Within the last couple of weeks I read somewhere--and I can't find it anywhere in my search history--that Vatican advisers recommended that the Pope not make any pronouncements related to scientific issues, because scientific knowledge evolves and changes paradigms over time, but the Pope must be infallible. Is it still possible to believe anyone could be infallible? It's hard to credit how people might believe that the most unholy acts are divinely mandated, yet if intelligent people still suggest that the Pope is infallible then anything is possible.

KayR wrote: Vatican advisers recommended that the Pope not make any pronouncements related to scientific issues, because scientific knowledge evolves and changes paradigms over time, but the Pope must be infallible.

I posted something about that recently. I saw the scientific adviser to JP II say that on a TV program. Evolution COULD be wrong (after all Newton was wrong), so it was better for the pope to say nothing than to get involved with the evolution controversy.

I guess you could be infallible if you said nothing of consequence

Mahree wrote:Joseph Smith was an 1800's Warren Jeffs, maybe worse. He was nothing more than pond scum with lack of authority to keep him in place. Today he would be in jail for life, along with Brigham Young and the rest. They got away with unscrupulous behavier.

I agree that Smith was a scum bag and opportunist who took advantage of the average persons gullibility and desire to believe and belong to something bigger than themselves. Smith screwed dozens of married women all in the name of a sacred ceremony called a "sealing ceremony." It is actually a bit funny when you think about it. A decent porno movie could be made with such a plot.

Chris OConnor wrote:A decent porno movie could be made with such a plot.

Are you sure that one hasn't been already made?!

No. I don't know the answer!

That would be quite a movie. Take polygamy, which is not legal or acceptable to the majority, and make a decent porn, when porn seldom falls into suitable, what do you have? It's hard enough reading about this. For me...polygamy is an embarrassment. I expect more from women, at least turn it around–five husbands for one woman, that would be more tolerable. There were a few women, then, that stood up to this craziness, Smith's wife for one.

Maybe the women made out. All the household chores that somehow ended up on a woman's plate, would be made much easier with other women around to help. I might go for that part of it, lighter housekeeping. But the down side, women are moody, so I think I would rather do all the housework myself. Another point, or maybe my own observation, couples get tired of each other (normally), and marriages are to be for life (crazy as that appears) so, one tires of their mate and there are others to please him (lightens the obligations of married life).

All in all, it's hard for me to grasp. I am a loner. I like my freedom. To confining to understand.