Talk:Pope Benedict XVI/Archive 12

message: Ok, looks like I opened a door I should not opened. What do people think about what I have done with the transcluding? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 23:04, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transcluding 

message: When is the official photographic portrait of Benedict XVI going to be placed in the article?  See John Paul I and II articles (wearing red with the stole of Peter; photographic pose; neutral/subdued background).  To be honest it is not clear what the official portrait is as of yet but I don't think it is the one currently be used by Wiki, showing Benedict seated in the Sistine Chapel (looking slightly bemused).  The home page of the Vatican has a couple possible contenders.  Any thoughts?  [June 26, 2005]
:We tried to get some, but the Vatican is not really helping things out. We need to wait and see, though I think what we have now is great. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 02:02, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official photographic portrait 

message: The BBC tried questioning  Primate Cormac Murphy O'Connor before his journey to demonstrate at Edinburgh recently , about the Catholic church's attitude to prevention of Aids through the greater use of Condoms His unsatisfactory , nigh evasive , answers provoke  a further questioning .
Humanae Vitae states that no member of the church  can possibly deny that the church is competent in her magisterium to interpret natural moral law. The encyclical further states that God  has wisely ordered laws of nature . However ,as we all know , there is a new biological "law" of infectivity  which states that human bodily intercourse can of itself be a death sentence . God's law previous to this new law of cause and effect  might have or did appear to be wisely ordained , but the situation now is completely ovetaken by what presumably (in inversion of God ) would be classed as a 'devilish' law but which medically is recognised as being an infective human immuno-deficiency syndrome .
We know that in fact this infectivity is not limited to humans . We know that the result of the infectivity is  mortal destruction , irrespective of morality or belief , or, indeed, species . We know that the church's response thus far is to solely countenance  abstention from intercourse between humans as solution , whereas we know that the simplest of protective plastic film is enough to protect life ,already in existence ,from this mortal  danger . 
Here we have a plain contradiction in the natural law trumpeted under the aegis of the Magisterium by Humanae Vitae and ,doubtless, throughout  this faith's teaching  . The natural law has changed ,however a faith may wish to deny this - the mortality is present  and it's virulence exceeds any inverse of God's will (such as the fallen Angel's name earlier mentioned  describes-but which we should not use except in this particular  theological analysis ).
The belief  in Hum. V. is that each man through the exercise of his conjugality  , is not the master of the sources of life  but rather  the minister of the design established  by the Creator . Indeed so, and irrefutably , the design is subject now to AIDS (whether through God's will or not is in comparison a theological as opposed to real  discourse) . The church -which has always insisted on the inverse of God -the unrepeatable name , is  well-placed to therefore recognise that a duality exists now within natural law .
However it appears that the members of the church Hierarchy are in  natural and hence , from the above, moral confusion .  As natural law has changed and the duality has entered within the very chain of ministry that is conjugality , we see that there is a complete up-ending of the socio-moral order of society . Death is overtaking wide sections of humanity , simply because of their natural adherence to the previous natural order . Marriage is no bar to infectivity , intention is no bar . The Primate's only advice is towards abstinence by all from the  most instinctual  natural functions of the body  , which is an equal up-ending of the natural law , and one which we see financially bankrupting the church following the human failure of its own ecclesiastic's  even with their magnificent support system of the  Mother Church, providing them with nourishment and care  to the grave. 
It is not here the intention to simply point to hypocrisy , because this will not further understanding or provide advance. Nevertheless I have to relate this  central subject of world concern back to a similar moral problem , that implicated by the teachings of romans 3,8 .This  is necessary  because the central argument of  humanae vitae rests upon the same magisterial or divine law  tenets. These state that whilst a lesser evil may be tolerated to prevent a greater evil , that yet , evil shall never be chosen in order to promote a good . HV states though it is sometimes lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good ,"it is never lawful
even for the gravest reasons , to do evil that good may come of it ,-in other words to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order...even though the intention is to protect ... an individual .. or society in general .''
Laudable  injunctions, which I note at length  throughout the relevant pages , were broken by  Pope Pius XII, Hitler's Pope and his  predecessor Pope Pius XI . That is a subject of dispute here on wikipedia and elsewhere . It appears to many historians that indeed the Catholic Church  as led  at the time , chose actively (in  1932 and 1933 ) to consider Nazism a lesser evil than Communism and was therefore culpable in upending the moral order of society .
The church , in so far as it can operate to defend itself from the accusations  and the historical realities (through apologists ) should now recognise that just as it chose then  to avail of the lesser evil policy  , now it should see the damage  considered resultant upon the use of protective condoms to marital structure and promiscuity and actual conception  to be clearly the lesser evil  given that God  (let us use the word) has now inserted  the dualism of death into this conjugal ministry of life .
(Ye who would cavil at my use of these pages to raise these issues, as those who cavil at the additions to the historical pages, should deeply consider the morality of your complaints before carping at these words...)Famekeeper 7 July 2005 08:58 (UTC)
FK,
those that cavil are those wikipedians that don't consider themselves above the (wiki) law. But I digress.
Apart from the fact that your evaluation of the Pius XII situation is wrong, now you are also inconsistent:
Only a few lines above this post you called on BXVI to go to the UN make what you call "the Law" a.k.a. as the principle "don't do evil to achieve good", to make this principle international binding law. I considered this simplistic, unrealistic and unpractical. But now, in this post, you are calling on the same BXVI to do the complete opposite, namely to declare an evil, though a lesser evil, good. 
Yes, I agree using condoms are a lesser evil than spreading AIDS and IMHO the late and the current Pope agree. But it's still evil, according to Catholic morality - and I hope you can muster enough tolerance to at least let us be and follow our consciences.
Very confusing is your remark that "natural law has changed" - no, natural law has not changed, it cannot change, otherwise it wouldn't be natural law. And natural law doesn't change because of the appearance or spreading of a disease. There were other STD here before anyone could spell AIDS.
However, for those you seriously consider the Pope responsible for the spreading of this pandemia, please read the following, non-Catholic articles:
http://www.spiked-online.com/Printable/0000000CA993.htm
http://canadiancoalition.com/forum/messages/7406.shtml
Str1977 20:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Condoms and Moral and Ecclesiastical Law

message: This "vandal" version should definitely be stored in some kind of humor archive: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pope_Benedict_XVI&oldid=18563853 Torfgeist 12:50, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Space Pope

message: Is Benedict the last political figure/person in the news who has a link with WWII?
This comment can be incorporated in the main article if appropriate.
:Hard to say. There are still lots of people (political figures) alive with some sort of "link with WW II", anyone of them could appear in the news the next day for some reason, for example Robert McNamara (helped to plan the 1945 bombing of Tokyo). Gestumblindi 18:59, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Benedict and WWII