3rd From Sol

~ Learn from before. Live now. Look ahead.

3rd From Sol

Tag Archives: Catholic

Popes That Damned Women, Choice, and Humanity

21 Sunday Jan 2018

Posted by Paul Kiser in 1968, Aging, Ethics, Generational, History, Politics, Privacy, Public Image, Public Relations, Relationships, Religion, Respect, Technology, US History, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anglican Communion, birth control, Catholic, Catholic Church, church, contraceptives, Lambeth Conference, Pope, Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI, Pope Pius XI, population control, pregnancy, religion, Second Vatican Council, Vatican II, Women, women's choice, Women's Rights

Pope Pius XI in 1930 and Pope Paul VI in 1968 had opportunities to extract the Catholic Church from the debate on birth control options for women. Both Popes had religious councils that suggested women using contraception should be allowed under some circumstances. Both Popes rejected those opinions and strictly forbade women having medical options in preventing pregnancy. 

Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini, ordained 1920

Pope Paul VI as a new Catholic priest

By Brescia Photo – Instituto Paolo VI, Public Domain, Link

1930 – The Church Takes A Stand

In 1930, the Anglican Communion (the alliance of Churches associated with the Church of England) held their seventh conference known as the Lambeth Conference. This Conference, held once each decade, brought together representatives of the Anglican Churches around the world to discuss religious issues.

At the 7th Lambeth Conference the representatives, by a 193 to 67 (47 abstentions,) passed Resolution 15 that would allow certain methods of contraception provided it was, “…done in the light of the same Christian principles.”

The Catholic Church was not affected by this Resolution; however, Pope Pius XI felt he had to respond to the Conference’s Resolution with his own proclamation on New Year’s Eve the same year. For the first time in Church history, the Pope insisted that the only justifiable reason for sexual relations was for procreation. He said that anytime, “…the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature..” 

Pope Pius XI reaction to the Lambeth Conference was obviously his belief of the moral superiority of the Catholic Church, but 38 years later Pope Paul VI was not attempting to respond to actions of other churches. Instead, he was squelching his own committee that had been called to review the teachings of the Church.

Birth Control Guided Away From Vatican II

The Second Vatican Council (Vatican II) was convened in October 1962 and ended in December 1966. It was established to assess the role of the Church in modern life. The decisions of the Council resulted in many changes to the Church doctrine, but women’s use of contraceptives was not one of the issues discussed. 

Some in the Church wanted to bring the issue of contraception methods into the discussions during Vatican II, but instead, Pope John XXIII established a commission in 1963, that reported directly to him. The task of the commission was to study questions of birth control and population. Pope John XXIII died later that year and Pope Paul VI continued the commission to its completion in 1966.

The commission, by a 64 to 5 vote determined that the use of medical contraceptives was an extension of the method of monitoring a woman’s fertility cycle and was not inherently evil. Information about the report was leaked to the media prior to publication and Catholics around the world began to believe the Church was about to liberalize the teachings regarding the use of birth control.

A Handful of Men Kill Women’s Choice

Despite the findings of the study, a minority report by four priests vehemently opposed the decision. They stated that if the Church’s position was reversed, it would mean the declarations of Pope Pius XI and other church leaders of the past would be seen as false teachings.

Pope Paul VI chose to follow the minority report and rejected the commission’s findings. He reaffirmed the Church’s position that women should not be able to prevent a pregnancy with contraceptives.

Why Did Pope Paul VI Reject the Findings?

The four most likely factors contributing to Pope Paul VI’s rejection are as follows:

  1. The Catholic Church has been consistent in discouraging the idea that worshipers have a personal relationship with God. The Church has preferred that personal choices should be made using the Church to guide them.
  2. A historical perspective in the Church that women are subservient to men and not worthy of positions of religious leadership; therefore, a woman’s choice to want to avoid pregnancy is irrelevant.
  3. Pregnancy is an act of God, not of humans.
  4. Pope Paul VI was not a woman, never married, and rumored to be gay.

It is unlikely that any Pope will ever reconsider the issue of birth control. Note that when Pope Paul VI made his declaration in 1968, the population of the world was 3.5 billion people. The world population is now 7.6 billion. 

Confronting Truth: The Difference Between Science and Religion

27 Monday Nov 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in Education, Ethics, History, Passionate People, Religion, Respect, Science, Space, Technology, Universities

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

astronomy, belief, Catholic, Catholic Church, center of the universe, Christian, Earth, Faith, Galileo, Galileo Galilei, geocentric, heliocentric, Islam, religious doctrine, scientific method, scientific process, Sun

There is a primary difference between science and religion. Religion discourages the confrontation of the ‘truth’ as it is presented by the leaders of the church. When I say discourage, I mean up to and including the murder of those who challenge the church’s version of the truth.

Science, not only accepts a challenge to the current truth, it is the fundamental architecture of all scientific endeavors to challenge the truth. Scientists accept that our current knowledge is incomplete, and that research, observation, and experimentation will replace the current truth of the universe around us.

A good example of this is our understanding of Earth and its relationship to other bodies in space. The religious doctrine stated that Earth was the center of the universe. Religious sources have claimed that holy text have told them the Earth is the center of the universe, and that was a truth which could not be challenged.

However, the concept of an Earth-centered (geocentric) universe had been challenged in the third century BCE by Greek astronomer and mathematician, Aristarchus of Samos, who theorized a Sun-centered (heliocentric) universe. Unfortunately, his idea lacked supportive evidence and was largely ignored.

Galileo was a victim of the Church, not of science

Over 1,700 years later, others began using observations that indicated that the geocentric model didn’t work as well as the heliocentric model. In January of 1610, Galileo Galilei used a telescope to discover three of Jupiter’s four largest moons, and observed that they orbited Jupiter. He then theorized that the Earth may also orbit the Sun, rather than the Sun orbiting the Earth.

This challenged the belief that dated back to Aristotle that all objects orbited the Earth, a concept that was adopted by both Islam and Christian churches. Galileo’s findings contradicted a fundamental truth of the church. For that crime, Galileo was subject to a Roman Inquisition, and ultimately, arrested and imprisoned.

While it is true that Galileo’s theories were not readily accepted, even by other astronomers of his time, he began a process of challenging truth, and using observation to determine truth. For this, Galileo is known as the father of the scientific method.

Some might think that their religion has outgrown this absolute interpretation of doctrine, and accepts scientific proof. To some degree, most Christian churches, when faced with overwhelming proof will either reluctantly accept the science, or become mute on the subject.

However, in the case of Galileo, the Catholic Church has attempted to use revisionism to explain its position on the geocentric/heliocentric debate. In 2004, the Catholic Church published a revised history of its role in the matter of Galileo. In a blog article on Catholic.com, the Church implies:

  1. that it was his fellow scientists, not the Church that disputed Galileo’s findings,
  2. that it was Galileo’s fault for promoting his theories that challenged Church doctrine,
  3. that Galileo failed to prove his position,
  4. that Galileo’s findings were not 100% correct, and 
  5. that Galileo did not suffer any real consequence for his research and findings.

All five of these points are twisted interpretations of what we know to be fact.

  • Galileo was persecuted by the Church, not his fellow scientists. Arrested by the Church, not this fellow scientists, and sentenced by the Church, not his fellow scientists. Yes, his findings were not widely accepted by other astronomers, but as Galileo was the first to observe Jupiter’s moons and their orbits, he would have been alone in promoting the observations.
  • Galileo had his observations, and while there would need to be more observations and the development of better technology to confirm his observations and conclusions, he had every right to promote the concept, even if it disputed the truth of the Church.
  • Galileo observed and hypothesized, but he wasn’t 100% correct. The Catholic Church suggests that because he wasn’t 100% correct that they were right in persecuting him for his theories. They were not, and the idea that the church was waiting for better evidence is a lie.
  • Galileo faced an Inquisition, and was sentenced. Whether he was tortured is not relevant to the Church’s role in trying to silence those who challenge the teachings of their doctrine.

Science seeks truth, but scientists know that all truth is subject to the gathering of more data, which may disprove the known truth and replace it with a new concept. The church believes that all truth comes from God, and it is not subject to revision, even if the truth of the Church is wrong.

The God Test

21 Tuesday Feb 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Branding, Ethics, Generational, Government, Honor, Politics, Relationships, Religion, Respect

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Baptists, Catholic, Christian, Christianity, Islam, LDS, Methodist, Muslim, nature of God, Protestant, religion

_dsc7618-2

Christ crucifixion statue, Isla Grande, Panama.

Question 1

Is God infallible? (Incapable of making mistakes or having an error in judgement)

If God is not infallible then God is capable of making mistakes and has failings that could lead to unneeded pain and suffering.

Question 2

Is God omnipresent? (In all places at all times past, present, and future.)

If God is not omnipresent then God cannot be aware of all things, nor intervene on all situations.

Question 3

Is God’s always good and honorable? (Does God always desire good for those who believe in Him/Her, and seek to do good rather than evil?)

If God is not always good and/or honorable, then followers cannot trust in Him/Her to do what is correct.

Question 4

Does God have/know all the correct answers to every possible question?

If God does not have/know all the correct answers to every possible question then He/She is not infallible, nor omnipresent.

Question 5

Does God love humans? (Have a unique and caring relationship with humans.)

If not, then a basic premise of the nature of God and His/Her relationship with humans (that God loves humans) is not true.

Question 6

Are humans the most important part of the universe?

If not, then God’s purpose is not human-based, but based on caring for the larger universe, thus, He/She does not always have our best interest in mind, as the needs of other aspects of the universe may have priority.

Question 7

Are humans to serve God? (Provide a service, act or behave on behalf of God, or produce material goods for God.)

If not, then humans have no compelling need to have a dependent relationship with God.

Question 8

Are humans to worship God? (To glorify, honor, praise, exalt, and please God.)

If not, then humans have no obligation to please God.

Question 9

Do humans and God have a quid pro quo relationship? (There is an equal benefit to both humans and God in the relationship)

If not, then there is an imbalance in the relationship that could lead to neglect or abuse of the relationship.

Question 10

Is it impossible for humans to survive without God? (God’s existence is necessary for human existence.)

If not, then humans don’t need a God.

Question 11

Does God determine when and how a human is born and how a human dies?

If not, then human lives are a random chance and God is not the creator of all things.

Question 12

Is there an existence for a human after death?

If not, then there is no reward or punishment for a human’s acts and/or failure to act during life.

(Copyright © 2017 Paul Kiser)

The God Store: There’s A God for That

16 Thursday Feb 2017

Posted by Paul Kiser in Aging, Ethics, Generational, Lessons of Life, Opinion, parenting, Politics, Relationships, Religion, Respect

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Catholic, Christians, Faith, God, Heaven, Hell, Methodist, Muslim, Protestant, religiolositical, religion

god-storeLooking for answers of purpose of life? 

Don’t understand the trials and the strife? 

Relax, you need to wander no more.  

We have what you seek at our local God store.

Need a God that is kind, wise and caring? 

Or one vengeful, wrathful, and worth fearing? 

Our Gods have it all, we’re where it’s at 

Name your desire because there’s a God for that 

A God to worship only on Sunday? 

Or one on your dash as you go down the highway?

Let your God be at home, work, or school

Our store perfects the religiositical fool 

In church your God will look like the others

So you can pretend you’re all sisters and brothers

Need a God that looks only like you?  

We have Him, and His blond-haired son too 

We have one for each hook, line, and sinner  

You pick the one that feels like a personal winner 

Need the God that is from a Bible? 

More precise please, the text is too tribal 

A God that hates all abortions and gays? 

No problem, we even throw in Jose

Need to put a woman in her place?

Not that original, but okay, how about race?

Want a God that loves only Caucasians?

We have a God for every skin persuasion

Need a God that takes care of the rich?

This is the place, your God’s your bitch.

You don’t believe in any God you say?

You’re not normal and you should go away.

For the faithful we have God to sell

We’re going to heaven, you’re going to Hell

Still, we feel compelled for something to do,

So, we’ll be condescending and pray for you

Pope Paul VII?

15 Friday Feb 2013

Posted by Paul Kiser in Ethics, Generational, Lessons of Life, Opinion, Pride, Relationships, Religion, Respect, Women

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Catholic, Christian, Church Christianity, Pope, Roman Church

A Pope without white hair? Why not?

A Pope without white hair? Why not?

As I understand it there is a vacancy coming up in the papacy and I think I might be just the person they need right now. I realize I may not meet all (or any) of the applicant requirements, but you don’t win the lottery if you don’t buy a ticket, right?

Some may feel that I’m not qualified because I don’t believe in God; however, I could make an argument that based upon their actions, it would seem that some Popes didn’t believe in a God either. I’m not an atheist¹ nor do I have a problem with anyone who chooses to believe in a God. I just think that the accountability for good and evil should reside in the acts of a person, not attributed, nor blamed on a God or devil.

I used to be a Catholic and that should qualify me for the position. If not, perhaps the fact that I’ve also been a Protestant and a Seventh Day Adventist should show that I have a wide variety of experience as a Christian. As an Adventist I even studied the entire Bible, so I know what it actually says about Christianity.

But enough about my qualifications, let’s talk about what I can do for the Catholic Church.

Some might think that as Pope I would stray from the teachings of the Bible, but, in fact, I would place more emphasis on the Bible, especially the New Testament, since that is the part that is written by Christians, for Christians. Under my service as Pope, Catholics would be expected to abide by Romans 14: 10-13:

But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.  For it is written:

“As I live, says the Lord,
Every knee shall bow to Me,
And every tongue shall confess to God.”

So then each of us shall give account of himself to God. Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.

Bible, New King James Version

That passage defines how a Christian is to behave and it needs no interpretation of a holy man. Bottom line, mind your own business. That God you allegedly believe in will decide what is a sin or not.

Another passage, Matthew 22: 21, further defines the limitations of a Christian:

Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s

Bible, King James Version

Both passages tell Christians that engaging in politics to declare the sins of another person is forbidden, and so shall it will be if I’m made Pope. Further, any Catholic who promotes the use civil laws and government policy to restrict, prohibit, restrict, or regulate the alleged ‘sin’ of another shall be excommunicated. If you believe in a God, then don’t try to be the God.

Another change will be to abolish marriage restrictions on priests. Not only will they be allowed to marry, it will be encouraged, and they will be encouraged to have families. There is no better way to understand the meaning of life than to be a parent of a child and a priest with a family can relate to his or her flock better than a priest without one.

If you caught that last reference to priests as “his or her” then you know I will allow women to be priests. Not only will women be allowed to be priests, but gay and lesbians will be allowed. Anyone who has the capacity to love another person is too valuable to not consider for Church leadership. Also, it’s time Catholics put some distance between us and the Baptists.

Finally, one of the other major changes I will make if selected as Pope will be to eliminate some of the rituals of the Church. If there is a God, why should we try to bore Him or Her with the same old, tired policies and procedures week after week? 

I know these changes will cause many current Catholics to denounce their faith, but I’m confident we’ll be fine without them. The new Catholics we gain will be true Christians, and that seems more important to me.

So, who will be contacting me and what’s the next step in the application process?

NOTE: This article was originally titled “Pope Paul I.” After I published it I researched the names of the Popes and discovered there have been six Popes using the Pope Paul name, thus the change to Pope Paul VII.

¹Regarding the term ‘atheist,’ we don’t attach a name to everyone who doesn’t believe in something mythological. If you don’t believe in invisible gorillas does that mean I can call you an aprimatist?

Other Pages of This Blog

  • About Paul Kiser
  • Common Core: Are You a Good Switch or a Bad Switch?
  • Familius Interruptus: Lessons of a DNA Shocker
  • Moffat County, Colorado: The Story of Two Families
  • Rules on Comments
  • Six Things The United States Must Do
  • Why We Are Here: A 65-Year Historical Perspective of the United States

Paul’s Recent Blogs

  • Dysfunctional Social Identity & Its Impact on Society
  • Road Less Traveled: How Craig, CO Was Orphaned
  • GOP Political Syndicate Seizes CO School District
  • DNA Shock +5 Years: What I Know & Lessons Learned
  • Solstices and Sunshine In North America
  • Blindsided: End of U.S. Solar Observation Capabilities?
  • Inspiration4: A Waste of Space Exploration

Paul Kiser’s Tweets

What’s Up

March 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Jun    

Follow Blog via Email

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,651 other subscribers

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

 

Loading Comments...