homosexuality and the priesthood

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Ben16/Instructions.htm

evolution and the catholic

quote from comment    640 here http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2013/03/jason-stellman-tells-his-conversion-story/#comment-61225

.........how about the example of whether theistic evolution is compatible with Catholic teaching. See Comment #605 for the citations that lead some conservative Catholics to hold the view that theistic evolution is incompatible with the Catholic faith.
Some Catholics who call themselves “traditionalists” do indeed believe that “theistic evolution is incompatible with the Catholic faith.” They are mistaken. As evidence for that claim, I offer two citations from papal documents.
The first is from Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani Generis (1950):

…the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, insofar as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter–for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. However, this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith.[11] Some however, rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the greatest moderation and caution in this question (§36; emphasis added).

The second is from Pope John Paul II’s address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in 1996:

Taking into account the scientific research of the era, and also the proper requirements of theology, the encyclical Humani Generis treated the doctrine of “evolutionism” as a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation and serious study, alongside the opposite hypothesis. Pius XII added two methodological conditions for this study: one could not adopt this opinion as if it were a certain and demonstrable doctrine, and one could not totally set aside the teaching Revelation on the relevant questions. He also set out the conditions on which this opinion would be compatible with the Christian faith—a point to which I shall return.
Today, more than a half-century after the appearance of that encyclical, some new findings lead us toward the recognition of evolution as more than an hypothesis. [See the footnote marked with an asterisk--ML.] In fact it is remarkable that this theory has had progressively greater influence on the spirit of researchers, following a series of discoveries in different scholarly disciplines. The convergence in the results of these independent studies—which was neither planned nor sought—constitutes in itself a significant argument in favor of the theory.

Although both popes certainly upheld the two binding dogmas you cite in #605, they do allow that the human body is the product of “evolution” in the sense of genetic mutation and natural selection. In so doing, they contradict what the non-ecumenical and thus non-binding Council of Cologne had asserted.
That is a very good example of how the CIP works, and of how the Church has learned from her mistake in the case of heliocentrism. No defined dogma is denied, but a widespread and weighty theological opinion has been rejected in light of the progress of science.

priest marry?

http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/the-vatican/detail/articolo/benedetto-xvi-benedict-xvi-benedicto-xvi-27843/

Pope Francis statements

http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-francis-letter-to-the-founder-of-la-repubblica-italian-newspaper see also this comment found here:
http://jeremiahgibbs.com/2013/09/12/is-pope-francis-changing-the-teaching-of-the-catholic-church-a-theologians-commentary-on-his-open-letter-to-eugenio-scalfari/

http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2013/05/pope-francis-atheists-and-the-evangelical-spirit

see this by Pope John Paul II about other faiths: http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFUNICI.HTM

from comment 121 http://www.calledtocommunion.com/2013/05/pope-francis-atheists-and-the-evangelical-spirit/#comment-61207  :

Pope Francis knows that following one’s conscience leads to responding positively to the supernatural grace already at work in the heart of every man by the Holy Spirit, and this positive response leads to repentance, and to faith. He is not teaching two ways to heaven. Rather, he is pointing the atheist to the first step in the journey toward faith, namely, an examination of and adherence to conscience. Jay’s mistake here is a basic logical mistake, i.e. the non sequitur. The importance of following one’s conscience in coming to repentance and faith does not mean or entail that one is saved by conscience alone.

Catholics/ birth control

http://www.ewtn.com/library/marriage/cclbc.txt

see also Humanae Vitae http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

healing

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20001123_istruzione_en.html ..." the Instruction on Prayers for Healing released by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. As Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, he offered guidance on administering the gift"

A book written by a Catholic named Francis MacNutt called Healing ---here are a few quotes:

"You know what has happened throughout Judea, beginning

            in Galilee after the baptism that John preached--how God
            anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power,
            and how he went around doing good and healing all who
            were under the power of the devil, because God was with him.
            We are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the
             Jews and in Jerusalem (Acts 10:37-39, ......)
 
    After this, Peter speaks of Jesus' crucifixion, death and resurrection; but he sums up the entire public ministry of Jesus in terms of what He did rather than what He said , for Jesus established the kingdom of God through the power of healing as well as through preaching.
        The healing of Jesus, then, is central to the doctrine of the gospel.  To deny this is, in effect, to deny the gospel--to change it from good news into good advice, which lacks the power to transform us into a new creation.  In short, Jesus did not heal people to prove that He was God; He healed them because He was God."

pg 110

Then from page 124-5:

Faith, after all, is not in my faith, but my faith is in God--in His goodness and wisdom, in His unfailing listening to my prayers and answering them.  To claim more than this, unless it has been specifically revealed that a given person is going to get well, is to make ourselves into a counterfeit trying to play God.

                  The way, then , to pray in faith is this:

a) to turn to God in the complete trust that He knows what is best , that He loves us more than anyone else and that He has the power to accomplish whatever we need;

b) to accept as normal our doubts about our own adequacy and about what is going to happen after we pray;

c) to see that the faith-action we need to take is to pray for the sick (when our guidance in prayer indicates this);

d) to leave the results up to God. Ordinarily we need not keep after the person we have prayed for to prove results. 

end of quote. He makes a distinction between the faith in healing that all Christians have and the special "gift of  faith" the Bible mentions. This is why some will say , I believe God can heal and has the power to heal you, but I can not predict what will happen when I pray. Those with a gift of healing and discernment then can and do pray with more authority.

Pray for what we need but don't determine the way or time God may answer it. He mentions process healings . He suggests one to pray and leave the results to God. Must be in an attitude of faith and love.

"Personally, I find it easier to be myself when I pray if I am thinking only of God's love. I find no need to raise my voice, no need to assume an authoritative posture.  I can just be myself, knowing that anything good which results is accomplished through God's will, His power and His love, and not through any efforts of my own to generate a faith that the sick person does not have. In short, we must take God seriously but we must not take ourselves too seriously.  Healing is not so much a test of faith as it is the natural response to God's generous love" (pg 153)

He mentions that not everyone is healed and that is a mystery hidden from our understanding. He does affirm that it is God's ordinary will for people to be healed.

He mentions 4 things that may need healing or prayer page 162:

1)prayer for repentance for personal sin;

          2)prayer for inner healing ("healing of memories") for emotional problems

 3) prayer for physical healing for physical sickness;

           4)prayer for deliverance (exorcism) for demonic oppression.

He mentions Mark 11:24,25--need for the person to forgive others--a connection between answered prayer and having forgiveness.

James 5:16--confessing sins so you may be healed. Sometimes a need for both repentance and healing prayer together for there to be healing.

He mentions you just don't go in a hospital and try to heal everyone. There is need for wisdom, knowledge, discernment in apply gifts. This is why he often works with a team.

mentions different reasons for not healing:
1. lack of faith
2. redemptive suffering
3.a false value attached to suffering
4.sin (ie if  one has resentment no healing likely unless dealt with etc)
5. Not praying specifically
6. faulty diagnosis--ie praying for physical healing when inner healings was the basic need; praying for deliverance from evil spirits , when inner healing was the basic need; praying for inner healing when deliverance was the basic need.
7. refusal to see medicine as a way God heals
8. not using natural means of preserving health--the ordinary means of keeping balance in our lives--rest,etc
9. now is not the time. Four time sequences-some healings instantaneous, some after a dela, some a process, gradual, and others do not occur at the physical level
Perhaps now is not the time.
10. a different person is to be the instrument of healing.
11 the social environment prevents healing from taking place--some not healed until our relationships and our society are healed. root cause needs removal. I Cor 11 many weak and sick and even died v 30

 

 

  

RCIA information

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2637880/posts

http://www.dioceseoflacrosse.com/ministry_resources/catechesis/rite_acceptance.pdf rite of acceptance another one

 an online pdf file that outlines classes and gives info: http://www.stjosephcc.net/stjodnn/portals/0/RCIA/A%20Guidebook%20for%20the%20Rite%20of%20Christian%20Initiation%20of%20Adults.pdf

outlines and notes:http://www.unamsanctamcatholicam.com/home/parish-resources/83-parish-resources/120-rcia-classes.html

another site with lessons http://rcialessons.blogspot.com/