Talk:Theology of Pope Benedict XVI

message: I'm reposting my query from the Benedict main page:
:Dear all,
:I feel somewhat uneasy about a lack of distinction between Ratzinger's personal emphasis and stances as a theologian and his pronouncements as head of the CDF. Not that there is a disagreement, but I don't think it appropriate to e.g. list his condemnation of Boff or of female priests as a personal view. This is why I moved these two to the CDF section. But this might be appropriate for other paragraphs as well, e.g. the Homosexuality paragraph (but needs rephrasing to start with statement, not with critics) or the abortion paragraph.
:Also, if anyone has greater knowledge about the theological writing of Ratzinger please post it. 
Of course the creation of the subpage makes it more complicated. Maybe we should put in some passage here, distinguishing the two.
Str1977 09:46, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Church doctrine and personal theology

message: The full related example can be seen here, without copyright notice (the text is marked to reveal integrality of outside-copyright  use . I place the relevant part here below . It relates to the  Christian theological reasoning why or why not condoms can be used between  even  , here, couples beyond the  age of fertility . Acknowledments to William .E. May, Prof. of Moral Theology , JPII Institute for Studies on Marriage & the Family at The Catholic University of America
:Nonetheless, as I argued in a brief essay published in the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars Newsletter, vol. 11, no. 3 (June 1988), pages 1-2, it would, as I said in that essay, be morally wrong to use condoms in this way. Using them would not violate some of the conditions of the principle of double effect but it would violate the first condition of this principle, which requires that the act chosen, prescinding from its evil effect, must either be morally good or at least morally indifferent. But condomistic intercourse is not morally good in itself, nor is it morally indifferent. 
Prof. May then explains why not .
:I do not understand the relevance of this example.  I disagree with the conclusion as to the use of condoms because I disagree with Humanae Vitae, which I consider to be a philosophical error.  It is a valid example of double effect if the original conclusion that the use of condoms is morally illicit is accepted.  The Nazi issue is entirely different.  Robert McClenon 18:43, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Example of the Principle of Double Effect

message: Nothing's really gone from this page  - it's just brushed under the carpet, to stink  in a digital cupboard. All is relevant despite this cleaning , condoms are relevant to Hitler by way of church law, and all things are countable and sourceable. BXVI knows well . The war against Islam is the war , not that against Buddhism(that was jealousy) and do  deaths of violence perturb ? Against all teaching of kindness and love war was embraced by the beatific Pius XII . Now in the formulation of the struggle for the Church as Islam , BXVI will take the appropriate measures . We shal not know  the out-come, but we certainly know the out-come of Pius XI's measures  of Reichskonkordat . Theological interpretations will have to be most agile to deflect the coming storms of arrows from the past , but the moral and heavenly consequence of error  for the present will presumably be there for those involved . The present pope's relations with  the Right in this present axis are plain for all to see  in this brave new cyberworld . This is what bureaucrats do not understand  . Incisions into my posting will not help them . Abraham Lehrer lives now on the wikipedia , where the reference he made about his dear Mother, should reside just as the words of the surviving Roman deported to Auschwitz should reside forever  in cyberspave beside the  personage of Eugenio Pacelli. Jimbo was told  to know, & he knows . He just hasn't worked out if there's a policy required or not . I have spent remarkably little time on chasing the Chicago mob over all this  history . Why do we not focus now on the  connections through to the markets , and be even handed about this older axis ? It ain't hard to read todays quid pro quo of interests .Famekeeper 22:52, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Bureaucratic Removals by Editor

message: Ratzinger (now Benedict XVI) is one of the world's foremost theologians. He has written dozens of books and hundreds of articles. This page doesn't really have ANYTHING about his contribution to theology.
Is there anybody familiar with his work who could try to summarise his achievements?
STOP
The links to doctrine and dogma
is sort of broken.
STOP
:Absolutely.  This page lists a bunch of hot button issues, but says pretty much nothing about Benedict's theology.  He just issued an apostolic exhortation that reiterates that the Mass in the center of Catholic life, but as far as I can see, it is mentioned neither here nor the main Benedict page.  This article needs to be refocused away from what the mainstream media creates through soundbytes and on Benedict's actual positions on Catholic doctrine.  --Sephiroth9611 02:59, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urgent attention for this page? 

message: An interesting analysis in this link. This Wikipedia article seems to miss how Pope Benedict XVI understands Hell so really needs expanding. Personally though I feel that as a concept hell is a rather brutal approach to managing society but then Richard Dawkins does equate aspects of what religion does to people (and especially children) as abuse. (Which is my way of saying that I'm now interested in this Pope and the related articles). Ttiotsw 16:24, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm glad you brought that up, I have just realised that this article isn't the Theology of Pope Benedict, more the Politics of Pope Benedict! We don't mention his views on the Virgin Mary, Original Sin, Heaven, Hell, Purgatory etc etc...we will have to work these things into the article! Gavin Scott 17:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pope says hell and damnation are real and eternal.