|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 20, 2023 0:33:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 20, 2023 16:14:01 GMT
I am indeed ignoring him. Which after my last exchange I am going to do as well. I can't see anything of use that would gained by exchanges with someone in this frame of mind. There is evidence (as noted above) that Ottaviani influenced Paul VI. So much the better. There is no evidence, though, that Ottaviani threw a tantrum and threatened schism. That would have been pretty pointless. Whom would he have taken into schism with him? The only "tantrum" I see here is from someone who didn't get what they wanted, by seeing the majority report's conclusions become part of the Church's magisterial teaching. If maintaining the Church's traditional teaching on the matter is "regressive", then not just Paul VI, but John Paul II, Benedict XVI, (thus far) Pope Francis, and the Catechism are all "regressive" as well.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Sept 21, 2023 14:39:53 GMT
At the suggestion of one good reader, I have "cleaned up" this thread to remove the other side of comments directed towards the OP, who is no longer on this forum. It was difficult to read or follow. This is a good topic, and one that certainly merits discussion, so I saw it as capable of being led in a worthwhile direction. Sadly, I cannot go in and edit the title to spell "Commission" correctly. And here is the "Majority Report" that recommended relaxing the Church's teaching on contraception, which thankfully did not carry the day. It all hinged on one question, "is deliberately and willfully seeking to prevent conception by artificial means intrinsically evil?", to which Paul VI wisely answered in the affirmative. www.ldysinger.com/@magist/1963_Paul6/068_hum_vitae/majority%20report.pdf
|
|