Vatican slams book on sexuality written by Irish American nun

Good, time to deal with those radical feminist 'nun' left over from the 60's. Thank God they are fading away along with their cracked ideas. It is amusing to read comments of readers who write about Church history in a matchbox.

SD---thanks for the clarifying question. my bad. and now, to answer. I am not a believer in the requirements the catholic church imposes upon the faithful members. I do not believe Christ became flesh, suffered & rose from the dead so that the catholic church can threaten you with eternal damnation for, say missing sunday mass; or, for disobeying some other silly arbitrary rule. interesting you bring up Saint Augustine. Tell me, if you will, what happened to the woman he lived with; and, what happened to his child. Did they convert? And, were they welcomed by members of the Carthage community? Maybe George Carlin [graduate of Hayes in NYC] got it right when he does his rant on abortion--while your a fetus, your life is sacred. once your born, you are on your own buddy. Oh yeah. watch out if dad is a would be saint

Another point-St. Augustine. Now, I have not read his writings, but I was taught back in 1st Grade that he "hung out with the wrong crowd". His mom, St. Monica, prayed for him for 30 years. In the end, he regretted his old ways, and reformed himself. Consider that St. Augustine likely showed no respect for the women he was with, and only used them to satisfy his selfish needs. THEN, he was right to reform himself, but he went off the opposite deep end! He embraced celibacy, which the Church started imposing on priests, around the 11th or 12th Century. As Father James Maguire said, in his 1967 blockbuster critique, "A Modern Priest Looks at his Outdated Church" : "The ideal becomes the law"! That was a very profound, and accurate statemant! BTW, does anybody know where Jim Maguire (no longer father) is today? Does he still make public statements, on the Catholic Church? I heard, sadly, that he became an athiest, but that was some time ago. Hopefully, he has abandoned that ideology.

tempranillo, I'm not sure of your position! Does your last sentence, "No, I do not believe" mean that you are critical of the Church's positions on many things? I don't agree with all of Sr. Margaret's positions, but she hits the nail on the head on most matters of human sexuality. Does any sane person today REALLY believe that "impure thoughts", masturbation, or pre-marital sex, will "send one to hell"? The Catholic Church has dogma which inspires guilt. Does it really make sense to say, "I'm sorry Lord", for the above activities, when we all know we will likely do them again? Rather, if a man or woman honestly sees nothing wrong with these things, what is there to be sorry about? Respect for women is the path men should follow! I answer to the girl I am with, not Jesus! If she wants to remain virginal, I respect that. If she is sexually active, and accepts me, I should do all I can to see that her physical & emotional needs are met. THAT should please a kind & just Jesus! In the 1970's, a movie set in a Catholic High School showed teenagers at a dance. The silly brother reminded the dancers to "leave some room for Jesus". Well, if Jesus has to get between a dancing couple, HE needs to see an earthly shrink!! I would then advise him to "get an Existence", and stop being such an ego-maniac control freak! A kind & just Jesus would be satisfied if I respect the women I know & date.

If anyone would ask me I think the Vatican and all those MEN of God are intrinsically flawed. Take a look in the record book or the mirror!!

Speaking of Natural Law: The wind is the wind and a force of nature that must be dealt with, not ignored. The oak can stand a strong wind up to a point and then is broken and destroyed. The willow tree shakes and bends in both a strong and a light breeze but when both are over still stands and continues growing. The question is not whether a very strong wind is blowing toward change in the RCC but how the RCC deals with it. The truth is a VERY strong wind!

The church with its almost exclusive concentration on matters sexual to the exclusion of other core problems such as declining attendance and clergy, is a bit like a baseball team spending most of their practice time on improving throws to the cut-off player versus improving their pitching and hitting.

I agree, mayoman. It was a wrenching change when the Church had to reverse its teachings on slavery (slaves owe obedience to their masters), and it will be a wrenching change when the Church revises its teachings on human sexuality. No wonder the Vatican beats against the tide of what really is justice. When change comes, it will knock many off their feet. Good for those who get back up!

eiriamach: Many thanks for your thoughtful and insightful comments. Its really too bad that the Vatican feels it necessary to condemn and silence everyone in the Church they disagree with. Why not a discussion, a spirited intellectual debate? But no, instead the stubborn old boys in the Vatican simply insist that they're always right on every subject, and that's that. Clearly this offensive intolerance can't go on indefinetely. Indeed there are far too many educated and thoughtful people in the Church for this pernicious obstacle to progress to continue.

If you wish to be roman catholic, you have the obligation to conform to the teaching of the church. you have no right of dissent. really, you have no rights in respect of moral teaching. indeed, the church holds that it enunciates no new teachings--all magisterial emissions are reflections of eternal truths. if i state the church's position properly, there can be no debate. while this story may be newsworthy to NYT editors, it is of no concern to roman catholics. sister farley is wrong. dissenters are wrong. roma locuta est. now, i infer that some dissent, and in matters of faith, how do you differ from protestants? you do not. sensum fideum? remember the church is not democratic. autocratic, you say? not your business. sex scandals & obstruction of justice? not possible if you believe in the priesthood as men set apart, only in need of good penance. and, yes, parents must be to blame for permitting children to be near occasions of sin. as eugenio pacelli, PP Pius XII said, 'the church is the perfect society.' no, i do not believe

Right, ChrisV. It's response these days is a media attack, complete with conspiracy-against-RCC theories. See PhlotiePhin's baseless attacks here. PP and anyone else who thinks that support for Sr Farley, like the Dolan news reports, is a conspiracy by the media or "church haters" or IC or "libs" or Obama or "radical feminists" or lesbians and gays (I've seen all of the above and more blamed in com boxes), please consider moving your conspiracy-theory hunt over to the Vatileaks scandal. According to yesterday's NY Times article "As Vatican Manages Crisis, Book Details Infighting," Alberto Melloni, the director of the liberal John XXIII Center in Bologna, believes that "traditionalist" and "powerful conservative Catholic groups like Opus Dei and Communion and Liberation" are using the leaks to discredit the pope, to control the Vatican, and preside over the next papal election. John L. Allen Jr. also published an article on the topic for NCR online: "Conservative Catholic Groups Gripped by Scandal": "it now seems Communion and Liberation’s turn to be the conservative Catholic group generating the ... greatest volume of conspiracy theories. That’s likely a special source of heartburn for Pope Benedict XVI, for whom Communion and Liberation has always been his personal favorite among the new movements in the Catholic church." 'Secularism,' Benedict XVI's favorite bogeyman, seems to be wreaking more havoc inside the Church than outside. Take on THAT alleged conspiracy, PP, and give up on Sr. Farley and the reporters following Cardinal Dolan!

Let's face it, a factual treatment of just about any topic poses a "grave risk" to Roman theology, since it is all antique fairy-tale. The bottom line is that the Roman church has nothing of value, and certainly nothing truthful, to say about anything, that is not pretty much universal already. Still, better than the old days; modern secular governments do not permit the church its traditional responses to difference of opinion: torture and mass murder.

It's the Church, hermitTalker, that needs to study natural law. Its reading is sadly medieval. We've learned-- and Sr. Farley's book benefits from-- a great deal about nature since Galileo showed us that we are one 'heavenly body' twirling about the sun, and not vice versa. It is certainly time to review what we now know about human sexuality and to allow knowledge to re-shape moral teachings.

The learned Sister Farley's opinions--and that's what they are; not her interpretations of Church doctrine--seem far more Christ-like than the opinions of Levada and his minions.

Amazing a scholar who professes to be a religious scholar is backed by another of her ilk for writing material that is against what God wrote in His Big Library and His Son said on earth and his scholar-apostle Paul repeated and HIS Church has said for 2000 years. eiriamach and others, please: read, study and see the development of Natural Law, and its many proponents and defenders.