Catholic Church Buries the "7 Deadly Sins", in favor of a new list.
By ParaTed2k
@ParaTed2k (22940)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
March 11, 2008 7:59am CST
Apparently the age old sins of sloth, envy, gluttony, greed, lust, wrath and pride are just "too individualistic" for the Vatican nowadays.
Catholics can now feel free to lust after whoever they want... eat all they want... and sit around envying others... as long as they separate their recycleables and spurn "paper or plastic" at the grocery store.
"The new lists condemns genetic modification, carrying out experiments on humans, polluting the environment, causing social injustice, causing poverty, becoming obscenely wealthy and taking drugs."
Hmmmm, does that mean they are changing the meaning of the name "Catholic" from "Universal" to "Global"?
I wonder if they'll absolve Catholic Priests from lusting after little boys... as long as they buy "carbon credits"?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/10/view10b.xml
11 people like this
23 responses
@wildcat180 (169)
• United States
11 Mar 08
Hmm...Interesting.
I wonder if this is coming because their membership is down and they're having a hard time recruiting new priests. But instead of dealing with the REAL problem (ie child molesting priests and mandatory celibacy in priests), they do this. To me, it sounds more like they're trying to gain the support (which turns to membership, which equals more money in the collection plates on Sunday) from the "green" people.
I'm sorry. I was raised Catholic and I despise the Church. I have no respect for an organization that is about mind control. Think about it. They're so busy telling you what you can't do in THIS life and the ONLY thing they offer in return is salvation AFTER this life. It's quite a racket, if you think about it. "Give me 10% of your income now, restrict even your most natural urges and desires, and you'll be in Heaven after you die". But you get nothing in this life. Gotta love it. Not.
3 people like this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
11 Mar 08
I wonder how they know what a "real" issue is cloistered up in the Vatican, never meeting with any "real" people.
2 people like this
@terilee79720 (3621)
• United States
11 Mar 08
And therein my dear ParaTed lies the biggest problem of all.....people, individuals, religious orders and whomever else....who has over the centuries decided in their own minds, in their own self induced piety, to change the natural order of things; to change the original....to make it 'feel' better or 'fit'.
The 'new improved version' for some reason, always appeals to the masses, when, the original always ends up being the one we can rely on.
Without sounding too critical or judgemental, if everyone's not careful, their own 'sins' will not only lead themselves, but everyone who agrees with the changes, right down the toilet.
But then, you have to realize, the changes are changes that were 'predicted' would come to pass, all those years ago, BEFORE anyone got their hands on it. The 'church' is only following what was said would happen, somehow, fulfilling prophecy, much too soon to suit me. But then, who am I to question the validity of 'the church'......HA!
2 people like this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
11 Mar 08
You mean the Catholic church is now running on a platform of "change"? ;~D
2 people like this
@Modestah (11179)
• United States
11 Mar 08
bleh.
I am Catholic, and there are things coming out that are so not Catholic.
Truth is absolute. A sin yesterday remains a sin today (except if a law has changed and that law was not of a moral consideration) and tomorrow.
The 7 cardinal sins are still sins and sins which lead to many other sins - hence the name cardinal.... also refered to as deadly.
but in all fairness I did not read the article - though I believe it is errant to alter what the deadly sins are - revamping the so called list does not say that the previous list is no longer sins.
I do not appreciate the gratuitous remarks at the end of the discussion.
2 people like this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
11 Mar 08
The offense taken is entirely by your choice. Enjoy it.
1 person likes this
@worldwise1 (14885)
• United States
12 Mar 08
I'm only perplexed, ParaTed, as to how they went about making these "changes." Did they actually go into the Bible and have them all rewritten? Oh, I guess it's just what they call progress; seems to me that people change anything they want now whenever they wish.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
13 Mar 08
I don't mind changes along the way, but the changes should be based on either scripture or revelation... not polical whims of the day.
@LorgenShadoufang (153)
• Philippines
13 Mar 08
I think that if we really investigate, most if not all religious books have been written and rewritten throughout their history. When I write, I also always make drafts, a final draft and ultimately a final product. And then sometimes I make more changes after the final product. =')
Of course, the miraculous writings are something else. (Some people were reported to have been able to write wonderful pieces without knowing how to read and write before). What's miraculous and what's not miraculous aren't mine to say, though.
And oh, be careful what you believe in. Beliefs can make you do terrible things.
1 person likes this
@fredgame (1260)
• China
11 Mar 08
i seem not to understand what is said about the catholic church. does it mean what one can not do isn't a sin as you mention? as the bible say donot envy the wicked nor dinne with them as they say eat and drink but they don't actually mean what they say. AS the bible says don't look at woman twice.
does it mean the catholic has a different norms from the others and that of the bible?
1 person likes this
@wildcat180 (169)
• United States
11 Mar 08
The Catholic church has always interpreted the Bible differently than other Christians. They read what they want to and ignore the rest. I believe that's one reason why so many other Christian religions came to be...they disagreed with the Catholic Church and set out to start their own.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
11 Mar 08
Exactly! The 7 deadly sins are biblical... this crap is just pop culture.
1 person likes this
@etnad0 (230)
• United States
9 Jul 08
wow, i've read through the Bible twice, and i've never seen mention of 7 "deadly" sins... that's something the Catholic church made up. there are a lot of sinful things mentioned in the Bible, only 2 things mentioned as unforgivable... blaspheming the Holy Spirit, and accepting the mark of the beast...
@ayou82 (3450)
• Philippines
11 Mar 08
I dont think this is a good idea.. it is lie they are taking away the tradition from what you have live on for the rest of your life. Lust is open to everyone that is absolutely no just imagine the world without rules to live by.. it is just the same with religion and if people dont have that fear living in their hearts kids ..will grow up as murderers, liers and baby makers.
2 people like this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
11 Mar 08
I prefer not to base my faith on fear. I prefer to base it on a love for Our Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ.
1 person likes this
@gewcew23 (8007)
• United States
13 Mar 08
To tell you the truth I could really careless what the Catholic do. The is a reason I am not Catholic and will never be Catholic. I do not have a problem with the Pope changing the Catholic belief on sins, as long as the rest of the world realize that the rest of Christendom does not agree with them. Carbon credits for atonement for lusting for little boys is just funny.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
13 Mar 08
I agree, they have the right to decide doctrine and practices for the Catholic Church, and Catholicism isn't the entirety of Christianity.
And boy aren't we glad it isn't! ;~D
@cripfemme (7698)
• United States
13 Mar 08
I enjoy with them that most of these things are wrong and personally more dangerous than any personal sin you might commit. Not that I think you should be greedy or lustful, but those seem like to big deal in the face of destroying the earth and causing injustice.
@WhatsHerName (2716)
• United States
17 Apr 08
Wow!
Next thing you know they will try to split the Golden Rule into two!
"Do onto others as you would have them do onto you, unless they attack you first?"
"Do onto others as you would have them do onto you, unless they attack you first?" 1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
17 Apr 08
LOL
I always liked the one that said..
"Do unto others... then split!" :~D
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
13 Mar 08
I am not a Roman Catholics, but I do think the sins of sloth, envy, gluttony, greed, lust, wrath, and pride belong to us all. The so called modern sins of genetic modification, experiments on humans and so on can be covered by the old sins, the sins that can all be covered in one, the pride of man and covetous. If one is covetous, one envies his neighbor and thinks he is better than everyone, so there is no need to categorize these sins. Oh the lusting is also covered by covetous, those who do that covet the bodies of those they lust over it.
And being environmentally correct does not mean a damn thing if you do it at the expense of your neighbor.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
13 Mar 08
Wow, you should work for the Vatican Public Relations office. You explained it much better than the Vatican did.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
14 Mar 08
I'm not Catholic and I'm not here to either defend the Catholic Church or attack it, but didn't they just add to the list of "mortal sins" rather than drop some and replace them with new ones? My problem with the Catholic Church has always been it doesn't seem to matter what one does as long as they go to Confession. That isn't meant as an attack, just an observation and an opinion; I could be wrong because, as I said, I'm not Catholic but I've heard that said already.
Annie
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
14 Mar 08
There's discussion both ways on that point. The fact that they decided the old ones are just "too individualist" tells me something though. ;~D
Mortal sins are those that take a person to hell... so now they are saying that littering or getting to wealthy in itself is grounds for damnation.
1 person likes this
@whymrhymer (26)
• United States
12 Mar 08
The Telegraph article this discussion is based on is totally misleading -- you need to read the comments after the article to discover that this list of "new" sins was just the ramblings of a "second-tier cardinal" giving an interview to the news media -- they are no where near official or even sanctioned by the big "Papa" in the Vatican.
Regardless of the mutterings of a British tabloid (or the quoted Cardinal), I tend to agree with the main comments here: organized religions are merely social clubs competing for members and contributions. They change their "rules" when they feel like it -- as is their right!
IMO: The Bible, as well as the Koran, the Talmud and all of the others, originated in the minds of moral man and from the pens of those men and is brilliant fiction and necessary fiction but fiction none the less. Religious texts outline the rules for society and imply punishments for those who would disobey those rules. They are necessary documents and, in a way, religions are also necessary because without them the "WORD" would not be spread, it would just die.
@Foxfire1875 (2010)
•
11 Mar 08
It looks like the catholic church is trying to convince everybody how modern it is now. What a joke, as if that is going to increase their congregations.
It's all a bit too little and too late, considering the damage that the catholic church has done over the years.
I thought they just automatically absolved their priests of lusting after choir boys, by moving them to another parish.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
11 Mar 08
True. I wonder how many of these "new" deadly sins The Catholic Church itself is guilty of.
1 person likes this
@danishcanadian (28953)
• Canada
12 Mar 08
Political correctness has done it again!!! The way I see it, they are doing what they are doing to make "younger people" understand. Unfortunately, that is the wrong approach. If people were educated from the beginning about the general meanings of the 10 commandments, they would know how to APPLY them to every day life, instead of us having to make a long or short list of sins, because no one knows better.
1 person likes this
@vanities (11395)
• Davao, Philippines
12 Mar 08
im a catholic and i dont think the 7 deadly sins were replaced by another lists which condemns genetic or whatever..as what i have understood its only an addition not a replacement..i dont know where the telegraph got it ...however i still respect,honor and follows the ten commandments which embodies the deadly sins..St. Peter was the first pope and been followed by the others as listed on the vatican..all of them are human and prone to commit mistakes ..just like the priests,pastors or any head of religious group globally..nobody is perfect here i guess...and who are we to judge those who commit one? we are given free will to do what we want to do with our life and face the consequences after that..
@Wario_1 (965)
• Sweden
12 Mar 08
Feels like they are starting to get really desperate, since they feel they needed to uptade their old sh*t with some new crap. Their hasnt and never will exist any deadly or mortal sins in the bible, Jesus said that humans will be forgiven regardless on how they blaspheme, but blasphemy against the holy spirit will not be forgiven, not in this world or the next.
1 person likes this
@LorgenShadoufang (153)
• Philippines
13 Mar 08
I thought they were just "new 7 Deadly Sins" and not replacements..
Were they replacements?
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
13 Mar 08
I would think that they would just say something like "7 deadly sins of today", but no, they actually said that the old 7 deadly sins are "too individualistic".. so yes, they are a replacement.
@LorgenShadoufang (153)
• Philippines
13 Mar 08
Oh, geez.. you have a source that says that the new list was a replacement http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/10/view10b.xml . HOWEVER, it doesn't say who wrote it. So I believe it's just an opinion piece, not a news article. "Britain's No.1 quality newspaper website"? I don't know about that now...
On several other reputable news sources, I don't see them saying that the list were replacements:
According to ABC News: http://www.abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=4424390
"The old sins still hold — lust is still a no-no... It is just that new developments, new advances, mean new ways of sinning..."
In the same webspace of Telegraph.co.uk, nothing was mentioned about a replacement: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/03/10/eavatican110.xml
In Bloomberg:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=aizloDFbRPRM&refer=uk
All throughout, the words that described them were "new", "updated", "modern", "social sins"... I really believe that the other article in Telegraph.co.uk http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/10/view10b.xml incorrectly used the term "replace".
Good discussion, though =') Actually, that was among my first questions when I heard about it two days ago: What happened to the old deadly sins? Apparently they're just that. Old. As in "1,500 years or so" old.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
13 Mar 08
Probably true, but the leadership of the Catholic church equating littering or 'being to wealthy' to a deadly sin is rediculous.
I'm glad the leaders of my religion take sin a little more scripturally.
@superdudeD (1)
• United States
10 Jul 08
Just so u know. You don't know much of anything about the Catholic Church. Only someone who really hated the Catholic Church would really accuse them of throwing out the old 7 deadly sins. Of course those are still around! The Pope just wanted the people to know that with the world changing there are new evils and that they should be aware of them.
