What Would The Catholic Church Have To Concede?

Status
Not open for further replies.

JoeS2

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
1,675
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
80
Location
Abington, PA USA
#1Sinner said:
lovesupreme said:
ialmisry said:
lovesupreme said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
It's almost as if you're accusing the Orthodox of unscrupulous behavior!
#1 Sinner is.  I guess his #1 sin might be slander.
All that aside, don't some Eastern Catholic clergy also adopt the same "worldly attitude" and allow for some forms of birth control in the context of a marriage? If so, his remarks aren't valid, since it's been proven that two different approaches can exist in the same communion. Rome would not need to "compromise" its standards for us promiscuous Easterners.
If they do than they act under pain of sin since the Church they are in communion with has declared that it is not allowed under any circumstances.
This is just one reason in a great number of reasons that unity will be somewhat impossible.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
lovesupreme said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
It's almost as if you're accusing the Orthodox of unscrupulous behavior!
#1 Sinner is.  I guess his #1 sin might be slander.
Slander is spoken, this would be libel or perhaps calumny, IF......

what I said was inaccurate, which it is not. If I'm wrong about my statements regarding the Orthodox Church's stand on contraception or abortion, please post the proof or retract your charge of slander.
First you have to prove the existence of such a thing as "Artificial" Birth Control, and the non-existence of therapeutic abortion.
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,485
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Age
38
Location
PA, USA
JoeS2 said:
ialmisry said:
JoeS2 said:
Iconodule said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations.
The Catholic Church already accepts artificial birth control, they just call it "natural family planning."
Natural Family Planning is not 'artificial', its a matter of Timing and Temp. It doesn't use 'artificial methods of preventing conception such as pills or condoms.  There is no interference in the act.
Just the timing and temp.

I know of no Church Father (let alone Holy Scripture) who makes the artificial distinction of "Natural family planning," which is why Humanae Vitae could not cite any for its position.
Well, from what I understand, there is nothing preventing a conception when using NFP method.  Many Catholic families have had children with this not so scientific method, aka accidental.  Nothing is fool proof.
The Catholic literature is constantly saying that NFP works just as well as, or even better than, barrier contraceptives ("when used correctly" of course) in "frustrating procreation."  
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
#1Sinner said:
lovesupreme said:
ialmisry said:
lovesupreme said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
It's almost as if you're accusing the Orthodox of unscrupulous behavior!
#1 Sinner is.  I guess his #1 sin might be slander.
All that aside, don't some Eastern Catholic clergy also adopt the same "worldly attitude" and allow for some forms of birth control in the context of a marriage? If so, his remarks aren't valid, since it's been proven that two different approaches can exist in the same communion. Rome would not need to "compromise" its standards for us promiscuous Easterners.
If they do than they act under pain of sin since the Church they are in communion with has declared that it is not allowed under any circumstances.
is that the church you are in communion with?
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
Iconodule said:
JoeS2 said:
ialmisry said:
JoeS2 said:
Iconodule said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations.
The Catholic Church already accepts artificial birth control, they just call it "natural family planning."
Natural Family Planning is not 'artificial', its a matter of Timing and Temp. It doesn't use 'artificial methods of preventing conception such as pills or condoms.  There is no interference in the act.
Just the timing and temp.

I know of no Church Father (let alone Holy Scripture) who makes the artificial distinction of "Natural family planning," which is why Humanae Vitae could not cite any for its position.
Well, from what I understand, there is nothing preventing a conception when using NFP method.  Many Catholic families have had children with this not so scientific method, aka accidental.  Nothing is fool proof.
The Catholic literature is constantly saying that NFP works just as well as, or even better than, barrier contraceptives ("when used correctly" of course.)
which is true: Condoms are more "open to life" than the correct rhythm method of contraception.
 

JoeS2

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
1,675
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
80
Location
Abington, PA USA
Iconodule said:
JoeS2 said:
ialmisry said:
JoeS2 said:
Iconodule said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations.
The Catholic Church already accepts artificial birth control, they just call it "natural family planning."


Natural Family Planning is not 'artificial', its a matter of Timing and Temp. It doesn't use 'artificial methods of preventing conception such as pills or condoms.  There is no interference in the act.
Just the timing and temp.

I know of no Church Father (let alone Holy Scripture) who makes the artificial distinction of "Natural family planning," which is why Humanae Vitae could not cite any for its position.
Well, from what I understand, there is nothing preventing a conception when using NFP method.  Many Catholic families have had children with this not so scientific method, aka accidental.  Nothing is fool proof.
The Catholic literature is constantly saying that NFP works just as well as, or even better than, barrier contraceptives ("when used correctly" of course.)
Hmm, "works just as well" is I guess the best way to describe any birth control method, NFP or otherwise.
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,485
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Age
38
Location
PA, USA
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
JoeS2 said:
Iconodule said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations.
The Catholic Church already accepts artificial birth control, they just call it "natural family planning."
Natural Family Planning is not 'artificial', its a matter of Timing and Temp. It doesn't use 'artificial methods of preventing conception such as pills or condoms.  There is no interference in the act.
Just the timing and temp.

I know of no Church Father (let alone Holy Scripture) who makes the artificial distinction of "Natural family planning," which is why Humanae Vitae could not cite any for its position.
I know Double Effect is a bit theologically nuanced: but do you really not understand the difference between using the natural rhythm of a woman's cycle and placing an artificial barrier (or pill) to intentionally frustrate procreation?
Both are done to "intentionally frustrate procreation" so again, no difference. In both cases the couple is having sex AND trying not to get pregnant. The Catholic literature constantly assures people that NFP is equally effective to, or even more effective than, barrier methods. If you are having sex and trying not to get pregnant, not matter what method you're using, that is sinful according to the basic Catholic teaching about sex and contraception. So the Catholic magisterium endorses artificial contraception.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
JoeS2 said:
Iconodule said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations.
The Catholic Church already accepts artificial birth control, they just call it "natural family planning."
Natural Family Planning is not 'artificial', its a matter of Timing and Temp. It doesn't use 'artificial methods of preventing conception such as pills or condoms.  There is no interference in the act.
Just the timing and temp.

I know of no Church Father (let alone Holy Scripture) who makes the artificial distinction of "Natural family planning," which is why Humanae Vitae could not cite any for its position.
I know Double Effect is a bit theologically nuanced: but do you really not understand the difference between using the natural rhythm of a woman's cycle and placing an artificial barrier (or pill) to intentionally frustrate procreation?
I understand that no Father nor a verse of Scripture makes a difference.

#1Sinner said:
Perhaps you should look to the teaching Church for your answer instead of Patristic quote mining.
you assUme that I haven't.
#1Sinner said:
Oh, the problem is that the Orthodox Church can't seem to, or lacks the ability, to come to a consensus on this matter of Moral Theology.
agreement on error is still error.  So even if you could get the 90+% of those claiming to belong to the jurisdiction of the Vatican to adhere to the position you stole from the Stoics, you would still be wrong.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
Iconodule said:
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
JoeS2 said:
Iconodule said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations.
The Catholic Church already accepts artificial birth control, they just call it "natural family planning."
Natural Family Planning is not 'artificial', its a matter of Timing and Temp. It doesn't use 'artificial methods of preventing conception such as pills or condoms.  There is no interference in the act.
Just the timing and temp.

I know of no Church Father (let alone Holy Scripture) who makes the artificial distinction of "Natural family planning," which is why Humanae Vitae could not cite any for its position.
I know Double Effect is a bit theologically nuanced: but do you really not understand the difference between using the natural rhythm of a woman's cycle and placing an artificial barrier (or pill) to intentionally frustrate procreation?
Both are done to "intentionally frustrate procreation" so again, no difference. In both cases the couple is having sex AND trying not to get pregnant. The Catholic literature constantly assures people that NFP is equally effective to, or even more effective than, barrier methods. If you are having sex and trying not to get pregnant, not matter what method you're using, that is sinful according to the basic Catholic teaching about sex and contraception. So the Catholic magisterium endorses artificial contraception.
I'm not sure #1 Sinner doesn't put himself on a higher moral plan than the "Catholic magisterium."
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control
You mean like the line >90% of the Vatican's followers have taken?
#1Sinner said:
and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations.
You mean like the one that the Vatican's Corban factories a/k/a Marriage tribunals take?
#1Sinner said:
They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
What the Vatican calls "double effect"?
Whether or not "Vatican followers" obey the Catholic Church's condemnation of contraception matters not. What matters is that it is an official teaching of the Church.
The one under the Vatican's Pope Francis?

#1Sinner said:
It is not left up to your "spiritual father" to determine the morality or lack thereof.
Is the supreme pontiff mandated by "Pastor Aeternus" your spiritual father? i.e. this guy who has his mandate from PA:


#1Sinner said:
And you clearly have no idea what is meant by "Double Effect." Direct abortion has for its end the termination of the life of the unborn child. Double effect applies if a procedure may result in the death of the unborn child but it is not intended and is not direct. If a cancer patient's hair falls out due to chemo that is a possibly foreseen, but unintended consequence of fighting the cancer. The doctor does not administer chemo to remove the patient's hair.

I've had to explain this several times and I'm not sure why this is so difficult to comprehend.
We comprehend it.  That is why we reject it as sophistry, jesuitry to get around the plain facts.  Like annullments.
 

Asteriktos

Hypatos
Joined
Oct 4, 2002
Messages
39,208
Reaction score
87
Points
48
Age
41
Wiki says he knows Latin. But still no Greek. I understand him better with each passing day.
 

OrthoNoob

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Jun 3, 2012
Messages
1,159
Reaction score
0
Points
0
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
Wait, what the heck? I mean, I dont trust the Greeks much farther than I can throw them, but...really? Link please.
 

#1Sinner

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
233
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
lovesupreme said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
It's almost as if you're accusing the Orthodox of unscrupulous behavior!
#1 Sinner is.  I guess his #1 sin might be slander.
Slander is spoken, this would be libel or perhaps calumny, IF......

what I said was inaccurate, which it is not. If I'm wrong about my statements regarding the Orthodox Church's stand on contraception or abortion, please post the proof or retract your charge of slander.
First you have to prove the existence of such a thing as "Artificial" Birth Control", and the non-existence of therapeutic abortion.
I have to prove that a rubber tube manufactured in a lab or factory in order to be placed over male genitalia in order to prevent conception is "artificial?"  :D

As to your other smokescreens and red herrings asking me "which Church I'm in communion with", it is obvious you are grasping at straws and unable to stay on topic.

I believe our conversation is over. Take care.

I believe our conversation is over. God Bless.
 

xOrthodox4Christx

Taxiarches
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
7,322
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Asteriktos said:
Wiki says he knows Latin. But still no Greek. I understand him better with each passing day.
He doesn't know English either. He admitted it publicly that he only knew 'formerly fluent' German, fluent Italian and Spanish.
 

Wandile

Archon
Joined
Nov 14, 2012
Messages
3,210
Reaction score
7
Points
38
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
ialmisry said:
Wandile said:
ialmisry said:
Wandile said:
ZealousZeal said:
The Marian apparition that I have the biggest issue with is Our Lady of La Salette, in which Mary allegedly says:

If my people refuse to submit,
I will be forced to let go the arm of my Son. It is so strong and so heavy,
I can no longer hold it back.
How long a time I have suffered for you! If I want my Son not to abandon you,
I am obliged to plead with him constantly. And as for you, you pay no heed! However much you pray,
however much you do, you will never be able to recompense the pains I have taken for you.
I gave you six days to work;
I kept the seventh for myself,
and no one will give it to me.
This is what makes the arm of my Son so heavy.
And then, those who drive the carts cannot swear
without using my Son's name.
These are the two things that make the arm of my Son so heavy.
I would bold the parts that trouble me, but I'd end up bolding the whole thing. This is a Church-approved apparition. And I know these things aren't technically requirements for belief, but that is nonsense^. This ended up being a pretty big nail in the coffin for me (so to speak) in my Catholic vs. Orthodoxy struggle.
hmmm I'm guessing you haven't read the Old Testament? God seems a lot more like this than the modern "lovey Dovey ...I'll never punish you" fictional god.
I take it then that the apparition at Fatima called for the Portuguese to drop their drawers and line up for circumcision and mass conversion to Judaism.

"God so loved the world...." I heard that somewhere.
Lol God was not a Jew. Ok he kinda was  :p..but in his actions God was God. He doesn't change and certainly not because Judaism has been rendered obsolete by christianity .

I can quote the bible too.
I you just did.
huh?

Wandile said:
hmmm I'm guessing you haven't read the Old Testament? God seems a lot more like this than the modern "lovey Dovey ...I'll never punish you" fictional god.
I just applied logic and took it to its conclusion.
In fact you left it open ended  

quote author=Wandile link=topic=55022.msg1033927#msg1033927 date=1385453949]
"I'm a just God..." heard that somewhere
Yes, from those circumcised Hebrews.[/quote]
Yes our Lord was one of them
but to be more specific, from the bible is where I heard it

Wandile said:
I've also hear that apparently God flooded the whole world because of the sins of man. Like apparently he killed everything except one mans family and a few animals :eek:
And He made a covenant that He would never do it again.  The Virgin Mary wasn't even a twinkle in Noah's eye.
The covenant did not entail God refraining from executing his justice by other means..like plagues,war, famine and personal trials... I see no relevance to why you mention Mary ???

Wandile said:
I also hear he destroyed two cities because of their sins by raining fire and brimstone on the inhabitants of the cities! I hear he asked the Jews to lay a city waste and kill everything that moves! Even rip out the babies from their mothers' wombs and throw them against the rocks!
Dude I also heard, apparently, that God nearly killed the Israelites because they worshipped a golden calf instead of him!
I've also heard that God said he does not change.
Like I said, drop your drawers, Portugal, line up and we'll get the knife.
What's your obsession with circumcision? What does it have to do with anything?  

Wandile said:
Woah... Lets take that in for a second... That means if God was willing to punish humanity back then, that he is still willing to punish us today? MIND BLOWN!  :eek:
It's blown all right.
Is that supposed to be an attempt at an insult? ::)   :-[
 

sheenj

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
1,429
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
28
OrthoNoob said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
Wait, what the heck? I mean, I dont trust the Greeks much farther than I can throw them, but...really? Link please.
I call BS. From the GOArch website:

Generally stated, fornication, adultery, abortion, homosexuality and any form of abusive sexual behavior are considered immoral and inappropriate forms of behavior in and of themselves, and also because they attack the institution of marriage and the family. Two representative statements, one on abortion and another on homosexuality, from the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North and South America follow. They are from the Twenty-Third Clergy-Laity Congress held in Philadelphia in 1976. The Orthodox Church has a definite, formal and intended attitude toward abortion. It condemns all procedures purporting to abort the embryo or fetus, whether by surgical or chemical means. The Orthodox Church brands abortion as murder; that is, as a premeditated termination of the life of a human being. The only time the Orthodox Church will reluctantly acquiesce to abortion is when the preponderance of medical opinion determines that unless the embryo or fetus is aborted, the mother will die. Decisions of the Supreme Court and State legislatures by which abortion, with or without restrictions, is allowed should be viewed by practicing Christians as an affront to their beliefs in the sanctity of life.
Nothing about therapeutic concerns in there at all.
 

Mor Ephrem

Hypatos
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
36,158
Reaction score
28
Points
48
Age
39
Location
New York!
Website
www.orthodoxchristianity.net
ErmyCath said:
Of course he doesn't know Latin. In fact, knowing Latin might lose you a few votes in the papal elections these days.
Actually, there's every indication that he knows Latin.  The interview he did with the Jesuits a few months back includes the following:

At this point the pope stands up and takes the breviary from his desk. It is in Latin, and is worn down by continued use. He opens it to the Office of the Readings of the Feria Sexta, that is Friday, of the 27th week. He reads a passage to me taken from the Commonitórium Primum of St. Vincent of Lerins: "ita étiam christiánae religiónis dogma sequátur has decet proféctuum leges, ut annis scílect consolidétur, dilatétur témpore, sublimétur aetáte" (“Thus even the dogma of the Christian religion must proceed from these laws. It progresses, solidifying with years, growing over time, deepening with age.”)

The view of the church’s teaching as a monolith to defend without nuance or different understandings is wrong.The pope comments: “St. Vincent of Lerins makes a comparison between the biological development of man and the transmission from one era to another of the deposit of faith, which grows and is strengthened with time..."
If he's comfortable enough with Latin to pray a good chunk of his daily prayer in Latin and interpret and comment on a patristic passage on the spot, he's probably more fluent than people give him credit for.  I have a feeling that the "aversion to Latin" some ascribe to him has more to do with pastoral considerations: if he's not saying Mass alone, but with a congregation, and the congregation doesn't know Latin to that degree, he would probably need to be convinced of the need to celebrate in Latin before doing so.  On his own, he can probably do it just fine and happily.  
 

#1Sinner

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
233
Reaction score
0
Points
0
OrthoNoob said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
Wait, what the heck? I mean, I dont trust the Greeks much farther than I can throw them, but...really? Link please.
http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/controversialissues

Part 2 under Sexual issues: "The Orthodox Church brands abortion as murder; that is, as a premeditated termination of the life of a human being. The only time the Orthodox Church will reluctantly acquiesce to abortion is when the preponderance of medical opinion determines that unless the embryo or fetus is aborted, the mother will die."

Father Harakas uses the term "theraputic" in this article on page 5 where he states that "serious consideration should be given to the preservation of life."  ::)

http://lgdata.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/docs/504/177730/Orthodox.pdf
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
lovesupreme said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
It's almost as if you're accusing the Orthodox of unscrupulous behavior!
#1 Sinner is.  I guess his #1 sin might be slander.
Slander is spoken, this would be libel or perhaps calumny, IF......

what I said was inaccurate, which it is not. If I'm wrong about my statements regarding the Orthodox Church's stand on contraception or abortion, please post the proof or retract your charge of slander.
First you have to prove the existence of such a thing as "Artificial" Birth Control", and the non-existence of therapeutic abortion.
I have to prove that a rubber tube manufactured in a lab or factory in order to be placed over male genitalia in order to prevent conception is "artificial?"  :D
no, among other things you have to prove that a thermometer manufacted in a lab or factory in order to be placed in the female genitalia or rectum (for accuracy) daily in order to time prevention of conception is "natural."

#1Sinner said:
As to your other smokescreens and red herrings asking me "which Church I'm in communion with", it is obvious you are grasping at straws and unable to stay on topic.
you are the one who appealed to authority, not I.  If you can't name that authority, well, it is obvious that you are unable to stay on this topic.

#1Sinner said:
I believe our conversation is over. Take care.

I believe our conversation is over. God Bless.
Believe what you like.  Take care, God bless. And God guide you to the truth of Orthodoxy.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
#1Sinner said:
OrthoNoob said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
Wait, what the heck? I mean, I dont trust the Greeks much farther than I can throw them, but...really? Link please.
http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/controversialissues

Part 2 under Sexual issues: "The Orthodox Church brands abortion as murder; that is, as a premeditated termination of the life of a human being. The only time the Orthodox Church will reluctantly acquiesce to abortion is when the preponderance of medical opinion determines that unless the embryo or fetus is aborted, the mother will die."

Father Harakas uses the term "theraputic" in this article on page 5 where he states that "serious consideration should be given to the preservation of life."  ::)

http://lgdata.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/docs/504/177730/Orthodox.pdf
What do you say about the Winnipeg Statement and Cardinal Martini, among others?
 

Mor Ephrem

Hypatos
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Oct 3, 2002
Messages
36,158
Reaction score
28
Points
48
Age
39
Location
New York!
Website
www.orthodoxchristianity.net
Wandile said:
ZealousZeal said:
The Marian apparition that I have the biggest issue with is Our Lady of La Salette, in which Mary allegedly says:

If my people refuse to submit,
I will be forced to let go the arm of my Son. It is so strong and so heavy,
I can no longer hold it back.
How long a time I have suffered for you! If I want my Son not to abandon you,
I am obliged to plead with him constantly. And as for you, you pay no heed! However much you pray,
however much you do, you will never be able to recompense the pains I have taken for you.
I gave you six days to work;
I kept the seventh for myself,
and no one will give it to me.
This is what makes the arm of my Son so heavy.
And then, those who drive the carts cannot swear
without using my Son's name.
These are the two things that make the arm of my Son so heavy.
I would bold the parts that trouble me, but I'd end up bolding the whole thing. This is a Church-approved apparition. And I know these things aren't technically requirements for belief, but that is nonsense^. This ended up being a pretty big nail in the coffin for me (so to speak) in my Catholic vs. Orthodoxy struggle.
hmmm I'm guessing you haven't read the Old Testament? God seems a lot more like this than the modern "lovey Dovey ...I'll never punish you" fictional god.
Since you're so comfortable within the pages of the Old Testament, Wandile, I'm sure you can explain what our Lady is supposed to have said the following at La Salette, as quoted above:

I gave you six days to work;
I kept the seventh for myself,
and no one will give it to me.
Did the visionaries actually see a vision of Christ, and mistake him for Mary because he was dressed like a woman, had a woman's voice, and spoke of having a Son?  

Or did the visionaries actually see a vision of Mary, and she is claiming to have given the Sabbath (which goes all the way back to Genesis, mind you)?  Perhaps, according to RC doctrine, Mary, like Christ, pre-existed the creation of the world?  Is she, perhaps, divine or quasi-divine?  Maybe a demi-goddess?  

Again, it never ceases to amaze me that RC's will, on the one hand, affirm that private revelations, even if approved by ecclesiastical authority, are not binding on the faithful, and then on the other hand will practice all forms of acrobatics and yoga in an effort to twist what is obviously problematic into a problem for and deficiency of the objector.  Just say "it's not binding, you don't have to believe it", and then focus on actual RC faith.  Why do you grasp onto visions so much?  

I don't know much about La Salette except that, as visions go, it is rather ignored among the RC's I know unless they are of a super-conservative bent.  The messages contain curiosities and the subsequent lives of the visionaries are clearly "not the norm" even by RC standards.  
 

#1Sinner

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
233
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
lovesupreme said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
It's almost as if you're accusing the Orthodox of unscrupulous behavior!
#1 Sinner is.  I guess his #1 sin might be slander.
Slander is spoken, this would be libel or perhaps calumny, IF......

what I said was inaccurate, which it is not. If I'm wrong about my statements regarding the Orthodox Church's stand on contraception or abortion, please post the proof or retract your charge of slander.
First you have to prove the existence of such a thing as "Artificial" Birth Control", and the non-existence of therapeutic abortion.
I have to prove that a rubber tube manufactured in a lab or factory in order to be placed over male genitalia in order to prevent conception is "artificial?"  :D
no, among other things you have to prove that a thermometer manufacted in a lab or factory in order to be placed in the female genitalia or rectum (for accuracy) daily in order to time prevention of conception is "natural."

#1Sinner said:
As to your other smokescreens and red herrings asking me "which Church I'm in communion with", it is obvious you are grasping at straws and unable to stay on topic.
you are the one who appealed to authority, not I.  If you can't name that authority, well, it is obvious that you are unable to stay on this topic.

#1Sinner said:
I believe our conversation is over. Take care.

I believe our conversation is over. God Bless.
Believe what you like.  Take care, God bless. And God guide you to the truth of Orthodoxy.
I'm somewhat at a loss here.....

God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children. I can't believe you really aren't seeing the difference here.

I'm sorry, but you have lost. You are digging deep and making yourself look bad.
 

#1Sinner

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
233
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
OrthoNoob said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
Wait, what the heck? I mean, I dont trust the Greeks much farther than I can throw them, but...really? Link please.
http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/controversialissues

Part 2 under Sexual issues: "The Orthodox Church brands abortion as murder; that is, as a premeditated termination of the life of a human being. The only time the Orthodox Church will reluctantly acquiesce to abortion is when the preponderance of medical opinion determines that unless the embryo or fetus is aborted, the mother will die."

Father Harakas uses the term "theraputic" in this article on page 5 where he states that "serious consideration should be given to the preservation of life."  ::)

http://lgdata.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/docs/504/177730/Orthodox.pdf
What do you say about the Winnipeg Statement and Cardinal Martini, among others?
That they speak error and stand already condemned based on the teachings of the Church. Pius XI in CASTI CONNUBII and Paul VI in Humanae Vitae have infallibly slammed the door on this.

Heretics will be Heretics.......doesn't affect the truth of things.
 

sheenj

OC.Net Guru
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
1,429
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Age
28
#1Sinner said:
OrthoNoob said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
Wait, what the heck? I mean, I dont trust the Greeks much farther than I can throw them, but...really? Link please.
http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/controversialissues

Part 2 under Sexual issues: "The Orthodox Church brands abortion as murder; that is, as a premeditated termination of the life of a human being. The only time the Orthodox Church will reluctantly acquiesce to abortion is when the preponderance of medical opinion determines that unless the embryo or fetus is aborted, the mother will die."

Father Harakas uses the term "theraputic" in this article on page 5 where he states that "serious consideration should be given to the preservation of life."  ::)

http://lgdata.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/docs/504/177730/Orthodox.pdf
Like I said in the PM, the way Fr. Harakas uses "Therapeutic" here refers to the medical process of healing an illness. The exception is solely allowed if the Mother's life is in jeopardy, and the medical process to heal her results in the death of the child.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
OrthoNoob said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
Wait, what the heck? I mean, I dont trust the Greeks much farther than I can throw them, but...really? Link please.
http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/controversialissues

Part 2 under Sexual issues: "The Orthodox Church brands abortion as murder; that is, as a premeditated termination of the life of a human being. The only time the Orthodox Church will reluctantly acquiesce to abortion is when the preponderance of medical opinion determines that unless the embryo or fetus is aborted, the mother will die."

Father Harakas uses the term "theraputic" in this article on page 5 where he states that "serious consideration should be given to the preservation of life."  ::)

http://lgdata.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/docs/504/177730/Orthodox.pdf
What do you say about the Winnipeg Statement and Cardinal Martini, among others?
That they speak error and stand already condemned based on the teachings of the Church. Pius XI in CASTI CONNUBII and Paul VI in Humanae Vitae have infallibly slammed the door on this.

Heretics will be Heretics.......doesn't affect the truth of things.
well, well.  So you are part of the Vatican II church.

So you state that Casti Connubii and Humanae Vitae are infallible according to Pastor Aeternus?
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
#1Sinner said:
I'm somewhat at a loss here.....
Yes.
#1Sinner said:
God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children. I can't believe you really aren't seeing the difference here.
Sorry, I don't wear Vatican googles.

How do you feel about Cycle beads?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CycleBeads
And how natural is a woman reaching up her vagina daily to touch her cervix?

And God did not create all females with a regular cycle.
#1Sinner said:
I'm sorry, but you have lost. You are digging deep and making yourself look bad.
You just admitted that you are at a loss. And lost.  And have lost.
 

#1Sinner

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
233
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
OrthoNoob said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
Wait, what the heck? I mean, I dont trust the Greeks much farther than I can throw them, but...really? Link please.
http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/controversialissues

Part 2 under Sexual issues: "The Orthodox Church brands abortion as murder; that is, as a premeditated termination of the life of a human being. The only time the Orthodox Church will reluctantly acquiesce to abortion is when the preponderance of medical opinion determines that unless the embryo or fetus is aborted, the mother will die."

Father Harakas uses the term "theraputic" in this article on page 5 where he states that "serious consideration should be given to the preservation of life."  ::)

http://lgdata.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/docs/504/177730/Orthodox.pdf
What do you say about the Winnipeg Statement and Cardinal Martini, among others?
That they speak error and stand already condemned based on the teachings of the Church. Pius XI in CASTI CONNUBII and Paul VI in Humanae Vitae have infallibly slammed the door on this.

Heretics will be Heretics.......doesn't affect the truth of things.
well, well.  So you are part of the Vatican II church.

So you state that Casti Connubii and Humanae Vitae are infallible according to Pastor Aeternus?
The situation in the Church since V2 is difficult to figure out, though I have my thoughts on the matter......none of which have anything to do with our topic at hand. Besides, if you can't figure out Double Effect I doubt explaining that can of worms to you will do any good.

Anyway, yes.....I believe both statements to be infallible since they were promulgated by the highest authority in the Church and reinforce what the Church has always taught regarding this issue. They key is continuity of teaching. In fact, Casti Connubii was written directly against the Lambeth Conference of 1930 where the Anglicans were the first to give way to the ways of the world regarding contraception.

It is interesting to note that Paul VI received accolades from Orthodox leaders at the time of Humanae Vitae stating that it agreed with Orthodox teaching. That's a far cry just 50 years later where very few Orthodox bishops or priests still profess that belief.
 

#1Sinner

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
233
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
I'm somewhat at a loss here.....
Yes.
#1Sinner said:
God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children. I can't believe you really aren't seeing the difference here.
Sorry, I don't wear Vatican googles.

How do you feel about Cycle beads?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CycleBeads
And how natural is a woman reaching up her vagina daily to touch her cervix?

And God did not create all females with a regular cycle.
#1Sinner said:
I'm sorry, but you have lost. You are digging deep and making yourself look bad.
You just admitted that you are at a loss. And lost.  And have lost.
One needs to wear "Vatican Goggles" to figure out that God created woman with a menstrual cycle with signs of fertility?  ???

OK....I am now done with this particular topic with you. I'll let the unbiased observer be the judge of our arguments.
 

Arachne

Matriarch
Staff member
Moderator
Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
12,053
Reaction score
38
Points
48
Age
48
Location
Camulodunum
#1Sinner said:
God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.
Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
OrthoNoob said:
#1Sinner said:
The Catholic Church would have to concede holding the line on artificial birth control and adopt a more worldly attitude towards marital relations. They would also have to loosen up on the abortion restriction and allow it for "theraputic" reasons (according to the GOARCH website).
Wait, what the heck? I mean, I dont trust the Greeks much farther than I can throw them, but...really? Link please.
http://www.goarch.org/ourfaith/controversialissues

Part 2 under Sexual issues: "The Orthodox Church brands abortion as murder; that is, as a premeditated termination of the life of a human being. The only time the Orthodox Church will reluctantly acquiesce to abortion is when the preponderance of medical opinion determines that unless the embryo or fetus is aborted, the mother will die."

Father Harakas uses the term "theraputic" in this article on page 5 where he states that "serious consideration should be given to the preservation of life."  ::)

http://lgdata.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/docs/504/177730/Orthodox.pdf
What do you say about the Winnipeg Statement and Cardinal Martini, among others?
That they speak error and stand already condemned based on the teachings of the Church. Pius XI in CASTI CONNUBII and Paul VI in Humanae Vitae have infallibly slammed the door on this.

Heretics will be Heretics.......doesn't affect the truth of things.
well, well.  So you are part of the Vatican II church.

So you state that Casti Connubii and Humanae Vitae are infallible according to Pastor Aeternus?
The situation in the Church since V2 is difficult to figure out, though I have my thoughts on the matter......none of which have anything to do with our topic at hand.
"What would the Vatican Church have to Concede"

#1Sinner said:
Besides, if you can't figure out Double Effect I doubt explaining that can of worms to you will do any good.
Jesuitry isn't hard to figure out.

#1Sinner said:
Anyway, yes.....I believe both statements to be infallible since they were promulgated by the highest authority in the Church
ah....now we are back to what you say has nothing to do with the our topic at hand "What would the Vatican church have to Concede"
#1Sinner said:
and reinforce what the Church has always taught regarding this issue.
CC expands on the change the Vatican instituted in the previous century in the Roman penitentiary.  HV contradicts the patristics its apologists depend on to defend it.

#1Sinner said:
They key is continuity of teaching.
And the Vatican doesn't have it. Besides that, do you still teach the humunculus and preformation?


#1Sinner said:
In fact, Casti Connubii was written directly against the Lambeth Conference of 1930 where the Anglicans were the first to give way to the ways of the world regarding contraception.
Somewhere here I posted about 1930 being the year that preformation was finally abandoned and died out.  here's a brief account:
http://10e.devbio.com/article.php?id=66
And as I pointed out above, CC just furthered the Vatican's change in the 1800's in the Roman penitentiary.

#1Sinner said:
It is interesting to note that Paul VI received accolades from Orthodox leaders at the time of Humanae Vitae stating that it agreed with Orthodox teaching. That's a far cry just 50 years later where very few Orthodox bishops or priests still profess that belief.
I've only seen "accolades" (and non-specific ones at that) from EP Athenagoras.  It wasn't his only mistake.

The Vatican church is a far cry across the board in its beliefs and practices just 50 years later.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
#1Sinner said:
One needs to wear "Vatican Goggles" to figure out that God created woman with a menstrual cycle with signs of fertility?  ???
To see a moral difference between latex and timing, especially when, with perfect use, the latex is "more open to life" as the Vatican puts it.
#1Sinner said:
OK....I am now done with this particular topic with you. I'll let the unbiased observer be the judge of our arguments.
that would require not wearing Vatican goggles.
 

#1Sinner

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
233
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Arachne said:
#1Sinner said:
God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.
Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.
Precisely, thanks for inadvertently making my point that NFP is not contraception.

And perhaps couples will have to control themselves until after those "telltale" signs go away later in the month.....or, if one knows what they are doing, even before.

I think we had it out in another thread where you were defending abortion in Ireland so I doubt this exchange will bear much fruit either.
 

ErmyCath

Elder
Joined
May 15, 2012
Messages
340
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Missouri
Mor Ephrem said:
ErmyCath said:
Of course he doesn't know Latin. In fact, knowing Latin might lose you a few votes in the papal elections these days.
Actually, there's every indication that he knows Latin.  The interview he did with the Jesuits a few months back includes the following:

At this point the pope stands up and takes the breviary from his desk. It is in Latin, and is worn down by continued use. He opens it to the Office of the Readings of the Feria Sexta, that is Friday, of the 27th week. He reads a passage to me taken from the Commonitórium Primum of St. Vincent of Lerins: "ita étiam christiánae religiónis dogma sequátur has decet proféctuum leges, ut annis scílect consolidétur, dilatétur témpore, sublimétur aetáte" (“Thus even the dogma of the Christian religion must proceed from these laws. It progresses, solidifying with years, growing over time, deepening with age.”)

The view of the church’s teaching as a monolith to defend without nuance or different understandings is wrong.The pope comments: “St. Vincent of Lerins makes a comparison between the biological development of man and the transmission from one era to another of the deposit of faith, which grows and is strengthened with time..."
If he's comfortable enough with Latin to pray a good chunk of his daily prayer in Latin and interpret and comment on a patristic passage on the spot, he's probably more fluent than people give him credit for.  I have a feeling that the "aversion to Latin" some ascribe to him has more to do with pastoral considerations: if he's not saying Mass alone, but with a congregation, and the congregation doesn't know Latin to that degree, he would probably need to be convinced of the need to celebrate in Latin before doing so.  On his own, he can probably do it just fine and happily.  
Fair enough. 
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,485
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Age
38
Location
PA, USA
Arachne said:
#1Sinner said:
God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.
Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.
What nonsense. Sure, you can use NFP to "optimise the chances of conception" but it is explicitly recommended by the Catholic Church as a means of having sex while avoiding pregnancy. You can use euphemisms like "spacing of children" all you want, but at the end of the day it is still contraception and is certainly as "artificial" as anything else.
 

ialmisry

Strategos
Joined
Aug 17, 2007
Messages
41,794
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Chicago
#1Sinner said:
Arachne said:
#1Sinner said:
God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.
Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.
Precisely, thanks for inadvertently making my point that NFP is not contraception.
bad contraception is still contraception.  Or is it not contraception if you pull out (other method of "NFP") during the critical moment rather than before it?
#1Sinner said:
And perhaps couples will have to control themselves until after those "telltale" signs go away later in the month.....or, if one knows what they are doing, even before.
or just withdraw.
#1Sinner said:
I think we had it out in another thread where you were defending abortion in Ireland so I doubt this exchange will bear much fruit either.
missed that.  A quick search didn't find it.
 

Iconodule

Hoplitarches
Joined
Jan 2, 2010
Messages
16,485
Reaction score
1
Points
38
Age
38
Location
PA, USA
#1Sinner said:
Arachne said:
#1Sinner said:
God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.
Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.
Precisely, thanks for inadvertently making my point that NFP is not contraception.

And perhaps couples will have to control themselves until after those "telltale" signs go away later in the month.....or, if one knows what they are doing, even before.

I think we had it out in another thread where you were defending abortion in Ireland so I doubt this exchange will bear much fruit either.
From the USCCB website:

NFP is an umbrella term for certain methods used to achieve and avoid pregnancies. These methods are based on observation of the naturally occurring signs and symptoms of the fertile and infertile phases of a woman's menstrual cycle. Couples using NFP to avoid pregnancy abstain from intercourse and genital contact during the fertile phase of the woman's cycle. No drugs, devices, or surgical procedures.

That's contraception. The fact that "drugs, devices, or surgical procedures" aren't involved is irrelevant (and actually the various methods used for NFP are devices).

NFP allows people to have sex while deliberately avoiding pregnancy. According the Fathers cited by the Catholic Church in its position on contraception, that is sinful. None of them indicated that the root of the problem was using "drugs, devices, or surgical procedures."

 

#1Sinner

Sr. Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2012
Messages
233
Reaction score
0
Points
0
ialmisry said:
#1Sinner said:
Arachne said:
#1Sinner said:
God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.
Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.
Precisely, thanks for inadvertently making my point that NFP is not contraception.
bad contraception is still contraception.  Or is it not contraception if you pull out (other method of "NFP") during the critical moment rather than before it?
#1Sinner said:
And perhaps couples will have to control themselves until after those "telltale" signs go away later in the month.....or, if one knows what they are doing, even before.
or just withdraw.
#1Sinner said:
I think we had it out in another thread where you were defending abortion in Ireland so I doubt this exchange will bear much fruit either.
missed that.  A quick search didn't find it.
Why do I have to do all your work for you?

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,53425.45.html

Reply #48 clearly implies that she feels there should be exceptions when abortion should be allowed.
Reply #59 seems to imply the same
Reply #80 shows that she would be hesitant to give her life for her child's
Reply #88 implies the same as the above.....complete with sugar coated, lib-speak about "removing the fetus surgically with minimal trauma"

And the cherry on top..... Reply #25 where she states courageously that she would have her unborn child killed in order to save herself.

All this took me less than 5 minutes........you sure you couldn't find it?
 

Arachne

Matriarch
Staff member
Moderator
Site Supporter
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
12,053
Reaction score
38
Points
48
Age
48
Location
Camulodunum
Iconodule said:
Arachne said:
#1Sinner said:
God created the female cycle with telltale signs of fertility which do not require thermometers or anything else. In essence, NFP is God's way allowing spacing of children.
Once the 'telltale signs of fertility' appear, it is too late to abstain. NFP is a way to optimise the chances of conception, not contraception in any way. Basic biology that everyone should know.
What nonsense. Sure, you can use NFP to "optimise the chances of conception" but it is explicitly recommended by the Catholic Church as a means of having sex while avoiding pregnancy.
I'm reluctant to take recommendations from the Catholic Church concerning the mechanics of conception seriously, but that's me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top