

here’s some more:

kofc.org/un/catechism/search.action

No real Adam? Well then original sin becomes a mote point, and on and on… it’s becomes what Welhausen “after Christ freed men the Catholic church enslaved men again by inventing a Church hierarchy.” Like I stated Welhausen theology was proven wrong even before the ink dried on his theorem.

Showed you my Church documents, show me yours!

thanks and God Bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

Cutting through the particulars of the day. The history of the Church is that it changes its immutable and permanent moral positions with regularity in order to remain viable in the context of scientific and social change. Otherwise the lights would go out at the Vatican, and the Swiss Guards would not be paid, the art treasures would be sold at auction. The historic evidence is compelling. Denial is simply that.

do you mean because the Vatican had electricity and modern plumbing installed that, that in itself proves it changed its teachings?? changed its doctrines.

Have you even bothered to read the history of the church? and from what perspective?
Give me a reference a title of the book you supposedly read/ studied to become so knowledgeable of the Catholic church. I want to read it and not hear about it from a biased anti- catholic.

Let’s go here All Christian Church’s prior to 1930 were against contraception, of any kind… and now many allow it… however the Catholic Church when pressed to change its teaching as early as 1920 by political parties refused to and has held that Moral decision.

one Pope Pius XI stated Contraception if allowed will open the door to abortion

catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0002.html

You use BIG conceptions like the evidence is compelling… but no evidence not a ONE, I’ve challenged you to produce such evidence but then you go mute…

fact: ** Opposition to birth control is increasing in evangelical circles** which are, curiously, relying heavily on Catholic teachings.