Vatican Adds 7 New Sins

[Flashpoint]

Where's the part about molesting children while placed in a position of trust?

Oh wait, that one's allowed as long as nobody talks about it.

SHHHHHHhhh!

[Ford Prefect]

Oh well, hell will be just a big home coming anyway ... without catholic priests hopefully, unless they can't get absolution for that pesky choir boy habit they have.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

Where's the part about molesting children while placed in a position of trust?

Oh wait, that one's allowed as long as nobody talks about it.

SHHHHHHhhh!

LOL!

Quoted for Truth.

Until the Catholic Church joins the 20th century (let alone the 21st), cleans the perverts out, recognizes women as full persons and practices what it preaches with wealth spreading... they're running a serious threat of being completely cast aside by its members.

At this rate, being Catholic might just be a state of being rather than being a member of the backwards hypocrisy.

Its a shame though, in theory, they could have some very good things going for it.

[czure32]

Originally Posted by Claeren

For a totally omniscient being God sure does overlook a lot of important stuff...

You'd think he would have mentioned to Moses that he was only getting version 1.0 in the 10 commandments

Claeren.

who needs the 10 commandments when you can have the "8 id really rather you didnts"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gos...u_Didn.27ts.22

RAmen

[The Goon]

Waitasec...am I to start obeying these now? Am I okay for past offenses against these seven new sins?

I'm still in candy withdrawal...less than 2 weeks of Lent left!

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Rhettzky

So are the old seven fair game again? If so I'll be coveting somebody's something or other tonite!!

Joke really falls flat when you confuse the 10 commandments with the original 7 deadly sins which were Pride, Envy, Gluttoney, Lust, Anger, Greed, Sloth.

To me, the new sins are a stupid attempt by the pope who is very conservative in his beliefs to soften his public image. The old 7 deadly sins would have easily covered all the new ones and plenty more.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by The Goon

Waitasec...am I to start obeying these now? Am I okay for past offenses against these seven new sins?

I'm still in candy withdrawal...less than 2 weeks of Lent left!

Lent dosen't have anything to do with the 7 deadly sins though.

If you look at the original sins in candy context, you can have them, but you should share them, you shouldn't sit around the house all day simply eating them, you shouldn't think about them all the time, you shouldn't hoard them, you shouldn't be proud of your assortment of Candy, You shouldn't get pissed off when you don't have them, And you shouldn't eat so many that you get fat.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Joke really falls flat when you confuse the 10 commandments with the original 7 deadly sins which were Pride, Envy, Gluttoney, Lust, Anger, Greed, Sloth.

To me, the new sins are a stupid attempt by the pope who is very conservative in his beliefs to soften his public image. The old 7 deadly sins would have easily covered all the new ones and plenty more.

I even read the stupid article. Tooo many beers last night...

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Rhettzky

I even read the stupid article. Tooo many beers last night...

Its ok, this lapsed catholic can forgive a drunken pagen like yourself, just don't expect absolution from me.

[Azure]

Does anyone even obey these?

[Matata]

Originally Posted by czure32

uh-huh....

so obscene wealth is a mortal sin now eh...isnt the catholic church basically one of the richest organizations in the entire world?

The Vatican City is the highest concentration of wealth per capita in the world, I can't think of anywhere else that can even compare. When owning hallways full of sculptures by Michealangelo is just for starters, you know there is some serious bank happening.

Maybe the Vatican has succumbed to pressure from Hollywood to get new material for a Se7en Sequel.

[GoinAllTheWay]

Rediculous. How do you just come up with 7 new ones? Did they pass it by the big cheif in the sky or simply declare them with their God given powers?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Flashpoint

Where's the part about molesting children while placed in a position of trust?

Oh wait, that one's allowed as long as nobody talks about it.

SHHHHHHhhh!

That is also allowed if you have enough money to pay the complainants off, but somehow evade criminal trials in the matter!

Aside from all of the other comments, I loved how these sins didn't come about until the 6th Century and then were revised in the 17th century when "sadness" was replaced with "sloth".

That must have been a happy day...you could be sad without fearing eternal damnation (as long as you were active about it!).

[Cube Inmate]

Hmmm... this pales in comparison to the irony of some of the other ones, but I find #4 to be pretty funny (polluting ye olde environment) when you consider that the grand poobah himself, the pope, is chosen at a conclave where they signal their decisions using copious amounts of black or white smoke.

I think what they're saying with this new list is that everyone should just commit suicide right now, and save themselves from any further sinning.

[metal_geek]

So if being wealthy is your only sin.. does giving it all to the church buy your way back in?... or if you have a boat load of sins, including money, does buying your way back in forgive thoes too?.. Are there forms to fill out, and like a warranty on my newly cleansed soul or do I just have to take someones word for it?.

Are my credits transferable, so should I decide to switch to like... anglican or something, will that god still accept my donated Catholic credits, or is it more like cell phones, where once I sign up with telus I'm pretty much screwed?
________
Dt175

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

Rediculous. How do you just come up with 7 new ones? Did they pass it by the big cheif in the sky or simply declare them with their God given powers?

I find it ironic that you are appearing to make fun of the premis of doing something like this based on "God given powers" when in fact that is exactly what is going on.

When Jesus picked Peter as the first pope he told him that what he declares on earth God would hold true in heaven (that's where the idea of papal indulgences, among other things, some good, some bad, came from). So yeah, the Pope does have God given powers to do things like this. That's a pretty well know fact.

That all being said, I think this is really intended to be more of a commentary on important issues today than anything else. Also keep in mind that the 7 deadly sins aren't meant as a "do it once and you're going to hell" sort of thing, but that if you live that type of lifestyle you're in some serious trouble.

[RougeUnderoos]

Not being a religious person myself, I have to wonder what the followers (not just of Catholicism but all of them) really think when the powers that be come out and say pretty much "oh yeah, we missed something, now the rules are different".

Like my grandparents for example. At the Swedish Lutheran church they went to when they were children dancing and playing cards were considered "sinful". If not sins then they were seriously looked down on and actively discouraged. By the time my mom was around this kind of nonsense was long gone. Everyone played cards and danced all the time, but they all still went to the same Lutheran Church and as far as I know, they still felt they were in tight with the man upstairs.

Somewhere along the way, the rules changed for them, and when the rules are changed, that means the old rules were, by definition, wrong. Doesn't it?

"Okay fine, the rules were wrong, but now we are really on the ball and our church knows what God wants us to do" would be the logical way to they might respond, but we all know that the rules are going to change again, so the rules that are being followed right now are wrong. We know it. Don't we?

To use the Catholics as an example -- we know for a fact that in 200 years things are going to be different for them. We know it, they know it. Some pope will come along and he'll want to "modernize" or "bring in the flock" or some such thing, and the rules will change, making the rules followed right now "wrong". Doesn't it?

I'm just rambling on here with no direction or plan to end this so I'll stop now.

[guzzy]

Funny how they didn't outlaw the funneling of billions of dollars to the vatican, one of the worlds richest organizations that for some odd reason supports the molestation of children.

Just a thought.

I will never understand why people feel they need to celebrate religion and god by dumping tonnes of money into the vatican. Like Ron L Hubbard said "we need to create a religion to become rich". And we think scientologists are crackers.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

So yeah, the Pope does have God given powers to do things like this. That's a pretty well know fact.

That the Pope (and Catholics) believe he has God-given powers to do things may be a fact, but I don't think the question as to whether or not that is true has been sufficiently answered.

I have to wonder though, if he does have a direct line to God, what was God waiting for with this new proclamation, and all the other ones in the past?

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

That the Pope (and Catholics) believe he has God-given powers to do things may be a fact, but I don't think the question as to whether or not that is true has been sufficiently answered.

I have to wonder though, if he does have a direct line to God, what was God waiting for with this new proclamation, and all the other ones in the past?

Who said he had a direct line to God?
The whole point is that he doesn't speak directly with God, so when he does make proclomations like this God has basically agreed to abide by them.

As to your first statement, that's a bit of an odd one to me.
If you are Catholic, to you it is a fact that what the Pope proclaims, God will hold as true.
If you aren't a Catholic, then you don't recognize the Pope, and therefore it is obviously not true. What is there to answer about it?