Pope resigning

Yep...it is humourous. Like the suitcase.

Oh I wasn't advertising it. Just thought it was quite funny.

Jings If those who fancy the figurine, donate the cash to Save the Children [instead] I would most certainly

sweet

Birth rate has fallen wherever girls can go to school.

Well prohibiting contraception seems to have worked at least amongst the poorer members of the popes flock. Of course italy has one of the lowest birth rates in the world - so it does not work these days with everyone.

Prohibition doesn't work, does it?

In the old testament polygamy was quite normal.
What about about the biblical prohibition on spilling your seed? Used as justification for prohibiting a number of activities.
It was in the Bible to do with a complicated rule about someone marrying their widowed sister in law and any firstborn of the union being considered legally the son of the dead man, not his brother who was the biological father. Onan used coitus interruptus to avoid this responsibility and was in such trouble with god that he died - pretty severe punishment.
But this has been used as reason to prohibit not only coitus interruptus, but all contraception and masturbation as well.

I agree bags. What I can remember is that it's mentions about husbands and wives but not how to go about getting married. The actual "act", ceremony or what ever you like to call it.

KJV, that should be

That's the version I was reading. It says "There was a marriage at...." It does not describe the actual "marriage act". "Marriage act" is what bookdreamer wrote, not "marriage".

#pickierthanyou

"Marriage act" could be interpreted as what the minister of marriages does to the couple getting married, or it could refer to what the couple do in the marriage bed. What is mentioned in KHV John 2 1-11 is neither of those, as I read it.

I can nitpick too – depends on the translation. The authorised version calls it a marriage.

susie I agree totally!

But, "marriage, the act itself" (which could have more than one interpretation) is not mentioned in the passage you highlight. Only a wedding is mentioned. To my tortuous mind "wedding" is not exactly the same as "marriage, the act itself". In any case, the act of wedding/marrying the couple is not mentioned, only referred to. The wedding feast is what is spoken about.

#nitpickingforthehellofit!

Nothing at all. Read the last sentence of her post Bags.

You know, I'm really glad I didn't have a grumpy "governor of the feast" at my wedding, moaning about the good wine being kept to last.

Actually, at my second wedding meal (second wedding, not second weddingmeal, though, actually, it was that too ), DD, then aged 17, commented that the bubbles in the champagne we had with dinner were smaller than the bubbles in the champagne we'd had at breakfast. Observant creature! It was the better champagne too, though the first was pretty good.

It amused me no end to have a seventeen year old daughter who could pick out high quality champagne so easily!!

So, after all that blether, what has the story about the wedding feast wine got to do with the best commandment that bookdreamer referred to, absent?

bookdreamer John 2 1–11?

Susieb. The greatest commandment of all. I thoroughly agree with you. If I remember as well marriage, the act itself, is not mentioned in the bible.

Socialism is a political tool too, of course, once it gets powerful.

susie, my dad used to say that too – that Jesus was the first socialist. As I said above, it is not personal religion and loving attitudes I have a problem with. Those are great.

It's the powerful, political institutions I don't like.

jo and susie

I was sent to Sunday School, as many of us were, and really enjoyed it, I stayed going to church , even teaching the Sunday school until I was about 16, depending on where we lived, C of E or Methodist.

At 22 I sent my DS to a local church sunday school, as it was nearby - it changed my life, - it was open brethren , and for the first time I actually read and understood the bible, and got baptised as an adult.

Guess what - the bible says NOTHING at all about popes, nuns, reverend this and that, dog collars, christening babies so they don't go to hell,confession, confirmation, bishops, diocese ... I could go on.

Basically all that is asked is that you 'love the lord your god with all your heart, and love your neighbour as yourself', an break bread and drink wine in remembrance.

You surely have to agree, that the God bit aside, if we all treated people like we wanted to be treated, the world would be a better place.

I always maintain Jesus was the first socialist....

It's never easy. One way or the other.

For me it's always been about love. The "Love that wilt not let me go". And that's the long and the short of it.

Thank you, jings, but actually I wasn't damaged. Being a contrasuggestible little blighter, I very soon thought "to hell with that" and did it deliberately – questioned everything, got into trouble for it, and learned a lot in the process. I don't think I have it in me to have faith. I sometimes wonder what it must have been like to be like that when atheism wasn't "allowed". Hellish, I expect.

The horrid part is feeling you 'should' believe something because religion is made out to be a good thing, and not being able to. I daresay religion can be a good thing, but it certainly isn't a good thing per se. That depends how it is used. Private, personal faith I have no problem with (apart from not really understanding it). It's religious institutions with all their rules and regulations for controlling people that I think are bad. Organised religion is a political tool, and very often a bad one.

It does make a difference how you were taught. My memories are all "Hymns for the very young" and Sunday School Anniversaries.