What do you think of the Seven New Mortal Sins

StrongInTheArm · 03-12-2008, 03:43 AM

The Vatican has brought up to date the traditional seven deadly sins by adding seven modern mortal sins it claims are becoming prevalent in what it calls an era of "unstoppable globalisation".

The old ones are: Pride, Envy, Gluttony, Lust, Anger, Greed, Sloth.

The new ones are:

Environmental pollution
Genetic manipulation
Accumulating excessive wealth
Inflicting poverty
Drug trafficking and consumption
Morally debatable experiments
Violation of fundamental rights of human nature

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that "immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into Hell". The new mortal sins were listed by Archbishop Gianfranco Girotti at the end of a week-long training seminar in Rome for priests, aimed at encouraging a revival of the practice of confession - or the Sacrament of Penance in Church jargon.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7287071.stm

What are your thoughts, are you a sinner, what would be your list of new sins?

**G10** · 03-12-2008, 03:56 AM

And what does the church know about religion

I think it is a very good cause but it isn't actually up to the pointy fish head-shaped hat wearing dude to decide on what constitutes as sin or not, though I suppose they do fit within the realms of other verses in there such as "God putting to ruin those ruining the earth" etc.

**cldnails** · 03-12-2008, 06:08 AM

Looks like a bleeding heart platform to me, instead of 'new' mortal sins. For example, what the hell is wrong with excessive wealth? It's called socialism and this article wreaks of it.

Why is this not in the politics section?

Kron · 03-12-2008, 08:24 AM

That's interesting.

kristeejo · 03-12-2008, 08:30 AM

I really don't 'get' how the pope can just start naming sins as worse than another.

StrongInTheArm · 03-12-2008, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cldnails

Why is this not in the politics section?

Not everything has to be an argument

Quote:

Originally Posted by cldnails

Looks like a bleeding heart platform to me, instead of 'new' mortal sins. For example, what the hell is wrong with excessive wealth? It's called socialism and this article wreaks of it.

The 7 new mortal sins have been issued by the Vatican, are you calling them socialists or just the journalist who reported them? Really not sure what you mean

The problem with excessive wealth for the Vatican, I can only assume, is the excessive part, I guess

vilelink · 03-12-2008, 09:11 AM

I think Scamming People + Getting Stonned while working....etc ( thats all I can think of right now) are few NEW Mortal Sins these days.

**cldnails** · 03-12-2008, 09:30 AM

I'm not Catholic, so the Pope don't mean a thing to me. So yes, I see them as having an agenda just like any other political figure.

Also, this looks about as political as it can get to me.

jowsefpirate · 03-12-2008, 09:49 AM

i think they are just narrowing down some unearthly doings nowadays.. i dont disagree or agree but yeah keeping away from drugs specifically would actually save you away from other sins like murder or theft.. logically speaking.. just my opinion..

digitalseo · 03-12-2008, 11:26 AM

how can i surpass the additional mortal sins?...lol...
so a revision of the 10 commandments...

**cldnails** · 03-12-2008, 11:28 AM

**** it, let's rewrite the Bible, the whole Revelations thing makes me a bit queasy.

Brian · 03-12-2008, 12:29 PM

A bunch of old kooks is all they are. Crazies

bogs · 03-12-2008, 05:36 PM

religion get people confused, war, conflict...
and one of the most controversial/complicated topic in the world...

Atom · 03-13-2008, 02:30 AM

I believe that only I can determine what my sins are, if so inclined, and indeed even define the word sin. I believe that no other definitions count except my own. I have no respect for definitions of sin outside the personal realm.

Atom · 03-13-2008, 03:08 AM

In other words, if I told someone what my definitions of sin were, those definitions would leave the personal realm. And if someone told me, including the bible or the text of any religion, what their/its definitions of sin were, those definitions would be outside of "the personal realm", and are invalid to me.

Atom · 03-13-2008, 03:17 AM

I consider definitions of sin to be valid only when they are completely personal.

Atom · 03-13-2008, 03:31 AM

I believe that meaningful definitions of sin must spring from personal conscience and remain there, expressed only in the form of ones actions. To try and define sin in a public manner is to err, IMO.

Atom · 03-13-2008, 03:45 AM

I also believe that sex is meant to be a personal issue, not a public one.

StrongInTheArm · 03-13-2008, 03:49 AM

I think I understand what you are saying Atom, only individuals know what is in their own minds and thus only they know their intentions and thus sins. But what about the sinner who doesn't think that what they have done is a sin?