h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I watched Monty Python's Meaning of Life last night and laughed till I cried, but it's left me full of questions.

First, having finally been able to watch it (behind a locked bedroom door), I can see why it's on the list of pernicious books and films that Catholics are forbidden to read/watch, but do The Church really think their adherents are really so feeble-minded that they need to be protected from things like that?

Second, how many normal Catholics (as opposed to the ravening, foaming-at-the-mouth Fundies) actually take notice of all that? Are there any Catholics reading this who have watched MoL and Life of Brian, read any of Jean-Paul Sartre's work, used artificial methods of contraception, divorced etc and still consider yourelves to be Catholics?

Third, do all you heathens out there actually find the Every sperm is sacred section hysterically funny or does one need to have had a repressive religious upbringing to appreciate it to the full?

(I'm still singing it and chuckling)

*had no repressive religious upbringing, but appreciates it to the full*

Let the heathen spill theirs
On the dusty ground.
God shall make them pay for
Each sperm that can't be found.

Those dancing children.

Was that Oliver or Mary Poppins?

1) Where are you getting the information that Catholics are forbidden to watch certain movies or read certain books? I'm a Catholic, and I can testify that there is no such information in the Catechism, nor has any such subject ever come up at mass. I guess it's possible that this is a regional thing (I'm American), and it's also possible that it's complete misinformation.

I know that here in America there's some kind of Catholic council that reviews movies (and quite possibly books as well), but they don't make any pronouncements about people not being allowed to see something -- they don't have the authority to do so. As far as I can tell, their two main purposes are to: 1) encourage Catholics to boycott movie which the council sees as rampantly anti-Catholic (i.e., movies in which the main point of the plot is to trash Catholicism), and 2) give parents information about the movies their children/teens may be seeing, so that the parents can have a starting ground for a discussion.

I, myself, happen to love "The Meaning of Life".

And you *can* use birth control and still be Catholic. It's one of those areas where the Pope or Church can make an announcement and say "this is what the church believes and thinks is the best thing to do", but leaves the decision to be something between the individual, their partner, and God.


Mikey

I had a Roman Catholic education to the age of 11, and it is the only bit of the film (apart from the Insurance Pirates) which makes me even smile-and it almost makes the rest of the film worthwhile.
I personally think it is a brilliantly observed and well-aimed kick in the wotsits to the catholic establishment, who reacted in much the manner I'd expect them too.

There is a list of forbidden books definately. At the Council of Trent in 1545 during the Counter-Reformation the Pope et al collected together the Index ( a collection of books forbidden for Catholics to read)and it still exists, though has been adjusted accordingly.

It all seems to have loosened up a bit nowadays though.

Two words Mikey.

Humanae Vitae.

You can't use artificial methods of birth control and still be a Catholic. The only method of birth control, other than Withdrawal, permitted by The Church is the muco-thermal method.

(It has one advantage - you know from day one when you're pregnant)

Mikey, the Holy See and the cardinals have the authority to forbid you to see anything they like. Whether you obey or not is up to you - thankfully you won't be burnt for your sin these days - but make no mistake, disobedience is a sin.

No, it isn't misinformation - I checked.

Catholics are taught that the Roman Catholic Church is the supreme guardian and purveyor of truth, that the Pope has infallible judgment in moral matters, and that `union of minds requires not only a perfect accord in the one Faith, but complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God Himself.'

Those are the words of Leo XIII in his "Chief Duties of Christian Citizens" but they have not been, and will not be, rescinded.
The Pope is infallible, you see. He is God's mouthpiece on Earth.

You may be confused because dear Albert Luciano did promise to do something about it in 1978.

Pity they managed to nobble him. (for a truly good man)

In the words of Karol Wojtyla himself:

“If it should be declared that contraception is not evil in itself, then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit had been on the side of the Protestant churches in 1930 (when the encyclical Casti Connubi was promulgated). and in 1951 (Pius XII’s address delivered before the Society of Hematologists in the year the pope died).

“It should likewise have to be admitted that for a hall a century the Spirit failed to protect Pius XI, Pius XII, and a large part of the Catholic hierarchy from a very serious error. This would mean that the leaders of the Church, acting with extreme imprudence, had condemned thousands of innocent human acts, forbidding, under pain of eternal damnation, a practice which would now be sanctioned. The fact can neither be denied nor ignored that these same acts would now he declared licit on the grounds of principles cited by the Protestants, which popes and bishops have either condemned or at least not approved”

"If it should be declared that contraception is not evil in itself, then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit had been on the side of the Protestant churches in 1930 (when the encyclical Casti Connubi was promulgated) and in 1951 (Pius XII's address delivered before the Society of Hematologists in the year the pope died)."

"It should likewise have to be admitted that for a half a century the Spirit failed to protect Pius XI, Pius XII, and a large part of the Catholic hierarchy from a very serious error. This would mean that the leaders of the Church, acting with extreme imprudence, had condemned thousands of innocent human acts, forbidding, under pain of eternal damnation, a practice which would now be sanctioned. The fact can neither be denied nor ignored that these same acts would now be declared licit on the grounds of principles cited by the Protestants, which popes and bishops have either condemned or at least not approved."

Hiya Sharky. You a left-footer too? Who'da believed it!

I missed the Insurance Pirates.
Liked the fish though.

OK. Since we're obviously not allowed to quote Karol Wojtyla I shall have to paraphrase.

Obviously, as all good Catholic schoolchildren ought to be, you will have been taught all about the Second Vatican Council.

The poor ignorant (through no fault of their own) heathens, however, may need the background explained...

In the early 60's Pope Paul VI appointed a Papal Commission on Population and Birth Control, made up of a group of 15 cardinals and bishops and a group of 64 lay experts representing a variety of disciplines.

He asked them to try to find a way to change The Church's position on birth control without destroying papal authority.

After deliberating for two years the lay commission voted 60 to 4, and the clergy voted 9 to 6, to change the position on birth control, even though it would mean a loss of papal authority, because it was the right thing to do.

However, a minority report was submitted to the pope. The co-author of that report was a Polish archbishop, Karol Wojtyla.
He pointed out to the Pope that if it should be declared that contraception is not evil in itself, they would have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit had been on the side of the Protestant churches in 1930 (when the encyclical Casti Connubi was promulgated) and in 1951 (Pius XII's address delivered before the Society of Hematologists in the year in which he died).

It would also have to be admitted that for a half a century the Spirit failed to protect Pius XI, Pius XII, and a large part of the Catholic hierarchy from a very serious error. This would mean that the leaders of the Church, acting with extreme imprudence, had condemned thousands of innocent human acts, forbidding, under pain of eternal damnation, a practice which would now be sanctioned. The fact can neither be denied nor ignored that these same acts would now be declared licit on the grounds of principles cited by the Protestants, which popes and bishops have either condemned or at least not approved.

Therefore, in order to protect the authority, continuity, and infallibility of The Church's magisterium, the Pope issued an encyclical, Humanae Vitae, in 1968, in which he condemned every form of contraceptive birth control and The Church immediately conducted a massive purge of its key personnel wherever it could.

Now that Karol Wojtyla is in charge of the Catholic Church he has declared that Catholic teaching on contraception must become law.

In his "Instruction on Respect for Human Life in its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation" he has instructed that politicians must commit themselves, through this intervention upon public opinion, to securing the widest possible consensus on such essential points.
They are expected to enact into law "appropriate legal sanctions" for violations of this law.

Rest easy in your beds all you heathens and poor misguided Protestants - the One True Church has you in its sights. Cinderella, You SHALL go to the ball.

Tefkat, there are obviously some issues about religion that you don't understand, although I can see that you feel very strongly about them.

In Catholicism, just like in every other religion and denomination I can think of, there are major issues and minor issues. There are issues on which you can NOT disagree with the church and still consider yourself a member of that church -- for example, whether Jesus is the son of God would be a major sticking point in most Christian denominations. There are also issues on which you CAN disagree with a church and still consider yourself a member -- of all the religions in the world, and all of their members, I have met very few who agree with every word of every precept. Which is OK -- I can't think of ANY type of group, company, or organization in which it's members agree with *absolutely everything*. The major, key issues are what bind a group of any kind, including a religion, together -- there are other issues on which disagreement can be tolerated.

In the Catholic church, contraception is one of those issues. You can disagree with the church without being excommunicated. In fact, there are priests (and even bishops) who disagree with the church on this issue and have not been "defrocked". Why? Because it's not one of the major tenets of our faith -- it's not something which "makes or breaks" a Catholic.

And no, disobeying the Pope or a priest is NOT a sin. And never has been. Disobeying GOD is a sin, but Popes and priests are not God, nor do they claim to be.

Mikey

Mikey, surely the fact that I no longer wish to submit to the dictatorship of the Vatican doesn't disqualify me from keeping abreast of issues over which I have fought on both sides of the divide?

May I refer you to JPII's apostolic letter 'Ad Tuendam Fidem' ("To Protect The Faith")
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_30061998_ad-tuendam-fidem_en.html
which adds a paragraph to Cannon 750 of the Code of Canon Law in order to "impose the obligation of upholding truths proposed in a definitive way".

It states that anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church and those who persist in disobedience are to be punished with a just penalty.

The accompanying doctrinal commentary, http://www.cin.org/docs/adtuennt.html
signed by Cardinal Ratzinger and Archbishop Bertone, states that those who fail to give assent to these 'definitive' teachings will 'no longer be in communion with the Catholic Church' (id est: "excommunicated").

The commentary gives examples of these 'definitive' teachings. They include the doctrine of Papal Infallibility.

JPII has decreed that even women who have been brutally raped must not use the morning after pill. He says they must "accept the enemy and make him flesh of their flesh".

There are dissident groups within The Church that are challenging Vatican dogma on several issues, including artificial contraception.
Surely, as a well-informed American Roman Catholic, you are aware that several of your fellow American Roman Catholics have already been excommunicated for the crime of belonging to these groups?

Remember...
The second proposition of the "Professio fidei" states: 'I also firmly accept and hold each and everything definitively proposed by the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals.' The object taught by this formula includes all those teachings belonging to the dogmatic or moral area, which are necessary for faithfully keeping and expounding the deposit of faith, even if they have not been proposed by the Magisterium of the Church as formally revealed.

Every believer, therefore, is required to give firm and definitive assent to these truths, based on faith in the Holy Spirit's assistance to the Church's Magisterium, and on the Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Magisterium in these matters.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Whoever denies these truths would be in a position of rejecting a truth of Catholic doctrine and would therefore no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Humble jalopies. In case you're not conversant with the Latin terms the "Professio fidei" is the Nicene Creed.

Which reminds me, aren't you old enough to remember the excommunication of all the people that refused to stop celebrating the Tridentine (sung Latin) Mass in the late 60s/early 70s when the Vatican decided to abolish it?

Credo in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem, factorem caeli et terrae.....

... the faithful of whatever rite and dignity, both as separate individuals and all together, are bound by a duty of hierarchical submission and true obedience, not only in things pertaining to faith and morals, but also in those which pertain to the discipline and government of the Church spread over the whole world, so that the Church of Christ, protected not only by the Roman Pontiff, but by the unity of communion as well as of the profession of the same faith is one flock under the one highest shepherd. This is the doctrine of Catholic truth from which no one can deviate and keep his faith and salvation." [Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Vatican Council I, DB1826-1827/DS3059-3060]

There is neither appeal nor recourse against a decision or decree of the Roman Pontiff. [Canon 333:3]

Mikey, of course there are issues concerning the Roman Catholic religion that I don't understand but I have argued this one with Canon Lawyers and I'm afraid the conclusion has to be the same for you as it was for me, and all the others over the centuries - A true Roman Catholic must submit to the Pope in all things. You can't pick and choose.

Sorry.

"A true Roman Catholic must submit to the Pope in all things."

This is NOT true -- you are grossly misinterpreting the doctrine of papal infallibility. Papal infallibility *only* applies to things stated "ex cathedra", most assuredly NOT to "all things".

It is not for YOU to decide who is and is not a Catholic. It is for the Church itself to decide. While I don't have a problem with discussing this topic, I *do* have a problem with the fact that you are repeatedly trying to claim that you somehow have the power to decide who is a "real Catholic" and who isn't. It isn't your call.

And we still have Latin masses here in Seattle -- saying the mass in Latin isn't against the rules, it's only against the rules to *only* offer them in Latin.


Mikey

ime sorry but th pope is the biggest boit of bad press that the cathlick church can ever have.
first of all he showes up the intolerace in the religion
you really need to be to,lerant of other people unawise alls they will think is that its just a place for the fachests to go but they vcan feel good about themselves coz its all in the name of god.
they really need to look at the whole establishment not just the pope
i eman when you get verious prests saying things like "euthanaser is a sin and your going to burn in hell" no matter what the cercumstances behind the chouse really put me off. I know Ive had the euthanaser thing.. just after it happend I was looking for a directeion considerd religion met that and hit the bottle, these people have the power to do alot of good, but if they are just stupid and intolerant alls they are going to do is cause more troubbel and to be honist I think we would be better of without them.