http://www.rochestercitynewspaper.com/NewsBlog/archives/2012/11/28/vatican-squanders-its-power Comments On: Vatican squanders its power by Tim Louis Macaluso en-us Copyright 2013 City Newspaper. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, City Newspaper readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact City Newspaper. mdeturck@rochester-citynews.com (City Newspaper Webmaster) Thu, 23 May 2013 00:00:01 -0400 Thu, 23 May 2013 17:45:00 -0400 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by Ron Legest]]> Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:27:42 -0500 City Newspaper
Perhaps something along the line of, "They who can give up a higher moral standard and adopt moral relativism in order to obtain a little temporary political safety, have no morals and do not deserve political safety,"?
Posted by Edmund Francis Jr.]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 22:02:27 -0500 City Newspaper Posted by MacAttack]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 21:10:32 -0500 City Newspaper Posted by Edmund Francis Jr.]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 19:02:47 -0500 City Newspaper
Can it be said that either Paul V or Urban VIII so committed himself to the doctrine of geocentricism as to impose it upon the Church as an article of faith, and so to teach as pope what is now acknowledged to be untrue? That both these pontiffs were convinced anti-Copernicans cannot be doubted, nor that they believed the Copernican system to be unscriptural and desired its suppression.
Posted by St. Mary]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 15:24:14 -0500 City Newspaper Posted by MacAttack]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 13:14:34 -0500 City Newspaper
1966 - The Vatican abolishes the "Index Librorum Prohibitorum" (List of Prohibited Books). The works of Copernicus , Kepler and Galileo were still on the list.
Posted by Chaim DeLoye]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 13:05:23 -0500 City Newspaper
And a few dates to bear in mind...

1616 – On March 5, the Congregation of the Index condemned all writings which treated Copernicanism as anything but an unproven hypothesis.
Posted by Chaim DeLoye]]> Tue, 04 Dec 2012 11:01:07 -0500 City Newspaper
The Church definitely banned the book in which Copernicus taught us heliocentrism clashing with Ptolemy's ideas. Banned specifically for that reason.

The Church definitely killed a man at least partly because he thought the sun was a star and there were others like it (Bruno).
Posted by Rd. Mary]]> Mon, 03 Dec 2012 18:47:31 -0500 City Newspaper
Most would consider Jesus to have very radical teachings for his time.
Posted by St. Mary]]> Mon, 03 Dec 2012 17:33:00 -0500 City Newspaper Posted by Chaim DeLoye]]> Mon, 03 Dec 2012 10:25:55 -0500 City Newspaper Posted by j.a.m.]]> Mon, 03 Dec 2012 08:02:51 -0500 City Newspaper Posted by kjterz]]> Sun, 02 Dec 2012 15:44:32 -0500 City Newspaper
j.a.m. - How gracious of you to extend to me the right to hold an opinion contrary to yours. Now let's hope you'll do the same for any "faithful and reasonable Catholic, enlightened by Revelation, etc." who might also disagree with you , despite your attempt to speak on their behalf.
Posted by Chaim DeLoye]]> Sun, 02 Dec 2012 15:24:29 -0500 City Newspaper
In any case, you are completely free to reach the opposite conclusion from me, but this much is for sure: one of us will be wrong.
Posted by j.a.m.]]> Sat, 01 Dec 2012 17:27:23 -0500 City Newspaper
j.a.m. - so by your definition anyone who disagrees with your opinion cannot be "a faithful and reasonable Catholic"? I believe that the appropriate question at this juncture is, who died and left you god?
Posted by Chaim DeLoye]]> Fri, 30 Nov 2012 17:07:33 -0500 City Newspaper
The question then is whether a faithful and reasonable Catholic, enlightened by Revelation and Tradition, would find a proposed change to be sound, worthy, necessary, essential, universal, and true.
Posted by j.a.m.]]> Fri, 30 Nov 2012 12:40:37 -0500 City Newspaper
So as a "knowledgeable catholic" do you believe that the sun revolves around the earth?
Posted by Chaim DeLoye]]> Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:00:11 -0500 City Newspaper
You claim that you believe being a Catholic holds you to a much higher moral standard than say a moral relativist.
I wonder whether it was this higher moral standard or moral relativism that was at work when the Vatican signed the Lateran Pact of 1929 with Mussolini's fascist government, or the Concordat with Nazi Germany in 1933 ?
Posted by Edmund Francis Jr.]]> Fri, 30 Nov 2012 10:50:11 -0500 City Newspaper
You claim that, "to believe that the Church must change to adapt to today’s society to become or remain relevant is a wild assertion". Do you REALLY think that the moral stance of the Church has not (you'll excuse the expression) evolved over the centuries?
Posted by Chaim DeLoye]]> Fri, 30 Nov 2012 10:27:32 -0500 City Newspaper http://www.peterkreeft.com/audio/09_priestesses.htm

I would be curious to hear your response after you understand the theology behind it.
Posted by St. Mary]]> Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:28:44 -0500 City Newspaper Posted by MacAttack]]> Thu, 29 Nov 2012 12:14:52 -0500 City Newspaper Posted by millimeter]]> Thu, 29 Nov 2012 10:16:47 -0500 City Newspaper
It sounds like you are heading down the path of moral relativism; ‘just because you find it morally wrong, does not mean I find it morally wrong’. Moral relativism is one of the primary reasons why our society has so many problems (I could list out the problems but the list probably would take quite some space.
Posted by MacAttack]]> Thu, 29 Nov 2012 09:16:26 -0500 City Newspaper Posted by Bart]]> Thu, 29 Nov 2012 08:44:58 -0500 City Newspaper