dUSt Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 The thread started before the title change. I created a new group for those I don't feel comfortable representing the Church here at phatmass--yet, still claim Catholicism as their religion (separating them from the non-Catholic group). I call these new people "Phishy". Not only is it funny, it gives me another chance to replace an "f" with a "ph". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThyWillBeDone Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 [quote name='Hananiah' date='Jul 2 2004, 06:00 PM'] I think there are some legitimate reasons to do so, for example to prevent fellow Catholics from emulating sinful behavior (No, son, it's not ok to put corpses on trial, not even if the Pope does it. The Pope is wrong.), to encourage other Catholics to pray for the Pope's repentance (this was the context of the statement which got me the non-Catholic label),[/quote] If you are working to prevent other Catholic form emulating the popes sinful behavior this implies that his behavior is sinful. What gives you the authority to decide that the Pope the head of the Church has sinned? The same thing applies in asking catholics to pray for his repentance, what makes you think you can decide if he needs to repent. He is the head of the church, you do not have the right or abilty to judge weither he is a in a state of sin. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hananiah Posted July 2, 2004 Author Share Posted July 2, 2004 [quote name='ThyWillBeDone' date='Jul 2 2004, 05:27 PM'] If you are working to prevent other Catholic form emulating the popes sinful behavior this implies that his behavior is sinful. What gives you the authority to decide that the Pope the head of the Church has sinned? The same thing applies in asking catholics to pray for his repentance, what makes you think you can decide if he needs to repent. He is the head of the church, you do not have the right or abilty to judge weither he is a in a state of sin. Chris [/quote] Sometimes, Chris, it is simply obvious that an act is objectively sinful. You've heard me mention Stephen VI's corpse trial anumber of times, right? Will anyone here deny that Pope Stephen's actions were objectively sinful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThyWillBeDone Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 (edited) So who determines when something is obviously sinful. You? What is obvious to you, like our current pope's actions being sinful, it not obvious to me, or many many catholics. Chris Edited July 2, 2004 by ThyWillBeDone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quietfire Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 (edited) Hananiah, First of all, this IS dUSt's house and house rules apply. We ALL knew that when we signed up to play here. Second, St. Catherine didnt go on the WORLDWIDE internet to critisize the Pope. Especially when it involved asking others to pray for his repentance. Third and finally, If you have a problem with the fact that dUSt changed your title, then you should, out of courtesy, private message HIM and talk about it. This isnt the place to do it. This is only a rude rebuke at him and this entire website. Much like if you came to my house for dinner and then griped about the entree, not only to me but in front of all my other guests, I promise I would never invite you back. What is wrong with people today that feel as though its ok to wail and moan about anything THEY dont agree with or like. Instead of taking the extra time to figure things out, talk to those involved and try to come to some accord. No! Lets just all run outside screaming conspiracy! This may seem like an attack, but it isnt. I am much older than most of the others here, I have seen and heard to much of this for too long, even outside the Church. People who think they know the rules better than the one who made the rules. People who think that they have the "right" to critisize and "decide" what is right or wrong. People who then complain when they are rightly put in their place. (again, this is not an attack. I was once one of those people) This is not a double standard. Rather, look at our own society now. The very minute someone doesnt get their way, theyre ready to take ya to court and sue, or worse, they pull out a gun and start shooting. We have become a very selfish society indeed. It's about time someone started standing up for what is right. To sit there and complain about the Pope on a Catholic website is like talking trash about your best friends dad while your friends dad is in the next room getting the rods ready for the family fishing trip that you were personally invited to go on with them, by him. He considers you one of the family, and this is how you repay him? Nice. What's the problem? Youre upset because of your title? Get over it. Please. Until you show some respect and especially some maturity then nothing will get resolved. Oh, and it doesnt say you are a Non-Catholic. It simply states that you do not represent the Church, and that you are phishy. Meaning...?? (as in 'what's the hubbub..bub') Or as my mom would say, "Dang if that boy aint talking out his neck! Enough. Ive said my piece. Peace :peace: Edited July 2, 2004 by Quietfire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hananiah Posted July 2, 2004 Author Share Posted July 2, 2004 [quote name='ThyWillBeDone' date='Jul 2 2004, 06:15 PM'] So who determines when something is obviously sinful. You? [/quote] Anyone can. Like I said, do you deny that it is obviously a sin to put a corpse on trial? A Pope did that. If you lived during his pontificate, would you tell your children that what the Pope was doing was a sin? [quote]What is obvious to you, like our current pope's actions being sinful, it not obvious to me, or many many catholics. Chris[/quote] Read the moral theological definition of cooperating with evil, then read a Catholic commentary on the first commandment. Then read about Assisi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThyWillBeDone Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 What is obviously sinful to you may not be sinful to me, or anyone else. So it your opinion vs. the opinion of those who disagree with you, which would include the pope. So I simple can not accept that your public critism of the popes action based on you opnion on things is ok. If you are catholic you should not be publicly critizing the pope simply becuase you feel he is wrong. You must understand that your moral judgement of his action can be wrong. And since it can be wrong,and as catholics we are called to accept the judgements of the magisterium and the pope you should not publicly express it like you have been. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 [quote name='Hananiah' date='Jul 2 2004, 06:28 PM'] Anyone can. [/quote] So now it's up to the individual to decide what is and isn't a sin? What is the Church's role in determining this? It appears as if you've embraced Protestant theology, picking and choosing what aspects of Church teaching/authority you decide to accept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThyWillBeDone Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 That is along the lines of what I was trying to express Dust is just much much better at it then me. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted July 3, 2004 Share Posted July 3, 2004 [quote name='Hananiah' date='Jul 2 2004, 08:28 PM'] Anyone can. Like I said, do you deny that it is obviously a sin to put a corpse on trial? A Pope did that. If you lived during his pontificate, would you tell your children that what the Pope was doing was a sin? Read the moral theological definition of cooperating with evil, then read a Catholic commentary on the first commandment. Then read about Assisi. [/quote] We are not talking about a previous pope so don't cloud the issue. We are talking about the current Servant of servants, the Vicar of Christ on earth. You are not qualified to judge him, and neither am I. You were not at Assisi and neither was I. Therefore your opinon is based on hearsay and not fact. Somehow i doubt if you had a direct command of God to rebuke the Holy Father. I see you like Saint stories, how about this one..,. Saint Francis once went into a town and the people gathered around him to tell him stories about their terrible priest who had a mistress. He said he would go see the priest and the whole town followed behind him hoping for some good entertainment. When he saw the priest, he fell on his knees and kissed the hands of the priest and saying "I don't know anything else about you, but I know these hands bring me Jesus Christ. Thank you, thank you." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hananiah Posted July 3, 2004 Author Share Posted July 3, 2004 [quote name='dUSt' date='Jul 2 2004, 06:40 PM'] So now it's up to the individual to decide what is and isn't a sin? What is the Church's role in determining this? [/quote] Absolutely not. What is and isn't sin is founded in natural law and divine positive law and it has been entrusted to the Catholic Church to safegaurd and explicate their contents. This is not a matter of private judgment. However, it is often left to individuals to compare the Church's teachings on morality with the actions of individuals to determine whether they are conflicting or in harmony. In order to avoid being edited, I will post only the major and minor premises of the following syllogism about Assisi, and leave it up to you to infer the conclusion. You can find both of these teachings in the Catechism. 1. It is sinful to encourage someone else to commit a sin. 2. Worshipping a false god is the sin of idolatry. [quote]It appears as if you've embraced Protestant theology, picking and choosing what aspects of Church teaching/authority you decide to accept.[/quote] No, I accept the teachings of the Catholic Church in toto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hananiah Posted July 3, 2004 Author Share Posted July 3, 2004 [quote name='Quietfire' date='Jul 2 2004, 06:16 PM'] If you have a problem with the fact that dUSt changed your title, then you should, out of courtesy, private message HIM and talk about it. [/quote] If he's willing to publicly call me a non-Catholic, he shouldn't have a problem with my publicly praying for him. He's a big boy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littleflower+JMJ Posted July 3, 2004 Share Posted July 3, 2004 [quote name='Hananiah' date='Jul 2 2004, 10:58 PM'] If he's willing to publicly call me a non-Catholic, he shouldn't have a problem with my publicly praying for him. He's a big boy. [/quote] lets keep in mind whos a visitor in this big house called phatmass. how quickly we can forget that we are merely guests here pax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hananiah Posted July 3, 2004 Author Share Posted July 3, 2004 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Jul 2 2004, 08:19 PM'] We are not talking about a previous pope so don't cloud the issue. [/quote] This isn't clouding the issue. Admit it, if you lived during the reign of Pope Stephen VI, you would publicly call a spade a spade; his actions were immoral. And if you would do that, then you have no grounds for condemning my criticism of the current Pope [i]on the principle[/i] that it is never licit to criticise the reigning Pontiff. You would be forced to admit that there are situations in which it is proper and just to do so. Then all you could argue in the present case is that I have come to a mistaken conclusion about John Paul II. You would no longer be able to simply say, "stop saying that." You would have to engage my arguments about Assisi and Qur'an kissing on the merits (which no one has done yet). This is why I keep bringing up the corpse trial. I could do some digging and come up with some even more blatantly sinful actions which Popes have committed in the past, just to drive my point home, if you like. [quote]Saint Francis once went into a town and the people gathered around him to tell him stories about their terrible priest who had a mistress. He said he would go see the priest and the whole town followed behind him hoping for some good entertainment. When he saw the priest, he fell on his knees and kissed the hands of the priest and saying "I don't know anything else about you, but I know these hands bring me Jesus Christ. Thank you, thank you."[/quote] I have had similar thoughts about my former pastor at Penn State. He taught so much poison to the RCIA class (extra ecclesiam nulla salus is heresy, there's nothing wrong about homosexuality, etc.) but on the other hand, he restored me to a state of grace when I had fallen into mortal sin, and gave me the body of Christ. I pray for him almost as often as I pray for the Pope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted July 3, 2004 Share Posted July 3, 2004 I have no clue what I would have done during the reign of Pope Stephen and I do not engage in chronological snobbery for the mere speculation of it. Nobody has ever claimed previous popes were perfect, that is not a requirement for the office. THe Pope has to be infallible in teaching faith and morals, but not impeccable. If he has made mistakes, he will answer the same as you or I. You were not present at either occasion you criticise and therefore are relying on hearsay evidence. CALUMNY. Injuring another person's good name by lying. It is doubly sinful, in unjustly depriving another of his good name and in telling an untruth. DEFAMATION. Unjust injury of a person's good name. It consists in telling facts that harm another's reputation. In defamation, there is at least an implicit intention to harm the reputation of another, who is absent and therefore not a witness to being defamed. Defamation may be committed in two ways: by spreading injurious facts that are true but not publicly known, or by saying things that are false. DETRACTION. Revealing something about another that is true but harmful to that person's reputation. It is forbidden to reveal another person's secret faults or defects, unless there is proportionate good involved. The fact that something is true does not, of itself, justify its disclosure. Detraction is a sin against justice. It robs one of what most people consider more important than riches, since a person has a strict right to his or her reputation whether it is deserved or not. (Etym. Latin detractio, a withdrawal.) We do not criticise the current Pope on THIS site, feel free to do it elsewhere to your hearts content. It won't happen here. Sounds like your pastor had the same teachers my professors had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts