Posted on 07/08/2006 6:52:03 AM PDT by NYer
London, England (LifeNews.com) -- British researchers are upset that the Catholic Church has decided it will excommunicate scientists who are involved in embryonic stem cell research. The Vatican says the research, which relies on the destruction of human life to obtain stem cells, is just as bad as abortion.
Last week, Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, head of the Pontifical Council for the Family, told an official Vatican magazine that embryonic stem cell research was "the same as abortion."
"Destroying human embryos is equivalent to an abortion. It is the same thing," he said.
"Excommunication will be applied to the women, doctors and researchers who eliminate embryos [and to the] politicians that approve the law," the cardinal said in an interview.
However, British scientists are calling this "religious persecution."
Dr. Stephen Minger, leading stem cell expert at Kings College, told the BBC, "Having been raised a Catholic I found this stance really outrageous."
"Are they going to excommunicate IVF doctors, nurses and embryologists who routinely put millions of embryos down the sink every year throughout the world?" he asked.
Professor Allan Templeton, president of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, told the BBC that the cardinal's comments were "insensitive and unhelpful."
Meanwhile, Professor Julian Savulescu, Uehiro Chair in practical ethics at the University of Oxford, blasted the Catholic church saying the excommunication views amount "to religious persecution of scientists which has no place in modern liberal societies."
An Italian cloning scientist wants to be the first excommunicated from the Catholic Church.
Professor Cesare Galli of the Laboratory of Reproductive Technologies in Cremona, the first scientist to clone a horse, said last week that the position makes the Catholic church like the Talbian in Afghanistan.
"I can bear excommunication. I was raised as a Catholic, I share Catholic values, but I am able to make my own judgment on some issues and I do not need to be told by the church what to do or to think," Galli told the London Telegraph newspaper.
This is pretty simple really.
Embryonic Stem Cells (ESCs) hold little or no potential for long term treatment or cure of anything.
Adult Stem Cells have 70 patents on proven and high potential treatment and cures.
IF ESC held any promise there would be no need for federal funding of research. The private sector would be flooding the market with investments.
The push for federal funding for ESC research is ALL about pretending there is a benefit to abortion.
Don't be upset.
On excommunication:
If you got married and beforehand your fiancee and yourself were adamant you couldn't wait to have children, you later find birth control pills in her nightstand. Now there is something between you... blocking what was before.
You talk about it; Maybe she felt that way and got afraid after the fact because of family history or insecurity that you really would be with her for life. You talk, say that's silly, i'll always be here... that's why I married you. Problem solved.
It's the something between that cuts you off from God... but can be remedied.
The key phrase.
I always through excommunication was based on 1 Cor. 5:12-13:
"For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. 'Purge the evil person from among you.'"
Also, consider Matthew 18:15-17:
“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector."
The verse that Roman Catholics pull out referring to "on this Rock" has nothing to do with this. The "Rock" refers to Christ, not Jesus' friend Peter. But that's something those from the Church in Rome refuse to acknowledge, as it's fundamental to their doctrines....
I'm glad to learn from this thread that a person can be "un-excommunicated." I thought it was a permanent thing until this morning.
FR can make ya smarter!
ROFL. The feeling is mutual.
I really do like how it's possible for freepers here, especially the ones who have been around long enough to know the ropes, to get in a spitwad fight on one thread and still be friends on another.
And I'm not saying this thread is a spitwad fight. It's not.
It's just that each of us brings a different level of expertise on a topic to the forum. And we all can learn from that. At least I try to.
That sounds more persuasive than the "rock" reference. I have no problem with any church expelling any member who either is committing some egregious sin or becomes opposed to the church in any way.
My only concern was that a church was in some way "sentencing" a person to hell. Opinions on this thread vary, but largely they seem to say that excommunication is a formal, but possibly temporary, distancing from the church. The future ramifications of that belong to the Big Guy upstairs.
I'm cool with that.
Professor Cesare Galli of the Laboratory of Reproductive Technologies in Cremona, the first scientist to clone a horse, said last week that the position makes the Catholic church like the Talbian in Afghanistan.
These guys are in hysterics. Vigorous criticism does not equal persecution. Internal church disciplinary action does not equal persecution. They obviously never played "one of these things is not like the other" in childhood.
"The "Rock" refers to Christ, not Jesus' friend Peter. "
Its great that we have you here to interpret scripture for us.
You apparently know a lot more than the folks who have believed otherwise for the last two thousand years.
"I can bear excommunication. I was raised as a Catholic, I share Catholic values, but I am able to make my own judgment on some issues and I do not need to be told by the church what to do or to think,"
I can re-state this in two words: "Non serviam."
It's true that millions believe (wrongly) as you do. Millions more correctly interpret this verse as Jesus' commending Peter for recognizing Him as the Lord, and upon that recognition, upon Christ himself, will the Church be built. There is no "rock" but Christ, after all.
Take a look at this page, which explores this verse quite thoroughly, from both a biblical and historical perspective:
http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=2701
And as this page asserts -- http://www.gpcredding.org/petra.html -- "The Greek text does not teach that Peter is the rock. The rock is either Peter's confession of Christ, or Christ Himself, in Peter's answer to Jesus' earlier question 'Who do men say that I the Son of man am?'"
You understand that the words "rock" and "rock" in that verse are actually two different words in the original language?
It's very difficult to have both historical and biblical facts come against a core doctrine in your faith. I encourage you to consider revising your doctrine in light of the truth, my friend.
As multiple posters have pointed out, by their actions they have already excommunicated themselves. That the church hasn't yet acknowledged it publically matters little.
Unfortunately, "Theo" is wrong. The verse DOES refer to Peter.
"Of course because of that, in the eyes of the Church, his kids are now bastards."
You're pretty ignorant of the Catholic Church position on this aren't you!
If things happened as you state, this is a matter of either abuse by the priest, or the laity managing parish matters.
The threat of excommunication was bogus and invalid under these circumstances.
Bad behavior by these individuals, or other Church representatives is not a reason, but an excuse to discontinue in the beliefs and teachings of the Catholic Church.
There's an ongoing theological debate about that, and I don't really care one way or the other. Catholics rely on the verse to make Peter the first Pope. Protestants tend to hold a more general meaning of the verse.
I'm not interested in that argument at the moment because the thread was about excommunication. And I think it's a strained reading of the verse to infer a directive regarding that. Other passages mentioned on this thread seem to do a far better job in that regard.
That's all I'm saying.
Because it is Christ's Church. HIS Mystical Body. Reading Isaiah 22:22, Christ uses the language used by which Shebna is appointed "Prime Minister" of the House of David. The Prime Minister has the "keys."
Now exactly what is it that Peter could 'bind' here on earth that continues to be bound in heaven or Peter loose here on earth that continues to be loosed in heaven???
Those matters relating to Faith and Morals that are pronounced ONLY when the Pope (Peter) speaks "ex cathedra."
There are many examples the modern church no longer follows that Peter bound or loosed, Peter never claimed that Mary stayed a virgin and that she should be prayed to as intervener for we that followed. Just one small example.
Perpetual Virginity of Mary, the Mother of God
Your comment about "prayed to" smacks of the tired conundrum of Mariolatry. We ask the Blessed Mother to intercede for us to her Divine Son, Jesus. We don't worship her; she is not a Goddess. She is a Jewish Mother and her Son listens to her intercessions. Read the account of the Wedding Feast of Cana to see how generous He could be in response to a request from His Mother regarding a poor wedding couple who had run out of wine at their wedding. I believe the total came to over 100 gallons of wine "created."
"And as this page asserts -- http://www.gpcredding.org/petra.html -- "The Greek text does not teach that Peter is the rock."
It is fascinating to find out how much more you and your sources know about biblical interpretation, Aramaic, and classical Greek than the early Christians whose grandparents possibly met and talked with Christ or His apostles. It is dismaying to find out that they have been wrong since the very beginning.
As I said before we are most fortunate to have you to interpret Scripture for us.
What do you think about the IVF comment? IVF doctors do destroy embryos as well, especially if there is some genetic flaw that prevents the embryo from being implanted. I have a hard time with this because I know so many couples that have struggled with infertility. But, it doesn't seem fair to excommunicate one group without even mentioning the other.
I agree. The scientists insist on whining, instead of facing up to the reality that they have made immoral choices.
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.