cmotherofpirl Posted July 8, 2004 Author Share Posted July 8, 2004 [quote name='CatholicCrusader' date='Jul 8 2004, 07:22 PM'] I'm sorry if that was seen as derogatory. I don't see how it was such, for if it was there is no way to use "heretic" in a manner that is not derogatory. Therefore, I will restate what I said without using heretic. I stated that it is absurd to be put in jail for defending the truth; however, a person who is of another religion and teaches it is NOT a pastor but an imposter. Only Priests are true pastors. I stated that although I disagree that someone would be put in jail for that, it is good to have a person who teaches heresy no longer teaching in any way we possibly can. God bless all. [/quote] Catholics do not own the word pastor. a person authorized to conduct religious worship www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn Another name for a clergy person. In both Latin and English the word simply means "shepherd." All Lutheran clergy are called pastors, and many Episcopal and Roman Catholic clergy are comfortable enough with the term to use it to describe them. www.holycross.net/anonline.htm Putting anyone in jail for preaching the truth is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allis-challmers Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 this is just wrong how can they put someone in prison for offending a group of people. The prochoice people offend me all the time and they don't get in any trouble. :angry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC Just Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 [quote name='Raphael' date='Jul 8 2004, 04:12 PM'] And thus why I hate liberal politics. [/quote] [quote name='Raphael' date='Jul 8 2004, 04:12 PM']And thus why I hate liberal politics.[/quote] Yeah me too, they make me :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: :angry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 [quote name='Raphael' date='Jul 8 2004, 06:12 PM'] And thus why I hate liberal politics. [/quote] I thought about posting the same thing... decided not too... then read this... and had to pipe up. CMTA (Catholic Minds Think Alike - for the liberals in the audience). God Bless, ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 [quote name='crusader1234' date='Jul 8 2004, 07:28 PM'] To be a heretic you'd have to say yuo are Catholic and then go against Church teachings. [/quote] All who claim that Christ is the truth long to be Catholic, they just do not know it. Man strives for truth, that is why they study the bible, that is why the church hop, because they find that the people teaching them are not teaching the full truth of Christ. There is only one Ekklesia (Church)... those who left her do not have churches, even though they wish to call them that. Anyone who calls themselves Christian and goes against the Church established by Christ is a heretic, but sometimes it is not there fault. There is but one truth, and the only church that knows it fully is the Catholic Church. [quote]St. Thomas (II-II:11:1) defines heresy: "a species of infidelity in men who, having professed the faith of Christ, corrupt its dogmas". "The right Christian faith consists in giving one's voluntary assent to Christ in all that truly belongs to His teaching. There are,therefore,two ways of deviating from Christianity: the one by refusing to believe in Christ Himself, which is the way of infidelity, common to Pagans and Jews; the other by restricting belief to certain points of Christ's doctrine selected and fashioned at pleasure, which is the way of heretics. The subject-matter of both faith and heresy is, therefore, the deposit of the faith, that is, the sum total of truths revealed in Scripture and Tradition as proposed to our belief by the Church. The believer accepts the whole deposit as proposed by the Church; the heretic accepts only such parts of it as commend themselves to his own approval. The heretical tenets may be ignorance of the true creed, erroneous judgment, imperfect apprehension and comprehension of dogmas: in none of these does the will play an appreciable part, wherefore one of the necessary conditions of sinfulness--free choice--is wanting and such heresy is merely objective, or material. On the other hand the will may freely incline the intellect to adhere to tenets declared false by the Divine teaching authority of the Church. The impelling motives are many: intellectual pride or exaggerated reliance on one's own insight; the illusions of religious zeal; the allurements of political or ecclesiastical power; the ties of material interests and personal status; and perhaps others more dishonourable. Heresy thus willed is imputable to the subject and carries with it a varying degree of guilt; it is called formal, because to the material error it adds the informative element of "freely willed". Pertinacity, that is, obstinate adhesion to a particular tenet is required to make heresy formal. For as long as one remains willing to submit to the Church's decision he remains a Catholic Christian at heart and his wrong beliefs are only transient errors and fleeting opinions. Considering that the human intellect can assent only to truth, real or apparent, studied pertinacity, as distinct from wanton opposition, supposes a firm subjective conviction which may be sufficient to inform the conscience and create "good faith". Such firm convictions result either from circumstances over which the heretic has no control or from intellectual delinquencies in themselves more or less voluntary and imputable. A man born and nurtured in heretical surroundings may live and die without ever having a doubt as to the truth of his creed. On the other hand a born Catholic may allow himself to drift into whirls of anti-Catholic thought from which no doctrinal authority can rescue him, and where his mind becomes incrusted with convictions, or considerations sufficiently powerful to overlay his Catholic conscience. It is not for man, but for Him who searcheth the reins and heart, to sit in judgment on the guilt which attaches to an heretical conscience. II. DISTINCTIONS Heresy differs from apostasy. The apostate a fide abandons wholly the faith of Christ either by embracing Judaism, Islamism, Paganism, or simply by falling into naturalism and complete neglect of religion; the heretic always retains faith in Christ. Heresy also differs from schism. Schismatics, says St. Thomas, in the strict sense, are they who of their own will and intention separate themselves from the unity of the Church. The unity of the Church consists in the connection of its members with each other and of all the members with the head. Now this head is Christ whose representative in the Church is the supreme pontiff. And therefore the name of schismatics is given to those who will not submit to the supreme pontiff nor communicate with the members of the Church subject to him. Since the definition of Papal Infallibility, schism usually implies the heresy of denying this dogma. Heresy is opposed to faith; schism to charity; so that, although all heretics are schismatics because loss of faith involves separation from the Church, not all schismatics are necessarily heretics, since a man may, from anger, pride, ambition, or the like, sever himself from the communion of the Church and yet believe all the Church proposes for our belief (II-II, Q. xxix, a. 1). Such a one, however, would be more properly called rebellious than heretical. [url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07256b.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07256b.htm[/url][/quote] These statements are not derogetory. These statements are fact. If anyone wish to dialog about the facts that I have stated above, please start a thread and PM me the link. I will be happy to write my reasons out for the above simple statments. God Bless, ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thicke Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 [quote]Green had described homosexuality as "abnormal, a horrible cancerous tumor in the body of society" in a 2003 sermon. [/quote] I have a point I'd like to make and I hope I don't get roasted for it. It seems to me like the quote as it's written could be taken two different ways. I would agree that the homosexual act is "abnormal, a horrible cancerous tumor in the body of society". But, is that what he is saying? Or is he saying homosexuals are "abnormal, a horrible cancerous tumor in the body of society"? The statement is kind of ambiguous and I don't pretend to know what was meant by it, one way or another. If anyone can find it (I'll look myself), I'd like to see the exact quote from Rev. Green. I am most disturbed by the fact that the quotation marks start with the word "abnormal", instead at the beginning of a sentence. That's poor journalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorphRC Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 [quote]Soren Andersson, the president of the Swedish Federation for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender rights, said on hearing Green's jail sentence that religious freedom could never be used as a reason to offend people.[/quote] Yes. But a lifestyle that could totally destroy humanity through no-procreation, spreading AIDS, like its a flu bug, and forcing sexually explicit gay shows on TV, to further their perverted lifestyle is perfectly alright. Even though it offends, over 80% of the population in one form or another. OY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorphRC Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 [quote name='Raphael' date='Jul 9 2004, 07:46 AM'] How about the student this last year who went to the "Free Speech Zone" on the campus of Georgetown University (a Jesuit school) and passed out anti-contraception pamphlet who was removed and repremanded by school authorities? 1. Why does there need to be a special zone for free speech on a Catholic campus (Catholic Church=HUGE human rights supporter), especially one as pro-civil rights as Georgetown? 2. Why is a school, at least nominally Catholic, arresting a kid for passing out pro-Catholic doctrine pamphlets? [/quote] Because its against gay rights, and rights of people who want to avoid having a great gift like a child, Geez! ...sorry, sarcasim gets my point over better than charity.. :| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorphRC Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 [quote name='crusader1234' date='Jul 9 2004, 08:58 AM'] To be a heretic you'd have to say yuo are Catholic and then go against Church teachings. [/quote] Hmmm No. Once you accept a false doctrine, OSAS then your a heretic. Or if you deny the Immaculate Conception, then your a heretic to. [Theokotos, Woman, Mother, Disciple, Volume V, Author. Pope John Paul II, Pauline Media.] 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