Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

UH OH ... NEW SINS FROM THE VATICAN
NEALZ NUZE ^ | Monday, March 10, 2008 | neal boortz

Posted on 03/10/2008 1:04:05 PM PDT by Turret Gunner A20

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last
To: XeniaSt

Yes, “desecrating the temple of G-d”. I agree.

I think the others on the list can be categorized as sin similarly.

thanks for your reply.


41 posted on 03/10/2008 7:00:15 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20
Sure botche that one. Let's try it again.

TO: ladyinred

It might be a list for all of us to kinda work at, but for the DNC it is most likely their reminder for list for things to discuss with the Padre during their next confession.

42 posted on 03/10/2008 7:00:59 PM PDT by Turret Gunner A20 (If you aren't angry, you're not paying attention.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: DungeonMaster
Seen this? "Accumulating excessive wealth" and "pollution" join the ranks of "deadly sins."

The Vatican decries "accumulating excessive wealth" as a sin.

The Vatican ... says accumulating excessive wealth ... is a sin.

It just doesn't get any better than that.

43 posted on 03/10/2008 8:33:20 PM PDT by newgeezer (Fundamentalist regarding the Constitution and the Holy Bible. Words mean things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20

man this is bizarre

good lord, is the Vatican really this PC.....this sounds more like Unitarians

if this is true, it’s friggin awful


44 posted on 03/10/2008 9:10:45 PM PDT by wardaddy (Obama: The candidate for those who think Deliverance was a documentary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20

So...if I comminted one of these the day before it was “deemed,” am I guilty?


45 posted on 03/10/2008 9:12:34 PM PDT by bannie (clintons CHEAT! It's their only weapon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20

Believe me, we, as Catholics, get the bashing day after day after day.

I just posted a thread defining the seven deadly sins:
pride
avarice (greed)
lust
envy
anger
gluttony
sloth
I’ll put the link in the next post.


46 posted on 03/10/2008 9:51:47 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20
What are Capital Sins? [Seven Deadly Sins]
47 posted on 03/10/2008 9:52:59 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20; All

Not “new sins” but an old media blind spot (Vatican _DOES_NOT_ Announce Seven New Deadly Sins)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1983663/posts


48 posted on 03/10/2008 11:29:22 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

That should make the masses of RCs happy. This is how they make doctrine, by popular vote.


49 posted on 03/11/2008 5:26:41 AM PDT by DungeonMaster (WELL I SPEAK LOUD, AND I CARRY A BIGGER STICK, AND I USE IT TOO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
The Vatican ... says accumulating excessive wealth ... is a sin.

So it's a virtue than?

50 posted on 03/11/2008 11:19:25 AM PDT by conservonator (spill czeck is knot my friend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: conservonator
So it's a virtue than?

If "accumulating excessive wealth" is a sin, should we look for the Vatican to start divesting its billions any day now?

51 posted on 03/11/2008 12:50:12 PM PDT by newgeezer (Fundamentalist regarding the Constitution and the Holy Bible. Words mean things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
What does the "Vatican" do with it's alleged wealth? I'm assuming you have the balance sheet and are not simply pulling numbers out of the air...

The problem with mote eyed protestant and "bible" believing types is their inability to see the intellectual paucity needed to put up statements like "If accumulating excessive wealth" is a sin, should we look for the Vatican to start divesting its billions any day now?" The "Vatican" is a city state, city states don't sin, people do. In a hyperventilating rush to condemn the Church, the degenerate, unregenerate, pathetic, church of their own making "Christian", lose all capacity to reason and any ability to see what they would normally claim to be the "simple, self reveling meaning" of some bit of Scripture. Pathetic.

So I ask again; is accumulating excessive wealth a virtue?

52 posted on 03/11/2008 1:11:21 PM PDT by conservonator (spill czeck is knot my friend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: conservonator
What does the "Vatican" do with it's alleged wealth?

"Alleged?" Puh-leeze. Is the pope Catholic?

53 posted on 03/11/2008 1:44:01 PM PDT by newgeezer (Fundamentalist regarding the Constitution and the Holy Bible. Words mean things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

I’d ignore the question too.


54 posted on 03/11/2008 1:46:21 PM PDT by conservonator (spill czeck is knot my friend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: OpusatFR

“so why is Benedict’s edict a problem for everyone else?”

except this was not an “edict” from Benedict at all.
Benedict had nothing to do with this article.

This was a bunch of hullabaloo created by the media after an interview with a vatican official made statements about sin.
He was not trying to do away with any old list - not trying to replace anything with a new list.
He doesn’t have the authority to issue edicts either.


55 posted on 03/11/2008 1:53:54 PM PDT by Scotswife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: conservonator
I’d ignore the question too.

It was a ridiculous question, and one whose answer you wouldn't care to hear (especially from an unwashed scoundrel such as myself).

56 posted on 03/11/2008 2:05:48 PM PDT by newgeezer (Fundamentalist regarding the Constitution and the Holy Bible. Words mean things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
It was a ridiculous question, and one whose answer you wouldn't care to hear (especially from an unwashed scoundrel such as myself).

It's a perfectly decent and logical question, even an idolatrous Mariophile can see that, BTW, I never said you were unhygienic.

57 posted on 03/11/2008 2:28:29 PM PDT by conservonator (spill czeck is knot my friend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20; Liz; AT7Saluki; writer33
Pollution

Didn't the Supremes declare that exhaling pollutes?

58 posted on 03/13/2008 4:24:35 PM PDT by Libloather (March is Liberal Awareness Month.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
Didn't the Supremes declare that exhaling pollutes?

So wouldn't that go: "Stop! Exhaling In The Name Of The Environment" before you wreck the planet.

59 posted on 03/13/2008 6:00:08 PM PDT by writer33 (The U.S. Constitution defines a conservative and Rush Limbaugh knows it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Turret Gunner A20

[Accumulating excessive wealth ]

If accumulating wealth is a ‘sin’, why isn’t sitting on your dead arse and not trying to accumulate wealth?


60 posted on 03/19/2008 6:12:05 PM PDT by dbacks (Taglines for sale or rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-60 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson