FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren (/showthread.php?tid=58322)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22


Re: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - VoxClamantis - 10-22-2012

(10-21-2012, 08:57 PM)CollegeCatholic Wrote: If being a Catholic means being a naive little child who has no use for his brain and reasoning skills and is to ignore clearly scandalous writings and speeches by the Vicar of Christ in a time of Crisis and just assume "he means authentic Catholic teaching" while actually only muddling up the waters, well.... I don't know what to think then.

That doesn't jive with me having reason. 

Why bother thinking if all I have to do is assume his intentions are good?

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and the skulls of bishops.

That isn't what's being said. What was said is that Pope Benedict didn't say anything scandalous in that address, not "well, that's scandalous or ambiguous so let's turn our brains off and ignore it." There's just nothing wrong with what he said. I imagine that's disappointing for many, but, well, there it is.


Re: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - Phillipus Iacobus - 10-22-2012

(10-21-2012, 09:11 PM)Mithrandylan Wrote:
(10-21-2012, 08:57 PM)CollegeCatholic Wrote: If being a Catholic means being a naive little child who has no use for his brain and reasoning skills and is to ignore clearly scandalous writings and speeches by the Vicar of Christ in a time of Crisis and just assume "he means authentic Catholic teaching" while actually only muddling up the waters, well.... I don't know what to think then.

That doesn't jive with me having reason. 

Why bother thinking if all I have to do is assume his intentions are good?

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and the skulls of bishops.

And it really doesn't require a whole lot of thinking, either.  Consider the Pilgrimage of Grace.  English Peasants who didn't have the internet, didn't have hand missals, didn't have any of the resources we do went to war against their bishop and gave their lives when he changed the mass and protestantized the culture-- and there wasn't anything explicitly heretical in the mass of Cranmer, either.

Most were probably illiterate, too.


Re: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - Scriptorium - 10-22-2012

I'll repost essentially what I posted in another thread. Applicable just as much here.

Life is a series of acts, some good, some bad, which taken together form a whole, and defined solely by its position in the present. Some are here attempting to deny a good act, by appealing to the whole at this point in someone's life. I think weare worried too, that if we gave praise, we'd be compromising some core position. These people do good works in the name of Jesus, however filled with confusion and error they may be. The fact that we cannot find in ourselves to "come down" and take joy in that shows that we lack charity for our neighbor. Now some will come back and say that really what matters is going to heaven. And that on its face will look charitable, will look like the real optimum Catholic position, but they won't actually have charity in any concrete way that will get them there. It's this sort of abstract wish, this ideal while no position between heresy and complete conversion can be conceded (because all they can do is "scatter"). It's sort of like looking for a wife, but she has to be perfect. No physical flaws. No behavioral foibles. Etc. I won't settle for anything less, or for someone "on the way". Not seeing the good that can be harnessed and developed, and the transforming power of love. Before the good act of conversion to Christ, comes a good act of a heretic "going to hell". Notice the contrast of such willingness to criticize and stand in the position of judgement when finding wrong, but such reluctance to make light of good amongst one's enemies, which must be mitigated and qualified until in the end it really just brings us back to a criticism and fault finding. Note how we can't take joy because ultimately they're going to hell. No middle vision of their life. Only hell or conversion. A story without a middle. And notice how the Pope has to always be criticized. If he says the Church needs "a renewed enthusiasm in her faith in Jesus Christ, the only Savior of the world" we can't take joy even in that. We have to quote this text and that text, and look at, again, the "whole" which negates what he says. Good savior statement + bad Luther statement = bad Pope. Notice how whatever positive input there is in this and similar equations, he never gets to a positive. (I am sure even if he consecrated Russia just as our Lady said, no few will have internet postings showing what was wrong with it.) Although, in contradiction, we can't look at the whole of JPII. We have to overly focus on a few events. Funny how that always fits the argument one is making. My mind understands that someone doesn't have strong faith in their position when they are unable to concede something against their position.

Maybe the next address by the Pope should be titled "Take Joy in the Good of our Pope". Just to get us to loosen up enough to recognize these things to bring us into a holistic viewpoint. Or as Fox News would put it "Fair and Balanced". That's why I user the words "rigor" and "rigorism" so much. It's like some tensed up person. He ain't changin' his mind for nothin'. I worry mostly, honestly, about the most rigorist, who may not be able to accept when Jesus actually gives them a solution, because it may not be in line with their views, and he won't have the suppleness of mind to see it and make the shift. (In fact, shift is antithetical to such a person.)

Today's meditation: "And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same?"


Re: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - Walty - 10-22-2012

(10-22-2012, 12:17 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote:
(10-21-2012, 08:57 PM)CollegeCatholic Wrote: If being a Catholic means being a naive little child who has no use for his brain and reasoning skills and is to ignore clearly scandalous writings and speeches by the Vicar of Christ in a time of Crisis and just assume "he means authentic Catholic teaching" while actually only muddling up the waters, well.... I don't know what to think then.

That doesn't jive with me having reason. 

Why bother thinking if all I have to do is assume his intentions are good?

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and the skulls of bishops.

That isn't what's being said. What was said is that Pope Benedict didn't say anything scandalous in that address, not "well, that's scandalous or ambiguous so let's turn our brains off and ignore it." There's just nothing wrong with what he said. I imagine that's disappointing for many, but, well, there it is.

I think the question here is this (and I mean this with sincerity): If we disagree with you and think that there is indeed something wrong with what he said, are we free to criticize it and to disagree with you?  I ask because, while it's obvious that you have never moderated on a "everyone has to agree with me" level, you'd be well within your right to demand a certain amount of adherence to what you see as the truth and to want to end discussion which you think is only leading to error.  I know that if I ran a forum, I would feel the exact same way.

I ask this because it often seems that, at least recently, you've moderated threads more on theological grounds as well as on grounds of decorum (being prudent, arguing politely, using charity, etc.)  I feel that threads arguing in favor of the idea that any particular speech or writing of Pope Benedict is erroneous or open to scandal are increasingly finding more response from you.  It is hard to distinguish between your personal opinion as a poster and your wish for the forum as owner and moderator.

To what extent are we free to criticize something associated with Rome, the Curia, the College, Pope Benedict, etc. if we do it in a way which is mature (not falling into silly name calling and whatnot) and substantive? 

As you know, I've had a hard time figuring out how/if I currently fit on FE.  I respect you deeply as moderator and owner and do not think that pushing the rules is useful to any of us, however, I also don't see posting here as prudent if my views are beyond the pale of the forum.


Re: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - TrentCath - 10-22-2012

(10-22-2012, 10:46 AM)Walty Wrote:
(10-22-2012, 12:17 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote:
(10-21-2012, 08:57 PM)CollegeCatholic Wrote: If being a Catholic means being a naive little child who has no use for his brain and reasoning skills and is to ignore clearly scandalous writings and speeches by the Vicar of Christ in a time of Crisis and just assume "he means authentic Catholic teaching" while actually only muddling up the waters, well.... I don't know what to think then.

That doesn't jive with me having reason. 

Why bother thinking if all I have to do is assume his intentions are good?

The road to hell is paved with good intentions and the skulls of bishops.

That isn't what's being said. What was said is that Pope Benedict didn't say anything scandalous in that address, not "well, that's scandalous or ambiguous so let's turn our brains off and ignore it." There's just nothing wrong with what he said. I imagine that's disappointing for many, but, well, there it is.

I think the question here is this (and I mean this with sincerity): If we disagree with you and think that there is indeed something wrong with what he said, are we free to criticize it and to disagree with you?  I ask because, while it's obvious that you have never moderated on a "everyone has to agree with me" level, you'd be well within your right to demand a certain amount of adherence to what you see as the truth and to want to end discussion which you think is only leading to error.  I know that if I ran a forum, I would feel the exact same way.

I ask this because it often seems that, at least recently, you've moderated threads more on theological grounds as well as on grounds of decorum (being prudent, arguing politely, using charity, etc.)  I feel that threads arguing in favor of the idea that any particular speech or writing of Pope Benedict is erroneous or open to scandal are increasingly finding more response from you.  It is hard to distinguish between your personal opinion as a poster and your wish for the forum as owner and moderator.

To what extent are we free to criticize something associated with Rome, the Curia, the College, Pope Benedict, etc. if we do it in a way which is mature (not falling into silly name calling and whatnot) and substantive? 

As you know, I've had a hard time figuring out how/if I currently fit on FE.  I respect you deeply as moderator and owner and do not think that pushing the rules is useful to any of us, however, I also don't see posting here as prudent if my views are beyond the pale of the forum.

You're not the only one who's been thinking like that, the issue is that even if a MOD has no intention of doing so their getting involved in theological discussions except for issues of rudeness, sedevecantism etc.... tends to make others concerned that they risk some sort of sanction if they disagree with the opinion they express. I would appreciate some clarity on the issue.

it has to be said Vox that even though you've repeated it many times, It is not at all clear to many on this thread that actually the popes words are perfectly fine and I haven't actually seen an argument that they are, I've just been told that if a Catholic goes and reads the catechism and studies church teaching they will realise this, but people have done that and they completely disagree with the conclusion you have come to.


Re: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - newyorkcatholic - 10-22-2012

There are two issues here.

1. What the Pope said is okay or not okay.

2. Whether the people who say that the Pope's words were okay are (a) actually saying the words were okay or (b) saying it doesn't matter, put your head in the sand, the Pope is always right, just trust blindly.

CC was accusing people of saying (b), but no one is actually saying (b). Vox is pointing out that they are saying (a) which is a totally different position to take (and which preserves the view the we should be reasonable, we can use our minds, we can open our eyes - but comes to a different conclusion than those who say the Pope's words are problematic).

So without even forcing a side, I think Vox (who can clarify if I'm mistaken) is really saying that CC is off with his (quite unfair) characterization. "I see the problems with the Pope's words, so if you think they are okay, you must think we should be naive and act like we don't have reason."


Re: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - Walty - 10-22-2012

(10-22-2012, 11:06 AM)newyorkcatholic Wrote: There are two issues here.

1. What the Pope said is okay or not okay.

2. Whether the people who say that the Pope's words were okay are (a) actually saying the words were okay or (b) saying it doesn't matter, put your head in the sand, the Pope is always right, just trust blindly.

CC was accusing people of saying (b), but no one is actually saying (b). Vox is pointing out that they are saying (a) which is a totally different position to take (and which preserves the view the we should be reasonable, we can use our minds, we can open our eyes - but comes to a different conclusion than those who say the Pope's words are problematic).

So without even forcing a side, I think Vox (who can clarify if I'm mistaken) is really saying that CC is off with his (quite unfair) characterization. "I see the problems with the Pope's words, so if you think they are okay, you must think we should be naive and act like we don't have reason."

I think CC's assertion is that those who think it's ok may well think so because it's easier to dismiss this stuff than to admit fault in the Holy Father.  To be clear, unlike what some here may think, it is NEVER easy to find fault in the Holy Father or any of his cardinals.  It always hurts.  It always makes us lament for the Church.

But, I don't want to speak for CC.  And my question to Vox is a general one which is not necessarily tied to anything in this thread or any particular response which she's given to anyone in this thread.


Re: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - TrentCath - 10-22-2012

(10-22-2012, 11:06 AM)newyorkcatholic Wrote: There are two issues here.

1. What the Pope said is okay or not okay.

2. Whether the people who say that the Pope's words were okay are (a) actually saying the words were okay or (b) saying it doesn't matter, put your head in the sand, the Pope is always right, just trust blindly.

CC was accusing people of saying (b), but no one is actually saying (b). Vox is pointing out that they are saying (a) which is a totally different position to take (and which preserves the view the we should be reasonable, we can use our minds, we can open our eyes - but comes to a different conclusion than those who say the Pope's words are problematic).

So without even forcing a side, I think Vox (who can clarify if I'm mistaken) is really saying that CC is off with his (quite unfair) characterization. "I see the problems with the Pope's words, so if you think they are okay, you must think we should be naive and act like we don't have reason."

The problem is how much of peoples conclusions come from a presumption that actually the pope might be right because he's pope? Would those people come to the same conclusion if any old person said it or if it was just some private thoughts written in the popes diary? Judging from a lot of arguments that I've had with people on the magisterium I think the answer to that is obviously, No.

The other issue is that I haven't seen any cogent argument advanced that the popes words are fine, I've read several people saying this but no ones actually offered to prove or show it. Considering that several people have done the opposite i.e advanced cogent arguments that the popes words are problematic, its reasonable to not be very convinced by those who think the popes words are perfectly fine.

CC may or may not be right in this particular occasion  but there is a pattern of behaviour of some that resembles what he say, even if it might not have happened on this thread and there have been several threads where peoples arguments boil down to "the pope can't be wrong so you are wrong"


Re: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - VoxClamantis - 10-22-2012

It's simple: my posting my opinion isn't "moderating."  My warning and banning people is "moderating." There was no "moderating" in this thread.


Re: Benedict: Take Joy in the Good of our Separated Brethren - Walty - 10-22-2012

(10-22-2012, 11:43 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: It's simple: my posting my opinion isn't "moderating."  My warning and banning people is "moderating." There was no "moderating" in this thread.

Thank you for the clarification.