hotpink Posted February 12, 2017 Share Posted February 12, 2017 Skipping a portion of this because the case in Massachusettes fascinated me. There was this church--well--this group of people--who didn't want their church building sold. It apparently was in the heart of the priest-scandal crisis. It was acquired relatively recently in history terms...maybe the early 1930's? Anyway a few parishioners decided that they would not leave the building because they didn't want it shut. So they spent a decade and a half--squandered their children's childhoods over a squatting in building. Tied up the property for years in legal fees and court proceedings. All of that money--it could of gone to the poor. My priest tells it better than me, but I know there have been similar cases. It's not like in Cali where I've visited mission churches centuries old. These are freaking brick monstrosities that people get attached to. So I think it's not about one chalice, or one piece of art or one sacramental. It's about being aware of what is good and what is excess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Jesus also said sometimes it's okay to use riches to glorify God, such as when someone was pouring perfume on Jesus' feet instead of helping the poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack4 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 (edited) 23 hours ago, Peace said: The language I included in my response to Jack4 are his own words, so if you have a problem with someone using 'prayer' to belittle someone, you should speak to Jack4 about that. Let's have my response in context, please. Quote At the end of the day, Popes are still human beings who are products of their time. If I had been alive during the late 19th/early 20th century I would also be strictly opposed to any kind of socialism because humanity was not ready for it. If you traveled back in time and told Americans in the year 1776 that Blacks would eventually be liberated from slavery, given legal equality, and start interbreeding with white people on a wider scale, nobody would have believed you either. But given enough time, it did happen. I don't need a lecture on the past failures of communism. Heck, my parents left Poland while it was a communist satellite state of the USSR. The Leninist brand of socialism is indeed dangerous. But writing off socialism because of Leninism is like writing off capitalism because of Nazism. Please read n. 117 of QA which I have quoted. It clearly makes distinctions between Marx's Communism and softer Socialism. Popes Pius and John both made the distinction. Seriously, it was funny to read you say this just under the Papal words you quoted. Quote Quote Popes have been wrong in the past, so why is it unrealistic to assume that they couldn't be wrong again? Some of these Popes have allegedly fathered illegitimate children, killed other Catholics on the battlefield, had people tortured/executed for disagreeing with the Church, etc. I'm not writing this post to rail against the Church. The point I'm trying to make is that the Popes are human too. That is a giant Ignoratio Elenchi you've set up. Personal sins of Popes take nothing away from their teaching office. Quote Quote Socialism is an economic system, not a religion. Quote Socialism is an economic system, not a religion. Socialism is an economic system with a certain philosophy on man and society. These principles cannot be reconciled with Christianity. Quote On 2/11/2017 at 8:48 AM, polskieserce said: I'm a socialist, but I believe that Jesus died on the cross for my sins If anyone says that Christ Jesus was given by God to men as a redeemer in whom to trust, and not also as a legislator whom to obey, let him be anathema. (Trent, Canon 21 concerning justification) Quote On 2/11/2017 at 8:48 AM, polskieserce said: I'm fully aware that prior Popes condemned socialism, but I'm not deterred by that... Prayers for your soul. As you can see, I had indeed responded to polski's points and prayers for your soul was NOT the entirety of my post. Therefore, that post of mine was NOT an ignoratio elenchi. Contrast that with On 2/12/2017 at 2:51 AM, Peace said: On 2/11/2017 at 7:01 AM, Jack4 said: ...On one hand, the divorced and remarried should partake in the life of the Church, we should treat them with love. OTOH They are not to be admitted to Sacramental Communion. ...Understanding a Papal statement is far, far different from Scriptural exegesis. ...Your comments on tradition form the crux of your position, but I'm not sure I understand them. Prayers for your soul. There were some formatting errors with that post, but my point is: "As you can see, I had indeed responded to polski's points and prayers for your soul was NOT the entirety of my post. Therefore, that post of mine was NOT an ignoratio elenchi." Oh, whatever the case, I always appreciate prayers. Edited February 13, 2017 by Jack4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 I understood the context perfectly fine. Have a nice day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack4 Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 5 minutes ago, Peace said: I understood the context perfectly fine. 8 minutes ago, Peace said: I understood the context perfectly fine. I do disagree with @KnightofChrist that your initial statement, comparing me to Sola Scriptura protestants, was not intellectually lazy. But this one sure is. 10 minutes ago, Peace said: Have a nice day. Same to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amppax Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 I think y'all just need to take a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 5 hours ago, Amppax said: I think y'all just need to take a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack4 Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 (edited) 16 hours ago, Amppax said: I think you just need to take a break and read some Aristotlean works on logic and epistemology. Ftfy. I'm not making a fuss on @Peacenot ready to explain his statements in a spirit of dialogue. I am objecting to him comparing his own "prayers for your soul" to my reply to @polskiesercein the other thread. Edited February 14, 2017 by Jack4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 2 hours ago, Jack4 said: Ftfy. I'm not making a fuss on @Peacenot ready to explain his statements in a spirit of dialogue. I am objecting to him comparing his own "prayers for your soul" to my reply to @polskiesercein the other thread. To be clear, I do not approve of these "prayers for your soul" types of posts in either context. I wrote that only to demonstrate to you that it is wrong to write that to someone you disagree with, as if his disagreement gives you reason to believe or imply that the person is not in a state of grace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack4 Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Peace said: To be clear, I do not approve of these "prayers for your soul" types of posts in either context. I wrote that only to demonstrate to you that it is wrong to write that to someone you disagree with, as if his disagreement gives you reason to believe or imply that the person is not in a state of grace. Thank you for explaining. 1. Prayers do not condemn others as not in a state of grace. 2. Anyone who denies Magisterial teaching needs prayer. Edited February 14, 2017 by Jack4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 Whew. Blessed be the perpetual butthurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack4 Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 9 hours ago, Anomaly said: Whew. Blessed be the perpetual butthurt. Can you explain what you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted February 15, 2017 Share Posted February 15, 2017 11 hours ago, Jack4 said: Can you explain what you mean? Yes, of course I can. No, I shan't, at this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Credo in Deum Posted February 16, 2017 Share Posted February 16, 2017 On 2/8/2017 at 7:13 AM, Anomaly said: The value of art is intrinsic to the dignity and value of humanity. It is one of the things that make us different than animals. Selling art for food is prostitution of human dignity. It is selling something beautiful created by humanity for coins when there are plenty of other coins that can feed the needy. This is very profound if you think about it. Art is evidence of the human soul which has been made in the image of God, which is why we can create it and which is why it separates us from the animals. Like God who created our souls from nothing and wrapped them in bone and flesh, so too can we from nothing form an idea and wrap it in marble, clay, paint, or canvas. From the beginning of mans existence there has always been art. From the walls of caves to the Vatican. We've always had art because we've always had a rational soul. It's why I have a hard time with evolution because we'll never find an ape dwelling with artwork in it. 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