Maggyie Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Publicly functioning as a priest does not include blogging. Is that a canonical fact? A priest can broadcast online (including actual LIVE video of himself celebrating the sacraments) to an potential audience of millions, and he doesn't even need to be in touch with his local bishop? Sincere question as I don't know. It sounds like something canon law maybe hasn't evolved to deal with yet. But it certainly sounds like Fr. is waaaay stretching it when he claims he isn't functioning as a priest in public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangetholic Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Love ain't the same as like, brother. That's the godless way this world has taught us to think. I love you. This means that I like you. It means I want your best. It means I'd enjoy your company. It means that I'm going to be so radical and idealistic in the way I behave towards you that those who are perishing still will know that we are Christians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 (edited) It should never happen that a Christian exposes our internal discord to the world's ridiculing eyes without the most serious of reasons. And when we do, we should tremble with fear lest God's righteous frown fall on us. Dear, if this is your idea of us airing our dirty Christian laundry in public...I just have to say it gets way worse. :) Just wait until election season. I can't tell you how many times I threw dirt at the forum founder during election season. :saint2: Or another homosexuality thread. Or an SSPX thread. Or a lifeteen or charismatic renewal or modesty thread. Have I missed any? Hmm... But this is what forums are for. We hash out ideas. It's not like it's one sided. People learn from each other. Edited February 11, 2013 by Basilisa Marie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Is that a canonical fact? A priest can broadcast online (including actual LIVE video of himself celebrating the sacraments) to an potential audience of millions, and he doesn't even need to be in touch with his local bishop? Sincere question as I don't know. It sounds like something canon law maybe hasn't evolved to deal with yet. But it certainly sounds like Fr. is waaaay stretching it when he claims he isn't functioning as a priest in public. In what context was he celebrating the sacraments? I have not seen these videos. Was it at a parish to which he was invited? Because that is something different entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 *drink* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggyie Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 That's the godless way this world has taught us to think. I love you. This means that I like you. It means I want your best. It means I'd enjoy your company. Nope. That's not how Jesus meant it, anyway. Thou shalt enjoy thy neighbors company is not the greatest commandment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IcePrincessKRS Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 That's the godless way this world has taught us to think. I love you. This means that I like you. It means I want your best. It means I'd enjoy your company. It means that I'm going to be so radical and idealistic in the way I behave towards you that those who are perishing still will know that we are Christians. I love people that I don't like. I love them because they are God's children and I give them the basic respect that they deserve for being human beings. That doesn't mean I have to like them or have any sort of affection for them if they are reprehensible to me for one reason or another. I went to a very well respected Catholic college and took 4 years of theology. I may not be the most eloquent at explaining things, but I know what is expected and required of me. Liking everyone on the planet is not one of those things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Red Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 This is a stoooopid fight. You should all come drink with me. Hennessy Privilege, Jack Daniels Single Barrel, Paul Masson are all far more fun than getting butthurt over Father Z. The first thing you've said that I actually agree with, in a long, long, time. on that note, I'm going out for dinner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangetholic Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Then what in God's name do you think "love" means? Surely not some philosophized escape from the plain meaning of the text. Surely not "I can burn with the hatred we call dislike, but then spiritualize it by saying I am a Christian: ergo I love you." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggyie Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 In what context was he celebrating the sacraments? I have not seen these videos. Was it at a parish to which he was invited? Because that is something different entirely. No, he has a chapel on his property and he has the "Z-cam" which he has used to broadcast himself saying the extraordinary form of the Mass there. See this post: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2007/12/mass/ Back when I read his blog regularly this was a common occurrence. The first thing you've said that I actually agree with, in a long, long, time. on that note, I'm going out for dinner. Good idea.... I need to go make a sammich for myself and spouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 No, he has a chapel on his property and he has the "Z-cam" which he has used to broadcast himself saying the extraordinary form of the Mass there. See this post: http://wdtprs.com/blog/2007/12/mass/ Back when I read his blog regularly this was a common occurrence. Cool. And is he celebrating privately or publicly? According to the canonical definition of the term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangetholic Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 I love people that I don't like. I love them because they are God's children and I give them the basic respect that they deserve for being human beings. That doesn't mean I have to like them or have any sort of affection for them if they are reprehensible to me for one reason or another. I went to a very well respected Catholic college and took 4 years of theology. I may not be the most eloquent at explaining things, but I know what is expected and required of me. Liking everyone on the planet is not one of those things. Ah well. Well I didn't go to a "respected Catholic college." I just try to live like Jesus, whose love I do believe includes "like." But eh I'm just some silly Protestant, alone in my room with my Bible and the light of the Holy Ghost, to me they suggest that I should not raise my voice against a Christian without the most dire of causes, not even a Catholic priest. Maybe some day, as a sign of spiritual growth (and very well respected Catholic book-learning) I'll learn how to not feel tormented and convicted after sniping at other Christians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Basilisa Marie Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Ah well. Well I didn't go to a "respected Catholic college." I just try to live like Jesus, whose love I do believe includes "like." But eh I'm just some silly Protestant, alone in my room with my Bible and the light of the Holy Ghost, to me they suggest that I should not raise my voice against a Christian without the most dire of causes, not even a Catholic priest. Maybe some day, as a sign of spiritual growth (and very well respected Catholic book-learning) I'll learn how to not feel tormented and convicted after sniping at other Christians. :| Catholics don't like learning things about their faith alone. It's the whole tradition thing. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IcePrincessKRS Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 (edited) Ah well. Well I didn't go to a "respected Catholic college." I just try to live like Jesus, whose love I do believe includes "like." But eh I'm just some silly Protestant, alone in my room with my Bible and the light of the Holy Ghost, to me they suggest that I should not raise my voice against a Christian without the most dire of causes, not even a Catholic priest. Then what in God's name do you think "love" means? Surely not some philosophized escape from the plain meaning of the text. Surely not "I can burn with the hatred we call dislike, but then spiritualize it by saying I am a Christian: ergo I love you." There is more than one type of love. The type of love we should hold for all people is agape. Agape-love is much, much more than affection or like. It can be (and I tend to think should be) completely separate from merely liking someone. I don't equate hatred with dislike because they aren't one and the same. Perhaps this will help a little. http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=9375 This bit is just an excerpt: "But no word is more misunderstood in our society than the word love. One of the most useful books we can read is C. S. Lewis's unpretentious little masterpiece The Four Loves. In it, Lewis clearly distinguishes supernatural love, agape (ah-gah-pay), the kind of love Christ is and lived and taught, from the natural loves: storge (natural affection or liking), eros (natural sexual desire), and philia (natural human friendship). All natural loves are good; but supernatural love, the love that God is, agape, is the greatest thing in the world. And part of the Gospel, the "good news," is that it is available to us; that Christ is the plug that connects us to the infinite supply of divine love-electricity. The old word for agape in English was 'charity.' Unfortunately, that word now means to most people simply handouts to beggars, or to the United Fund. But the word 'love' won't do as an accurate translation of agape. For 'love' means to most people either sexual love (eros) or a feeling of affection (storge), or a vague love-in general. (Interestingly, we no longer usually classify friendship as one of the loves. That is probably why we seldom write great tributes to it, as the ancients did.) To solve this translation problem, it may be necessary to insist on using the Greek word agape instead of any of the misleading English translations, even at the risk of sounding snobbish or scholarly, so that we do not confuse this most important thing in the world with something else in our minds, and consequently risk missing it in our lives. There is enormous misunderstanding and confusion about it today. In fact, there are at least six common misunderstandings. (1) THE FIRST AND MOST usual misunderstanding of agape is to confuse it with a feeling. Our feelings are precious, but agape is infinitely more precious, because our feelings are not infinite but agape is. Feelings come from us, but agape comes from God as its ultimate source. Feelings also come to us, passively. They are "passions." Agape comes from God and is accepted actively by our free choice. St. Thomas Aquinas defines it as "willing the good of the other" — the simplest definition of love I've ever seen. Agape is an act of the will, not the feelings. That is why we are responsible for it, and commanded to do it, to choose it. We are not responsible for our feelings. Only an idiot would command us (That's why sexual feelings and desires, whether heterosexual or homosexual, are not sins in and of themselves. Feelings can be "disordered," but sins can come from acting on them.) We are responsible for our agape or lack of it, for agape comes from our free will, our deliberate choice, while feelings come from wind, weather, hormones, advertisements, and digestion. "Luv" comes from spring breezes; real love (agape) comes from the center of the soul, which Scripture calls the 'heart' (another word we have sentimentalized and reduced to feeling). Liking is a feeling. But love (agape) is more than strong liking. God does not merely like us; He saves us, He dies for us. Agape is a deed. Love is "the works of love." Jesus had different feelings toward different people. But he loved them all equally and absolutely. But how can we love someone if .we don't like him? Easy — we do it to ourselves all the time. We don't always have tender, sweet, comfortable feelings about ourselves; sometimes we feel foolish, stupid, asinine, or wicked. But we always love ourselves: we always seek our own good. Indeed, the only reason why we feel dislike toward ourselves and berate ourselves is precisely because we do love ourselves! We care about our good, so we are impatient with our bad." Edited February 11, 2013 by IcePrincessKRS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangetholic Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Ah well. Well I didn't go to a "respected Catholic college." I just try to live like Jesus, whose love I do believe includes "like." But eh I'm just some silly Protestant, alone in my room with my Bible and the light of the Holy Ghost, to me they suggest that I should not raise my voice against a Christian without the most dire of causes, not even a Catholic priest. Maybe some day, as a sign of spiritual growth (and very well respected Catholic book-learning) I'll learn how to not feel tormented and convicted after sniping at other Christians. John 13:35 "By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now