Slashdot Mirror

36. For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. [...]

37. [...] For the faithful cannot embrace that opinion which maintains that either after Adam there existed on this earth true men who did not take their origin through natural generation from him as from the first parent of all, or that Adam represents a certain number of first parents. Now it is no no way apparent how such an opinion can be reconciled with that which the sources of revealed truth and the documents of the Teaching Authority of the Church propose with regard to original sin, which proceeds from a sin actually committed by an individual Adam and which, through generation, is passed on to all and is in everyone as his own.

• Maybe our bodies came from evolution (under God's will), but God Himself creates our immortal souls [at conception].
• There was a first man and a first woman, whom we call Adam and Eve, who committed the first sin.

Here's the official hard line:

• 5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person's formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church's teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

  6. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, "the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration "Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics" [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgement on the person's subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person's public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.

  [N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate's permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate's stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]

Any questions?

The Code of Canon Law makes 4 references to abortion, and all of them talk about actually performing abortions. Have you got a source for official Catholic doctrine on legislating abortion?

I think the Church more or less considers "legislation" to be an artifact of decisions made by individuals (those who create the laws), and things like that are related to the concept of scandal. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

2286 Scandal can be provoked by laws or institutions, by fashion or opinion. Therefore, they are guilty of scandal who establish laws or social structures leading to the decline of morals and the corruption of religious practice, ...
2287 Anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged.

Also, I think the position of the church is that human life begins at conception (a zygote is a person), so any laws/sins which apply to a person (viz murder) apply to an unborn person.

Larry

1. The official position of the Catholic Church is that all artificial birth control should be illegal.

Is it? The Code of Canon Law makes 4 references to abortion, and all of them talk about actually performing abortions. Have you got a source for official Catholic doctrine on legislating abortion?

Unlesss you've got a cite, I don't buy it.

-Esme

Key word: supposedly.

Kerry is a lying bastard - either he's Catholic, and believes what the Church teaches, or he's not.

But trying to pretend he is Catholic while voting for so-called "abortion rights" is a travestry.

It's even worse than Kerry pretending to be pro-gun.

I mean, c'mon, at least be open about what you stand for! Sheesh.

You may also be interested in reading Fides et Ratio by Pope John Paul II.

A worthwhile read.

My state recently got a lottery for the first time in the history of the state. Now millions of Tennesseeans have poured half a billon dollars into the lottery system. Every eligible high school student was able to recieve a college scholarship. The manager of the lottery is paid $350,000 with another $400,000 in bonuses available.

So millions of people voluntarily pooled a little of their spare money together to provide a great benefit to the citizens of the state. (This is not an endorsement of the lottery. I am morally opposed to it and do not participate in it. I'm just using it as an example) Another example of people voluntarily giving or time or money is churches. The Southern Baptist Convention has a budget of hundreds of millions of dollars. I'm sure the Roman Catholic Church has a budget to dwarf that. People voluntarily gave this money.

Why doubt the power of FOSS when examples of people volunarily giving of their spare time/money and accomplishing great things is all around. Not everyone in the world demands monetary reimbursement for every beneficial act they perform. That's quite a sad outlook on life don't you think?

There are different uses of words like fundamentalist/orthodox: the literal sense of "sticking to the very fundaments and core concepts" are nowadays almost overridden by very negative connotations e.g. extremist, "not allowed to have fun"... [anybody expect the Spanish Inquisition ;-) ?].

But a priori, whether a fundamentalist, i.e. somebody who takes the fundaments on which something is built or based very seriously, is a good thing or not depends on what that fundament actually is. And that varies a lot across doctrines. For example, in Christianity, the fundament is the principle of love of God and your neighbour as embodied in the (first two of the) ten commandments. This is the core of Christian orthodoxy (and yes, I'm just re-stating official teaching here); so in that sense a fundamentalist can be something of high moral value in accordance even with other belief systems.

If, on the other hand you consider orthodox to mean what the average person on the street thinks, then it is not too surprising that there's a lot of divergence compared to experts you mention, since the average (wo)man in the street might not (have time to) read as much about religion to clarify their minds in times of time-tables, reality TV, beeping pagers, and ./.

There is a big difference between "condoms sometimes fail" (true) and "there are holes in (all) condoms that viruses can pass through".

Anyhow, the reason for the statement is nothing to do with the safety or not of condoms. The Vatican has tied itself into a bizarre knot with the Humanae Vitae proclamation that contraception is always wrong, and they can't admit that condoms might be a good thing for some people. How many people will die because of following this advice?

Here is the text of Humanae Vitae. I don't have time to rebutt it here, but I encourage you to see how many fallacies you can spot.

The biggest one of course, is that they assume God intends every single act (e.g. intercourse) to be possible to lead to its organic purpose (i.e. birth of a child.) Interrupting sex before ejaculation is a sin. But where do you draw the line, and where did they get that bizarre idea from in the first place? Is it a sin to not proceed from a kiss to ejaculation? Is it a sin not to procreate with the first partner you ever ask on a date? Is it a sin to make a cup of tea and then not drink it?

If an all-powerful loving God wants a couple to have a child, one fertile sex act is enough. Indeed, God could certainly rip a little condom if He wanted.

The Catholic Church is telling people in countries stricken by Aids not to use condoms because they have tiny holes in them through which HIV can pass - potentially exposing thousands of people to risk.

The church is making the claims across four continents despite a widespread scientific consensus that condoms are impermeable to HIV.

A senior Vatican spokesman backs the claims about permeable condoms, despite assurances by the World Health Organisation that they are untrue.

Oh yeah, and a quick Google scan of the Vatican's web site shows that the Catechism of the Catholic Church says nothing about evolution, but a document from 1998 (here) seems to suggest what you and I have gone over-- that evolution happened but God (/Fate/Time/Whatever) either initiated or intervened in the process.

2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

- the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;

- all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;

- there must be serious prospects of success;

- the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the "just war" doctrine.

The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.

According to Netcraft, The Vatican runs Tru64 Unix.

Hey, the Pope lives in Vatican City, and BTW they use Tru64, i.e. Alpha!!! wow! I knew this pope was cool!

In front of God and everyone, Bill Gates categorically denied any involvement in the entire SCO fiasco and stated in no uncertain terms that he hopes that Linux "breaks the back of SCO".

I checked at the Vatican Press Office, but apparently God has not issued a statement on this. Readers are cautioned to wait for an official statement before placing faith in Bill's denial.

There is only one Heaven, and you get there by following the True Church. So, let's just call L5 a bridge to the continued Pax Americana (which, to be true, is close to a heaven on Earth, for those who like freedom, equality, liberty and guns).

If you were suggesting a vast, global conspiracy of physicists has organized itself to fraudulently claim the existance of a particle which is of interest mostly only to them- then I think you need to adjust your tinfoil hat.

Yeah, that's simply ridiculous. That would be like positing a world-wide organization of people who proclaimed, and attempted to convince their followers to believe in, the existence of a ghost in the sky who created and controls the entire universe.

I guess you'd think that organization secured for its leaders influence over politics and broadcasting and political leaders. You might even think that this organization has its own country, and a leader who claims infallible knowledge of morality.

Clearly, if you believe such a conspiracy exists, you need to adjust your tin-foil hat.

I agree, and that is in fact what the Orthodox bioethicist Engelhardt has pointed out.

It's too bad that the Orthodox have fallen away from the teachings of the Church Fathers on this subject...

The Romans have some sort of idea that sperm are potential life or something, and that it's bad to spill them without chance of conception, or something (c.f. Onan in the Old Testament).

That has nothing to do with it. From Pope Paul VI's encyclical "Humanae Vitae":

11. The sexual activity, in which husband and wife are intimately and chastely united with one another, through which human life is transmitted, is, as the recent Council recalled, "noble and worthy." It does not, moreover, cease to be legitimate even when, for reasons independent of their will, it is foreseen to be infertile. For its natural adaptation to the expression and strengthening of the union of husband and wife is not thereby suppressed. The fact is, as experience shows, that new life is not the result of each and every act of sexual intercourse. God has wisely ordered laws of nature and the incidence of fertility in such a way that successive births are already naturally spaced through the inherent operation of these laws. The Church, nevertheless, in urging men to the observance of the precepts of the natural law, which it interprets by its constant doctrine, teaches that each and every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life.

Union and Procreation

12. This particular doctrine, often expounded by the magisterium of the Church, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act.

The reason is that the fundamental nature of the marriage act, while uniting husband and wife in the closest intimacy, also renders them capable of generating new life - and this as a result of laws written into the actual nature of man and of woman. And if each of these essential qualities, the unitive and the procreative, is preserved, the use of marriage fully retains its sense of true mutual love and its ordination to the supreme responsibility of parenthood to which man is called. We believe that our contemporaries are particularly capable of seeing that this teaching is in harmony with human reason.

Faithfulness to God's Design

13. Men rightly observe that a conjugal act imposed on one's partner without regard to his or her condition or personal and reasonable wishes in the matter, is no true act of love, and therefore offends the moral order in its particular application to the intimate relationship of husband and wife. If they further reflect, they must also recognize that an act of mutual love which impairs the capacity to transmit life which God the Creator, through specific laws, has built into it, frustrates His design which constitutes the norm of marriage, and contradicts the will of the Author of life. Hence to use this divine gift while depriving it, even if only partially, of its meaning and purpose, is equally repugnant to the nature of man and of woman, and is consequently in opposition to the plan of God and His holy will. But to experience the gift of married love while respecting the laws of conception is to acknowledge that one is not the master of the sources of life but rather the minister of the design established by the Creator. Just as man does not have unlimited dominion over his body in general, so also, and with more particular reason, he has no such dominion over his specifically sexual faculties, for these are concerned by their very nature with the generation of life, of which God is the source.

Unlawful Birth Control Methods

14. Therefore We base Our words on

The goal of MediaMax was not to invent the "holy grail" (since one does not exist).
...They seem to born out of some Messiah complex hell-bent on saving the world from any technological attempt to protect artists and their property.

No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of Corporate America to facilitate disinformation regarding the existence, or not, of such a Holy artifact. Also, to suggest that Jesus would be "saving the world from any technological attempt to protect artists" is a misrepresentation. When I asked, What Would Jesus Do , it was His position that He is not against any particular technology, however the application of technology such as DRM to prevent consumers from exercising their rights may be, in fact, an Evil that Jesus would be prepared to deal with during the coming Apocalypse.

The goal of MediaMax was not to invent the "holy grail" (since one does not exist).

...They seem to born out of some Messiah complex hell-bent on saving the world from any technological attempt to protect artists and their property.

No matter what their credentials or rationale, it is wrong to use one's knowledge and the cover of Corporate America to facilitate disinformation regarding the existence, or not, of such a Holy artifact. Also, to suggest that Jesus would be "saving the world from any technological attempt to protect artists" is a misrepresentation. When I asked, What Would Jesus Do , it was His position that He is not against any particular technology, however the application of technology such as DRM to prevent consumers from exercising their rights may be, in fact, an Evil that Jesus would be prepared to deal with during the coming Apocalypse.

1367 The sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are one single sacrifice: "The victim is one and the same: the same now offers through the ministry of priests, who then offered himself on the cross; only the manner of offering is different." "And since in this divine sacrifice which is celebrated in the Mass, the same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross is contained and is offered in an unbloody manner. . . this sacrifice is truly propitiatory."

1 Corinthians 11:26-29
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

1 Peter 3:20-21
...in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us...

Titus 3:5
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.

Funny comparison, TAOCP/SICP to Old/New Testament... I suppose Don Knuth doesn't transform you into stone if you can't solve your HM50-rated exercise; neither will SICP raise the dead, although good software design can certainly prevent the loss of many an innocent life...
The allusion to the Bible reminds me that here is a link to the thoughts of Knuth on religion (he is a committed Christian), if you are interested.

Jochen

P.S. (warning, joke!):
Q: How does a blind programmer tell whether his colleague is a BASIC loser or a Scheme poet when he uses his terminal?
A: The SHIFT+8/9 keys are worn out... :-)

Come on, and if one of our descendant monkeys had slipped off a rock and died eons ago we wouldn't be here either. You could make a billion variables to explain why we shouldn't be here. That's why you need a religion that embraces evolution. Roman Catholicism (Not a troll, it's true!)

• Pope Catholic
  
• Bears shit in woods.
  
• Michael Jackson found to have had plastic surgery.
  
• Frog's ass watertight.
  

It's okay Timothy, the True Church understands the Bible can not be interpreted directly as the immutable Word of God, so if the heretical snake handlers come after you, you can seek refuge in Rome.

"The harm done by some priests and religious to the young and vulnerable fills us all with a deep sense of sadness and shame. But think of the vast majority of dedicated and generous priests and religious whose only wish is to serve and do good!"
(full text)

I do find your "shaft" metaphor a disgusting, homosexualist shaded concept, please desist from such perverted thoughts.

Your hermeneutics and exegetical principles are clearly badly lacking, and discussion with you bears no fruit. Your twisting of scripture is painful to witness, and I suggest you read the Bible and ask God directly with all your heart to open its meaning to you.

Amazingly, you see no doctrinal issues with a Bible altered to state that Methusaleh survived the flood. A basic principle in Biblical understanding is types. For example, the passover lamb is a type of Christ.

In the same way, the ark is a type of Christ. When judgment (the flood) came to destroy sin, only those safely in Christ (Noah, his wife, and his three sons with their wives) could survive. Yet from your acceptance of Methusaleh surviving the flood as the Septuagint teaches, that would mean that one can survive God's coming judgment without Christ. I realize the RCC teaches this, but it is utterly against the entire redemption message of the Bible ([N]o man cometh unto the Father, but by Me -- John 14:6).

If you don't know that, the RCC teaches this ; the current pope on December 6 of 2000, said "The Gospel teaches us that those who live in accordance with the beatitudes: the poor in spirit; the pure in heart; those who will lovingly [endure] the sufferings of life; will enter God's kingdom. All who seek God with a sincere heart, including those who do not know Christ and His Church, contribute under the influence of grace, to the building of this kingdom". Reference: here about twenty minutes in. There are many further examples if you doubt that one, see here, here, here, etc. etc.

Again proof that the RCC is not only non-biblical, it's anti-biblical. And note that here the "infallible" pope got the gospel entirely wrong.

While your acceptance of Methusaleh surviving the flood is tragic, your (and the web site you cited) claim that Jerusalem is Babylon in Revelation 17-18 is as well. Revelation 17:9 states "And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth". Can you find a single source that says Jerusalem was known at the time John wrote Revelation (90-95 A.D.) as a "city on seven hills"? It doesn't have seven hills, Mount Moriah is its chief feature. Or perhaps you could admit that even today Rome is universally known as the "city on seven hills"? Additionally, the source you quote confuses the Whore OF Babylon with the city, as he cites OT references to Jerusalem as a harlot city. The Roman Catholic Church is not the city of Rome, but it's located there. Thus the seven hills are the hills on which the women sitteth. Further, when John wrote, Jerusalem had been destroyed at least twenty years earlier. It was rubble, not one stone was left on top of another.

On the theme of OT references to harlotry, I recommend you read the book of Hosea. The entire book is given to that theme. It shows how God views spiritual infusion of pagan practices and other pseudo-gods into worship of Him.That is what God considers harlotry against Him. And notice that Hosea is directed to Israel (and Judah as well, but primarily the northern kingdom of Israel). The book is certainly not directed solely at the capital (Jerusalem) of the southern kingdom. Now that you see what harlotry is about, examine Jeremiah 7 and 44, see what God thought of worship directed to "the queen of heaven". Then check here, here, here,

Your hermeneutics and exegetical principles are clearly badly lacking, and discussion with you bears no fruit. Your twisting of scripture is painful to witness, and I suggest you read the Bible and ask God directly with all your heart to open its meaning to you.

Amazingly, you see no doctrinal issues with a Bible altered to state that Methusaleh survived the flood. A basic principle in Biblical understanding is types. For example, the passover lamb is a type of Christ.

In the same way, the ark is a type of Christ. When judgment (the flood) came to destroy sin, only those safely in Christ (Noah, his wife, and his three sons with their wives) could survive. Yet from your acceptance of Methusaleh surviving the flood as the Septuagint teaches, that would mean that one can survive God's coming judgment without Christ. I realize the RCC teaches this, but it is utterly against the entire redemption message of the Bible ([N]o man cometh unto the Father, but by Me -- John 14:6).

If you don't know that, the RCC teaches this ; the current pope on December 6 of 2000, said "The Gospel teaches us that those who live in accordance with the beatitudes: the poor in spirit; the pure in heart; those who will lovingly [endure] the sufferings of life; will enter God's kingdom. All who seek God with a sincere heart, including those who do not know Christ and His Church, contribute under the influence of grace, to the building of this kingdom". Reference: here about twenty minutes in. There are many further examples if you doubt that one, see here, here, here, etc. etc.

Again proof that the RCC is not only non-biblical, it's anti-biblical. And note that here the "infallible" pope got the gospel entirely wrong.

While your acceptance of Methusaleh surviving the flood is tragic, your (and the web site you cited) claim that Jerusalem is Babylon in Revelation 17-18 is as well. Revelation 17:9 states "And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth". Can you find a single source that says Jerusalem was known at the time John wrote Revelation (90-95 A.D.) as a "city on seven hills"? It doesn't have seven hills, Mount Moriah is its chief feature. Or perhaps you could admit that even today Rome is universally known as the "city on seven hills"? Additionally, the source you quote confuses the Whore OF Babylon with the city, as he cites OT references to Jerusalem as a harlot city. The Roman Catholic Church is not the city of Rome, but it's located there. Thus the seven hills are the hills on which the women sitteth. Further, when John wrote, Jerusalem had been destroyed at least twenty years earlier. It was rubble, not one stone was left on top of another.

On the theme of OT references to harlotry, I recommend you read the book of Hosea. The entire book is given to that theme. It shows how God views spiritual infusion of pagan practices and other pseudo-gods into worship of Him.That is what God considers harlotry against Him. And notice that Hosea is directed to Israel (and Judah as well, but primarily the northern kingdom of Israel). The book is certainly not directed solely at the capital (Jerusalem) of the southern kingdom. Now that you see what harlotry is about, examine Jeremiah 7 and 44, see what God thought of worship directed to "the queen of heaven". Then check here, here, here,

Your hermeneutics and exegetical principles are clearly badly lacking, and discussion with you bears no fruit. Your twisting of scripture is painful to witness, and I suggest you read the Bible and ask God directly with all your heart to open its meaning to you.

Amazingly, you see no doctrinal issues with a Bible altered to state that Methusaleh survived the flood. A basic principle in Biblical understanding is types. For example, the passover lamb is a type of Christ.

In the same way, the ark is a type of Christ. When judgment (the flood) came to destroy sin, only those safely in Christ (Noah, his wife, and his three sons with their wives) could survive. Yet from your acceptance of Methusaleh surviving the flood as the Septuagint teaches, that would mean that one can survive God's coming judgment without Christ. I realize the RCC teaches this, but it is utterly against the entire redemption message of the Bible ([N]o man cometh unto the Father, but by Me -- John 14:6).

If you don't know that, the RCC teaches this ; the current pope on December 6 of 2000, said "The Gospel teaches us that those who live in accordance with the beatitudes: the poor in spirit; the pure in heart; those who will lovingly [endure] the sufferings of life; will enter God's kingdom. All who seek God with a sincere heart, including those who do not know Christ and His Church, contribute under the influence of grace, to the building of this kingdom". Reference: here about twenty minutes in. There are many further examples if you doubt that one, see here, here, here, etc. etc.

Again proof that the RCC is not only non-biblical, it's anti-biblical. And note that here the "infallible" pope got the gospel entirely wrong.

While your acceptance of Methusaleh surviving the flood is tragic, your (and the web site you cited) claim that Jerusalem is Babylon in Revelation 17-18 is as well. Revelation 17:9 states "And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth". Can you find a single source that says Jerusalem was known at the time John wrote Revelation (90-95 A.D.) as a "city on seven hills"? It doesn't have seven hills, Mount Moriah is its chief feature. Or perhaps you could admit that even today Rome is universally known as the "city on seven hills"? Additionally, the source you quote confuses the Whore OF Babylon with the city, as he cites OT references to Jerusalem as a harlot city. The Roman Catholic Church is not the city of Rome, but it's located there. Thus the seven hills are the hills on which the women sitteth. Further, when John wrote, Jerusalem had been destroyed at least twenty years earlier. It was rubble, not one stone was left on top of another.

On the theme of OT references to harlotry, I recommend you read the book of Hosea. The entire book is given to that theme. It shows how God views spiritual infusion of pagan practices and other pseudo-gods into worship of Him.That is what God considers harlotry against Him. And notice that Hosea is directed to Israel (and Judah as well, but primarily the northern kingdom of Israel). The book is certainly not directed solely at the capital (Jerusalem) of the southern kingdom. Now that you see what harlotry is about, examine Jeremiah 7 and 44, see what God thought of worship directed to "the queen of heaven". Then check here, here, here,

If ICANN had assigned a TLD to a city, THAT would be news.

Two words: Vatican City. Two letters: va.

As pointed out by CanSpice.

Now, "First city with a TLD and drive-through breast augmentation" - that I would believe.

The Holy See (Vatican City) has its own TLD, .va, and it's a city. I think the calls that Los Angeles is the first city with a TLD are a little premature.

Breaking News:

SCO has announced that is has claim to all IP related to supernovae. SCO claims it bought the rights to view and reproduce all supernovae images from NASA back in 1996. Another suit, targetted against the Catholic Church is insurance in case there really is a God that created the supernovae. If so, then God will be part of a future lawsuit.

Being that NASA uses UNIX computers to do much of it's work, SCO is also including IBM, Novell, Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson as defendents in the filings.

Further updates as we get them.

IANAP(riest) and for that matter IANAC(atholic), but the vatican's official website, here might be a good place to start. With respect to the Church's official positions, they should essentially be there. Or you could always ask a priest, but do you really want to ask the trolls of slashdot this question?

Well, for example, here's The Jewish People and their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible", from the Vatican. I can dig up other similar things from other religions, if you're interested.

You mentioned the way it's been for millenia. There's a reasonable historic overview in Christianity in its relation to Judaism, which also talks about the Islamic point of view. Islam considers the Jewish and Christian prophets to be true prophets, and recognizes the high moral qualities of Christians. It's amazingly small-minded to simply close yourself off to a thousand-year history of tolerance and understanding between the deepest thinkers and framers of the faiths of the major religions, and simply say "everyone is wrong but me and my religion". You place yourself squarely amongst the ignorant majority by doing so.

Never mind that since History endlessly repeats itself, technology gets discovered, forgotten and discovered again...

It's not because people worship Pazuzu instead of Jesus H. Fucking Christ (you know, the god that got nailed) that they are stupid...

Well, some software changes. Much rarely does at a visible rate. But people just never do learn to avoid common superstition unless they're taught reality.

Hmm. Maybe he's right. But then again, at $8-45M a quarter, it can take a long time to lose all your nut.

Of course, since telemarketers are a tool of Satan, they instantly hang up.

So, when some UN sponsored agency says chip manufacturing uses all these resources and makes all this pollution, I take those figure with a grain of salt, and look for the political movement behind them. I suspect the next report will condemn America and other western nations for their reliance on energy wasting high tech, and suggest we go back to living in drafty huts heated with animal dung (hello tubercolisos and lung disease) common in more PC third world countries like India, Sudan and France, while applauding the slave and child labor and environmental destruction used in the latest fabs in China.

I just ask you to compare the amounts of fossil fuel used to make this Pentium I'm using with the amounts I would need to go to each and every one of you and try to bring you back to the True Church, and ask you what is the better bargain for the world our Creator Above gave us.

You might have a problem, but there are plenty of people who don't, including this guy, who I belive has some theological training. Summary of his speach

If you ever read classic science fiction from the 1950's, you can feel America's pulse, we were going to conquer space, we were going to colonize orbit, the Moon, Mars, we were going to spread humanity through the Solar System, and eventually the galay. Somehow, in the last 30 years this changed.

Nowadays, Americans want comfort and safety, real heroism is lacking. We'll spend millions on designing a better recliner, with built in cat5 ports and a refrigerator. We'll spend millions on keeping people from smoking cigarettes, ignoring the fact that God gave people free will to decide for themselves. And then, because the budget has been spent on frivolous mandates like family-destroying welfare, we'll give up on space.

I, for one, blame the permissive 60's. Too many baby boomers ruined their mind on hallucinogens, and lost the courage and faith of their forefathers. Now, unless they're guaranteed 100 percent safety and comfort, these boomers won't have anything to do with it. Take NASA's money and spend it on Social Security so I can still rock to the Doors and drive my SUV when I'm 80. Greedy bastards.

What can we do to reclaim America's spirit? I don't think it's a coincidence that America's only Catholic president got us to the Moon. Yes, when you're involved in the True Church, you know that despite all your efforts, Death will get you, so it's better to be in orbit and die in a meteor shower, or die of a pressure suit leak on the Moon, than cravenly hiding in a planned retirement home.

America, let's get back to the Moon, let's go to Mars, and let's bring the Jesuits!

So, I tried translating this page from Italian using babelfish (ignoring the irony), but the translation left a lot to be desired. For example:
Historical documents of the Secret Archives Vatican

* Liber Diurnus
* Agreed of Worms
* Diploma of Federico the Barbarossa
* All your base are belong to us

Quite disappointing, I must say...

Speaking of Vatican secrets, look what I found on the Vatican website: lo and behold, the Vatican Secret Archives. Must not be such a big secret.

For the last 15 years, the Vatican has been working on transferring many texts and artwork to a secure digital format in hopes of saving it for all future generations.

Most of the text that the project has successfully transferred (and a good majority of text that has not been transferred) is available here. You do have to fill out some forms and then the materials are copied and sent to you.

All jokes and criticisms aside, the Vatican possesses the majority of the world's greatest works of literature, art, and historical documentation. I hope that they make all of it available to the world very soon.

Try it:
Vatican: the Holy See
See you in hell?

I wish there was less persecution, but those heretical Protestants know that they're Hellbound, and take it out on those of us who belong to the True Church.

such as this one? Or this?

Apple iSync + Ericsson T68i = Heaven

here's a good terrorist organization