Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Mountains of the Monsoon (Natural World)

It was an excellent programme, and more like that would be welcomed. Only fly in the ointment is the background music - some chants and some drum sounds. This music distracted the attention - sometime the music drowned the excellent commentary.

I fail to understand why a nature programme should have any music at all. Let us enjoy the scenary as well as the sound of the nature which is being depicted. Manmade sound can not replace the sound of nature. And where there is silence, let there be silence. My comments apply to all programmes on Nature.

While I'm not "'fessing up", I'd like to point out the article the Telegraph had on the Apostolic Penitentiary:



I'm a bit stunned about what the article says makes a sin so grave that only the pope can grant absolution. Not murder or genocide, according to the article. No, we're talking of true evil, like putting a rusty nail through a cracker that earlier on had had a little chat with a priest, the way PZ Myers did. Maybe I'm beginning to understand why, when massive genocide was taking place in Europe, the vatican didn't speak out too much against it. Obviously they were preoccupied with more important things.

As someone who grew up in a Catholic family, let me state what a pile of horse manure I think Catholic doctrine is. No offense intended btw to what is perfectly good, or even splendid horse manure.

Also, that sort of article makes me become doubtful about the theory of evolution. If that article shows the level that mankind is on, then surely other species, like snails, should have been out-competing us in just about any area by now, right?

Calm down Peter, for goodness sake! Let's get to the facts.

You don't know whether genocide and murder are sins requiring papal absolution. I imagine that genocide certainly is. Not all abortions require papal absolution, it all depends on the circumstances. You may not accept that the host is sacred, but those who accept this point do not regard it as strange that the church wishes to underscore that sacredness with this requirement.

Hello Augustine_of_Clippo,

Ok, I'll admit that was a strong one. But I'm not sure if I agree with the rest of what you wrote. You say

"You don't know whether genocide and murder are sins requiring papal absolution. I imagine that genocide certainly is."

The Telegraph article says

"While priests and bishops can deal with confessions of sins as grave as murder or even genocide , the tribunal is reserved for crimes which are viewed by the Church as even more serious."

What am I missing? I read that bit quoted above and the rest of the article as saying that the vatican considers putting a nail through a cracker as a more serious sin than murder and genocide. Where does my thinking go wrong?

greets,
Peter

On the specific point of the Roman Catholic view of confession and absolution, I, a Reformed Christian, would be interested to read a Roman Catholic explanation of the role of the priest in the confessional, what absolution in this context actually means, how it is appropriated and why there appear to be different categories.

I have heard many Protestant criticisms of the theology, but I have never really heard a Catholic explanation or defense. If someone could do this, it might make for a more informed discussion.

PeterKlaver-

"...the vatican considers putting a nail through a cracker as a more serious sin than murder and genocide."

You are absolutely, one-hundred percent right that that's what it means.

I didn't think your comment was strongly worded enough. :-)

I wonder if this category of sins includes Priests sexually mollesting children or Monseigneurs moving them from parish to parish to evade the law and enabling them to continue their criminal acts for decades undetected. How many countless thousands of lives were badly damaged this way? What kind of absolution can possibly be given for these kinds of crimes, especially the aiding and abetting, as heinous as the mollestations themselves?

For a certain time in British law, murder was given a life sentence. Capital punishment was discontinued for 'ordinary' killngs. But murdering the Monarch was still considered worthy of a death sentence. It's not that the monarch's life is worth more than anyone else's. It's that assassinating the Monarch is an attack on the state as well as an attack on an individual person. That same distinction is at work here for an attempt on the life of the pope.

I have something to confess......

And that is that after re-reading my post #2 in this thread after a few hours, I think I shouldn't have said some of that. My apologies to William and the readers of his blog.

Good Lord, this may be the first online conversation of a humanist. Dr Klaver has come over all funny. He's now prostrating himself before the cyber-priests of Will & Testament and is begging for forgiveness. Take two Nurofen and get an early night, Peter: you'll be as right as rain in the morning.

Peter Morrow;

I'm no theologian, so i just had a bit of a search;

John Paul II, apostolic exhortation "Reconciliatio et Paenitentia " (2/12/84)

"In the fullness of times, the Son of God, coming like an Angel who takes upon himself the sin of the world, appears as the one who has the power either to judge or to pardon sins, and who has come not to condemn but to pardon and save.

This power to remit sins Jesus grants, through the Holy Spirit to simple human beings, that is to his apostles who themselves are subject to the dangers of sin: "Receive the Holy Spirit: whose sins you shall forgive they are forgiven them and whose sins you shall retain they are retained." This is one of the more formidable Gospel innovations. As was his intention from the beginning, He confers the same transmissible power to the apostles and also upon their successors in turn entrusted by these same apostles with the mission and the responsibility to continue their work as announcers of the gospel and as ministers of the redemptive work of Christ. Here revealed in all of its grandeur, is the figure of the minister of the sacrament of penance, called by very ancient custom, the confessor.

Just as he does at the altar where he celebrates the Eucharist and at each one of the sacraments the priest, as the minister of penance, works "in persona Christi". The Christ whom he gives and makes present, and who by means of his ministry effects the remission of sins is with the priest, who appears as a brother of man, a merciful bridge-builder, faithful and compassionate pastor dedicated to search for the lost sheep, the doctor who heals and comforts, the one teacher who teaches the truth and teaches the ways of God, who judges the living and the dead and judges according to the truth and not according to appearances. This is, without doubt, the most difficult and delicate, the most exhausting and demanding, but also one of the most beautiful and consoling ministries of the priest. Precisely for this reason, aware of the strong call of the synod, I will never grow weary of calling my brothers bishops and priests, to their faithful and diligent performance of duty. Being present before the penitent who opens up to him with a mixture of trepidation and faith, the confessor is called to a great responsibility which is a service to penance and to human reconciliation: to know that penitent , the weaknesses and failings; to evaluate the desire to begin again and the strength to do it; to discern the action of the

Spirit the Sanctifier in the heart; to communicate a pardon which God alone can give; to "celebrate" his reconciliation with the Father, represented in the parable of the prodigal son; to reinsert that redeemed sinner redeemed into the ecclesial communion with his brothers and sisters; to admonish the penitent to change , in a fatherly, encouraging and friendly way, "Go and sin no more".

For the efficacious fulfillment of this ministry, the confessor should necessarily have the human qualities of prudence, discretion, discernment, a firmness tempered with gentleness and goodness. He should have thorough preparations, not fragmentary but integral and harmonious in the different branches of theology, in pedagogy and in psychology, in the methodology of dialogue and above all, in the living and communicative knowledge of the word of God. Even more important is that he live an intense and genuine spiritual life. To lead others into the way of Christian perfection, the ministry of penance should be present in his own life, more by his actions than by words, thus giving proof of a true experience of real prayer, of the practice of the theological and moral virtues, of faithful obedience to the will of God, of love of the Church and of docility to its magisterium"

More plainly, I had always imagined that its point was about an outward expression of one's sin to one's peers, who themselves are sinners.

We can agree that forgiveness only comes from God, but an expression of guilt made only to God, with no worldly expression, is not enough. It's easy to say you're sorry in your silent prayers. Far less to say it to your peers.

On the other hand...we could all just confess to each other. But that lacks all authority, and implies a purely human forgiveness.

That's just off the cuff...I am no expert.

REading further, this is why we can't just confess to each other, as lay persons;

"All of the treasure of human endowment, of Christian virtue, of pastoral capacity can not be improvised nor acquired without effort. For the ministry of sacramental penance, each priest should be prepared already from the years in seminary, through the study of dogmatic, moral, spiritual and pastoral theology along with the human sciences, the methodology of dialogue and especially of pastoral conversations"

and William, just a quick point;

"Many Catholics use birth control even though the church teaches that deliberately preventing conception during sex is sinful"

I'm not sure that's factually accurate, as there is a lot of scope for different forms of natural contraception.

I'm a little disturbed that Peter Klaver feels he must apologise for an anti-religious sentiment. I mean, whatever, but I'd have thought what he said needed no apology. It was an opinion about Catholic theology, not about Catholics. It was a perfectly valid criticism.

Bernard

Thank you for your comments. Much appreciated.