Posted on 09/19/2009 3:44:56 PM PDT by NYer
Feeling Profoundly Secular France's First Lady Carla Bruni-Sarkozy recently announced to the world that Pope Benedict XVI has forcibly driven her away from the Catholic Church. The Italian-born former supermodel and third wife of Nicolas Sarkozy accused the Pope of "damaging" countries in Africa with his stance on condom use, apparently a reference to the Pope's remark during his March trip that the AIDS pandemic "can't be resolved with the distribution of condoms; on the contrary, there is the risk of increasing the problem." Bruni-Sarkozy told the women's magazine Femme Actuelle, "I was born Catholic, I was baptized, but in my life I feel profoundly secular. I find that the controversy coming from the Pope's message — albeit distorted by the media — is very damaging" (Telegraph, May 18).
Host to the Post Archbishop Jonathan Blake, a former Anglican priest who is now a bishop of the Open Episcopal Church, is catering to worshipers who cannot get to his "Eucharists." He consecrates hosts, then posts them in the mail to allow members of the public to say their own "Masses." Prices are significantly lower when purchased in bulk: Blake charges approximately $4 for one consecrated host, and $20 for 500. According to Blake, when the hosts arrive, there's no need to construct a tabernacle: "People can carry a Host with them on a neck chain or in a specially adapted wallet for emergencies or just to have that sense that Jesus is with them throughout the day." Of course, in the eyes of the Catholic Church, the wafers Blake is sending through the post are just that: wafers (Damian Thompson's "Holy Smoke," Telegraph, May 25).
(Excerpt) Read more at newoxfordreview.org ...
Obama Said It, I Believe It, That Settles It
He's Always Been a Girl
Church as Bio-Hazard
Twenty-First-Century Christ
The Talented Mr. Horan
No Big Shoes to Fill
All she needs to do is simply leave.
She was “forcibly driven” from the church? Looks like she ran away as fast as she could on more than one occasion.
I wonder when she did her nude photos? Before or after Pope Benedict drove her away from the Church?
LOL! Is what she practices called Bimbology Theology?
She was still a good Catholic when Sarkozy walked out on his first wife. No doubt part of the attraction </sarc>.
From Wiki
“ I’m monogamous from time to time, but I prefer polygamy and polyandry [14] ”
“ I want a man with nuclear power. [15] ”
[edit] Relationships
It has been claimed that Bruni was involved with Louis Bertignac, Mick Jagger (Jagger’s wife acknowledged his affair with Bruni was a reason for their separation), Eric Clapton, Léos Carax, Charles Berling, Arno Klarsfeld, Vincent Perez[16] and former French Prime Minister Laurent Fabius.[17][18]
She has said she is easily “bored with monogamy”, and that “love lasts a long time, but burning desire — two to three weeks”.[18]
[edit] The Enthovens
While living with Jean-Paul Enthoven, Bruni fell in love and started an affair with his son, philosophy professor Raphaël Enthoven (the song “Raphäel” from Bruni’s album Quelqu’un m’a dit is named after him), who was at the time married to novelist Justine Lévy, daughter of philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy.[19] Bruni later denied ever having an affair with Raphaël’s father in an interview published in Vanity Fair, “I never slept with him, not even a minute.”[3]
The affair and the ending of her marriage were inspiration for Justine’s 2004 book Rien de Grave (published in English in 2005 as Nothing Serious). In it, she paints a vitriolic portrait of “Paula”, the surgically-enhanced model who steals the protagonist’s husband and describes her as “a preying mantis” and “a leech of a woman with a Terminator smile”.[20]
Bruni and Raphaël had a son, Aurélien, in 2001. The couple broke up in May 2007 because Raphaël thought their relationship did not have a commitment, as she told Vanity Fair.
Oh yeah.. the pope’s condom ban — don’t get me started!
Wow. I’m shocked, I must say.
What a BIMBO!
There's no such thing. Condoms are freely available and you can buy them at any pharmacy.
The Catholic Church simply points out the sinfulness of artificial birth control.
Mortal sin, venial sin and the seven deadly sins are just more dominion of behavior of the masses.
Look at True Christian Religion for the Spiritual meaning of adultery:
In the spiritual meaning, "committing adultery" refers to contaminating the good things taught by the Word and falsifying its truths. The fact that committing adultery refers to these things has not yet been known, because the Word's spiritual meaning has been hidden until now. In the following passages it is obvious, however, that "committing adultery," "being adulterous", and "being promiscuous" have no other meaning in the Word:
Run here and there through the streets of Jerusalem and see if you can find a man who makes judgment and seeks truth. When I fed them to the full, they became promiscuous. (Jeremiah 5:1, 7)
Among the prophets of Jerusalem I have seen horrendous stubbornness, committing adultery and walking in a lie. (Jeremiah 23:14)
They have acted foolishly in Israel. They have been promiscuous, and have spoken my Word falsely. (Jeremiah 29:23)
They were promiscuous because they had abandoned Jehovah. (Hosea 4:10)
I will cut off the soul that looks off in the direction of sorcerers and soothsayers to be promiscuous with them. (Leviticus 20:6)
They are not to make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land; this is to prevent them from being promiscuous with other gods. (Exodus 34:15)
Because Babylon contaminates and falsifies the Word more than the rest do, it is called the great whore, and the following things are said of it in the Book of Revelation:
Babylon has made all the nations drink the wine of the wrath of her promiscuity. (Revelation 14:8)
The angel said, "I will show you the judgment of the great whore with whom the kings of the earth were promiscuous." (Revelation 17:1, 2)
He judged the great whore who had corrupted the earth with her promiscuity. (Revelation 19:2)
Because the Jewish nation had falsified the Word, the Lord called it "an adulterous generation" (Matthew 12:39; 16:4; Mark 8:38) and "the seed of an adulterer" (Isaiah 57:3). There are also many other passages where adultery and promiscuity mean contamination and falsification of the Word; for example, Jeremiah 3:6, 8; 13:27; Ezekiel 16:15, 16, 26, 28, 29, 32, 33; 23:2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 14, 16, 17; Hosea 5:3; 6:10; Nahum 3:1, 3, 4.
Is there a catholic sin for hypocrisy? Saying high mass for Ted Kennedy was the very height of it. Check out the movie Dogma.
We are reminded as New Churchmen to especially be mindful of Dominion, Adultery and Deceit. Remind ourselves to look especially for evidence of them in all our works.
Ahhh ... you have popped up on this thread. Good to see you again with some new questions.
‘We have found no consistent associations between condom use and lower HIV-infection rates, which, 25 years into the pandemic, we should be seeing if this intervention was working.”
From Saint Peter’s Square to Harvard Square
Few realize that up until 1930, all Protestant denominations agreed with the Catholic Church’s teaching condemning contraception as sinful. At its 1930 Lambeth Conference, the Anglican church, swayed by growing social pressure, announced that contraception would be allowed in some circumstances. Soon the Anglican church completely caved in, allowing contraception across the board. Since then, all other Protestant denominations have followed suit. Today, the Catholic Church alone proclaims the historic Christian position on contraception.
The Bible mentions at least one form of contraception specifically and condemns it. Coitus interruptus, was used by Onan to avoid fulfilling his duty according to the ancient Jewish law of fathering children for one’s dead brother. "Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.’ But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him also" (Gen. 38:8–10).
The biblical penalty for not giving your brother’s widow children was public humiliation, not death (Deut. 25:7–10). But Onan received death as punishment for his crime. This means his crime was more than simply not fulfilling the duty of a brother-in-law. He lost his life because he violated natural law, as Jewish and Christian commentators have always understood. For this reason, certain forms of contraception have historically been known as "Onanism," after the man who practiced it, just as homosexuality has historically been known as "Sodomy," after the men of Sodom, who practiced that vice (cf. Gen. 19).
Contraception was so far outside the biblical mindset and so obviously wrong that it did not need the frequent condemnations other sins did. Scripture condemns the practice when it mentions it. Once a moral principle has been established in the Bible, every possible application of it need not be mentioned. For example, the general principle that theft is wrong was clearly established in Scripture; but there’s no need to provide an exhaustive list of every kind of theft. Similarly, since the principle that contraception is wrong has been established by being condemned when it’s mentioned in the Bible, every particular form of contraception does not need to be dealt with in Scripture in order for us to see that it is condemned.
As a Bible believing christian, you no doubt agree.
I’ve heard it said by a number of priests and bishops that hatred of the Church and outspoken denial of her teachings often are the symptom of guilt for some sort of personal sin.
I can’t help but think this might be the case here.
And it's working too, isn't it? I mean just about everybody is walking around shaking in their boots with worry about venial sins, aren't they? < /s>
Why would anyone assume that the Church's purpose is malevolent control of the "masses"? It's like saying that the purpose of one's parents is sinister control of their offspring. Some rebellious children actually think that but we know better, don't we? It's a ridiculous idea. Parents simply want to guide their children on the right path.
Similarly with the Church. The Church is our Mother. It's task is to light the path to eternal salvation. God doesn't just toss us a Bible and say "go figure". He's a better Father than that. He has given us the Church to guide us and enlighten us and help us on the journey.
You sound like an uppity teenager who thinks any law or discipline must have been put in place solely for the purpose of killing his fun.
Just my point. The word sin has become cheapened and lost it's holy message. Taking communion everyday also loses the signicance. It's turned into a breakfast snack.
LOL Indeed I do! I'm 52 and feel like a teenager! Jesus went into the temple on Palm Sunday and overturned the tables of the money changers. My message is FEED THE POOR!
The pope is also pointing out the futility of condom distribution. Handing them out to randy East Africans steeped in a polygamous tradition, is as ineffective as handing them out to army recruits back in WWII. By 1943 we have as many men down with VD as we had from battle wounds and other disease.
It could be that, or cognitive dissonance:
Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. The “ideas” or “cognitions” in question may include attitudes and beliefs, the awareness of one’s behavior, and facts. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, or by justifying or rationalizing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. Cognitive dissonance theory is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.
Knowing the Truth of the Church, but deciding not to participate in it anymore because it’s too hard/strict/impersonal/ritualistic may cause people to try to rationalize their beliefs and behaviors. I’d say the most vehement are those who are most conflicted deep in their hearts. If they were really happy with their choice, they wouldn’t have that desperate need to convince everyone that their decision was correct.
I’d find it refreshing if someone admitted he was just too spiritually lazy to follow Church teaching, and wanted something easier or something more “feel good.” Maybe Bruni needs to feel she was kicked out because it is too painful to admit to herself that she just couldn’t cut it. Her love of self was stronger than her love for God.
Lots of people leave the Catholic Church because they had a “mean” priest, got told “no,” didn’t get warm fuzzies at Mass, had a rough Confession, saw someone imperfect at Church, were told they couldn’t do what they wanted to do, etc. None of those things have anything to do with what the Church was divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit to teach; they’re just excuses to leave and find a church that will allow them to do what they want. Some seed falls on hard soil and doesn’t take root.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.