Vatican III

Actually ... I was thinking, so before I consider your post, J23 —

Re divorce ... Matthew 19:6-9:
"Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. They say to him: Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away? He saith to them: Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. [9] And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery."

I find this interesting, in that it would appear God takes marriage as insoluble, but Moses allowed a dispensation.

I would suggest the same dispensation might continue, as the reasoning — hardness of heart — continues.

I would also broaden the issue to cover ground Our Lord had not addressed — not simply infidelity, but also any form of abuse within the relationship.

It seems to me that in a 'good' marriage, each parter respects the other, indeed each is the 'shepherd' of the other, and where that breaks down then the bond between the two is broken, and even should they stick together, no-one's pulling the wool over God's eyes...

... because i do not believe that God would wish either one or both party endure in misery — physical, mental, emotional, etc., for His sake, when the condition, a sacrifice of self for the same of the marriage, achieves nothing but maintains an outward appearance that is a complete sham and empty shell, and is indeed, a hypocrisy.
 
juantoo3 said:
What should be the position regarding abortion, vis-à-vis homicide?
Click to expand...
Well a quick answer would be ...

This enters the area where moral responsibility is given to the individual to determine what is for the best.

I do agree that in principle abortion, which however we address it is the termination of life, is a not a desirous process or outcome.

Medical reasons, yes, OK. Rape is advisory, but validating all abortion by such extreme cases is somewhat akin to validating torture on the basis that in one case the tortured knew where the victim was (in mortal danger), where the bomb was planted, etc.

It opens up a range of issues, but I think we should discuss it objectively and not get caught up in the emotions.

I don't think that any woman undertakes the matter lightly, although I have to say I've met more than one who saw it as a 'simple' solution to an 'inconvenience'.

And society has shown a propensity for allowing homicide based on what it perceives as valued — the ancient world carried out infanticide as a matter of course, and especially the murder of girl children, when a boy was wanted. In China we have one-child families and enforced abortion and sterilisation, not so long ago in the West we had eugenics, and now we have designer babies. Clones for spare parts, tens of thousands of unwanted embryos as part of the IVF process ...

... so a broad range of discussion.

The rights of the woman, OK, but what about the rights of the child? And saying it's just a bundle of cells is skirting the issue — so is a fully grown human being. That bundle of cells is going to be a person ...

A lot to discuss ...
 
Thomas said:
... so a broad range of discussion.

The rights of the woman, OK, but what about the rights of the child? And saying it's just a bundle of cells is skirting the issue — so is a fully grown human being. That bundle of cells is going to be a person ...

A lot to discuss ...
Click to expand...

method to my madness... :D
 
Thomas said:
I have to say I've met more than one who saw it as a 'simple' solution to an 'inconvenience'.


And saying it's just a bundle of cells is skirting the issue — so is a fully grown human being. That bundle of cells is going to be a person ...

A lot to discuss ...
Click to expand...
a. I've known plenty of women who have had abortions, I don't know any who saw it as a simple solution.

Here in the states we have hundreds of thousands of kids looking for parents, for adoption, we have many with great foster parents, and many just in the system... It isn't opportune.... I believe never having known existence is better than to be raised unwanted.. Once our holier than thous can insure all children are in a loving home...I'll reconsider my attitude.

B. One bundle of cells needs 20 years of care to be ready to be the second bundle of cells you refer to.... Same conclusion as above
 
juantoo3 said:
... What should be the position regarding abortion ...
Click to expand...

Not likely to be accepted as subject for debate by the CC at this Ecumenical Council where @Thomas has been asked to submit ideas, lol.

Try again in 50yrs time, perhaps -- if qualified euthanasia in severe cases has been accepted by then? Ok, 20yrs. Things are moving faster nowadays ...
 
RJM Corbet said:
Not likely to be accepted as subject for debate by the CC at this Ecumenical Council where @Thomas has been asked to submit ideas, lol.

Try again in 50yrs time, perhaps -- if qualified euthanasia in severe cases has been accepted by then? Ok, 20yrs. Things are moving faster nowadays ...
Click to expand...
Dying with dignity should be accepted as well...IMHO...

Biggest problem I have.... Is not what tune the Vatican makes catholics dance to, but that it overflows into what noncatholics can or cannot do.
 
wil said:
Dying with dignity should be accepted as well...IMHO...

Biggest problem I have.... Is not what tune the Vatican makes catholics dance to, but that it overflows into what noncatholics can or cannot do.
Click to expand...
Sure. But you know, in the case of abortion it's not just the Vatican. There is a very strong antipathy. It's the sense of the thin edge of the wedge.

That a person can decide they don't want a child and just pop in to a clinic and dispose of it, and go home and make dinner. Is how it breaks down? Extreme cases apart, its a very serious issue in the CC.

Post edited
 
Last edited:
Let's get contraception allowed first. Maybe?
 
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/17/abortion-rate-england-and-wales-five-year-high

... More women are having multiple abortions, according to the annual statistics released by the Department of Health. Almost four in 10 terminations are now carried out on women who have undergone the procedure before. Fifty women had each had eight terminations, the figures revealed.

In all, 185,824 abortions were carried out on women and girls in England and Wales last year. That was 1,253 (0.7%) more than the 184,571 performed in 2014, and the largest number since the 189,931 carried out in 2011 ...

2016
Not a few ...
 
Seems to me that is the source of a great deal of the ills of the world...passing the buck onto the next generation, and the next...and the next. NOBODY wants to get their hands dirty tackling the genuinely hard issues. So why bother with a Council at all...just close for now and agree to pass all the problems to the next batch, light up the campfire and pass the marshmallows and begin the chorus of kum-ba-yah...

And that would be precisely why I wouldn't bother to begin with. :D More of the same ol' nuthin' (don't pay attention to the man behind the curtain)
 
RJM Corbet said:
Let's get contraception allowed first. Maybe?
Click to expand...
From a moral and ethical point of view, I understand not condoning abortion, but I have never understood not condoning contraception. It seems to me it would go a long way to alleviating the abortion issue....not solve it, mind you, but would seem to impact on a significant percentage. So I don't fully grasp the ethical concerns with contraception...I suspect that is the Church's *political* dig to end up with more little parishioners down the road.
 
wil said:
Dying with dignity should be accepted as well...
Click to expand...
Agreed. However, it should not be politically legal.

Can't try a corpse.

But if made "legal," what would stop "termination parlors," with ads on late night TV advertising the quick and painless check out systems? Just sign the paperwork...that leaves your entire estate to our company (in the fine print, of course).

Yeah, I don't see anything good coming out of the commercialization of the process.

If a person is at a point in their life and health that there is no other option, the doctor should be allowed to prescribe, or the patient should be allowed some ethical means, and the date, time and place and conditions should be entirely at the patient's control, with the opportunity to bail out if they have a last minute change of heart. But the process does not need to be commercialized.

An unborn infant does not have those choices, and is entirely at the mercy of the so-called "mother."
 
Thomas said:
Re divorce ... Matthew 19:6-9:
"Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. They say to him: Why then did Moses command to give a bill of divorce, and to put away? He saith to them: Because Moses by reason of the hardness of your heart permitted you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. [9] And I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery."
Click to expand...
My cursory read of this makes me think that the original intent, according to Matthew, was the social and economical security of woman? That they should be provided for and not discarded at the whim of the husband.
If that is the intent I think Vatican III can institute a more relevant solution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
Thomas said:
Well a quick answer would be ...

This enters the area where moral responsibility is given to the individual to determine what is for the best.

I do agree that in principle abortion, which however we address it is the termination of life, is a not a desirous process or outcome.

Medical reasons, yes, OK. Rape is advisory, but validating all abortion by such extreme cases is somewhat akin to validating torture on the basis that in one case the tortured knew where the victim was (in mortal danger), where the bomb was planted, etc.

It opens up a range of issues, but I think we should discuss it objectively and not get caught up in the emotions.

I don't think that any woman undertakes the matter lightly, although I have to say I've met more than one who saw it as a 'simple' solution to an 'inconvenience'.

And society has shown a propensity for allowing homicide based on what it perceives as valued — the ancient world carried out infanticide as a matter of course, and especially the murder of girl children, when a boy was wanted. In China we have one-child families and enforced abortion and sterilisation, not so long ago in the West we had eugenics, and now we have designer babies. Clones for spare parts, tens of thousands of unwanted embryos as part of the IVF process ...

... so a broad range of discussion.

The rights of the woman, OK, but what about the rights of the child? And saying it's just a bundle of cells is skirting the issue — so is a fully grown human being. That bundle of cells is going to be a person ...

A lot to discuss ...
Click to expand...
My position is that it shouldn't be officially discussed without the presence of at least an equal number of woman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top