Objective
#1
Quote:expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations

Usually people claim that their opinion is objective, the their opponents are subjective.

This in itself is the proof that we are all subjective. The knowledge is the mirror of the reality in our mind, and our personal environment, past interest, desire form our perception.

In the time of my grandfather the tradition was objective. His grandfather live basically in the same type of world into what he born in and lived onto his adulthood. Then with WWI the world started to change rapidly, everything became confused, the tradition did not gave answer any more to the problems. It became evident that we are contingent, particular beings, and our view is not objective, not the truth, only our opinion.

Some people understand it, and turn to the Magisterium or (non Catholics) their well formed conscience for guidance, other pretend that nothing changed, and blame consequences of the changes for the changes which happened much earlier.
Reply
#2
(03-24-2010, 07:14 AM)glgas Wrote:
Quote:expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations

Usually people claim that their opinion is objective, the their opponents are subjective.

This in itself is the proof that we are all subjective. The knowledge is the mirror of the reality in our mind, and our personal environment, past interest, desire form our perception.

In the time of my grandfather the tradition was objective. His grandfather live basically in the same type of world into what he born in and lived onto his adulthood. Then with WWI the world started to change rapidly, everything became confused, the tradition did not gave answer any more to the problems. It became evident that we are contingent, particular beings, and our view is not objective, not the truth, only our opinion.

Some people understand it, and turn to the Magisterium or (non Catholics) their well formed conscience for guidance, other pretend that nothing changed, and blame consequences of the changes for the changes which happened much earlier.

The Catholic Faith is objective, Liberalism is subjective; your comments on this forum often reflect the latter and not the former.

The traditions of the Catholic Faith always give the correct answers. It makes no difference in what time-period one lives. You simply have to follow The Faith.
Reply
#3
(03-24-2010, 08:12 AM)matthew_talbot Wrote: The Catholic Faith is objective, Liberalism is subjective; your comments on this forum often reflect the latter and not the former.

The traditions of the Catholic Faith always give the correct answers. It makes no difference in what time-period one lives. You simply have to follow The Faith.

Yes the Catholic faith is objective that belong to the reality, and the Revelation approves that it is true.

The question is about your/mine/our  knowledge about the Catholic faith.

My experience is that only those people make statement like " your comments on this forum often reflect the latter and not the former." who are utterly subjective, beliving that their word are creative like God's words. Those who want to at least seem to be objective always go to details, as it is opposed to generic judgment.

In the ancient times the Catholic practice required seven years of penitence for a fornication? Is it still the correct answer, and when it was diminished to the recitation of an our Father will do the penance were wrong?

Reply
#4
(03-25-2010, 09:47 AM)glgas Wrote: [quote='matthew_talbot' pid='539028' dateline='1269432753']

The Catholic Faith is objective, Liberalism is subjective; your comments on this forum often reflect the latter and not the former.

The traditions of the Catholic Faith always give the correct answers. It makes no difference in what time-period one lives. You simply have to follow The Faith.

Yes the Catholic faith is objective that belong to the reality, and the Revelation approves that it is true.

The question is about your/mine/our  knowledge about the Catholic faith.

My experience is that only those people make statement like " your comments on this forum often reflect the latter and not the former." who are utterly subjective, beliving that their word are creative like God's words. Those who want to at least seem to be objective always go to details, as it is opposed to generic judgment.
quote]



Reply
#5
(03-25-2010, 09:47 AM)glgas Wrote:
(03-24-2010, 08:12 AM)matthew_talbot Wrote: The Catholic Faith is objective, Liberalism is subjective; your comments on this forum often reflect the latter and not the former.

The traditions of the Catholic Faith always give the correct answers. It makes no difference in what time-period one lives. You simply have to follow The Faith.

Yes the Catholic faith is objective that belong to the reality, and the Revelation approves that it is true.

The question is about your/mine/our  knowledge about the Catholic faith.

My experience is that only those people make statement like " your comments on this forum often reflect the latter and not the former." who are utterly subjective, beliving that their word are creative like God's words. Those who want to at least seem to be objective always go to details, as it is opposed to generic judgment.

In the ancient times the Catholic practice required seven years of penitence for a fornication? Is it still the correct answer, and when it was diminished to the recitation of an our Father will do the penance were wrong?

I  (and others who have refuted your Vatican II, new-church drivel) base my (our ) statements on Catholicism..You base yours on Modernism..This has been pointed out by many posters in many previous posts; not just me..If you need me to go back and repost some of your more dubious statements I can gladly do so; and then disprove your falsehoods with notated refutations from approved Catholic sources...The ball is in your court..
Reply
#6
(03-25-2010, 11:27 AM)matthew_talbot Wrote: I  (and others who have refuted your Vatican II, new-church drivel) base my (our ) statements on Catholicism..You base yours on Modernism..This has been pointed out by many posters in many previous posts; not just me..If you need me to go back and repost some of your more dubious statements I can gladly do so; and then disprove your falsehoods with notated refutations from approved Catholic sources...The ball is in your court..

!./ I told you that in the good old and really traditional times some thing as Catholicism was big nono. 'ISM' always is particular, something defined by the difference from others, we Catholics as catholics - universal, for everyone, and representing the fullness: Jesus Christ. We are not ISM.

You are traditional-ists, you represent an ISM (=distinctive doctrine, cause, or theory), and collecting the negative side of others define themselves as you are different from others. You are not Catholic = universal, the truth for everyone. Your 'the ball is yopur side' statement is characteristic to your 'ISM' : you are are defined by your side, you do not believe that you have vocation for everyone.

I will be happy discuss this above statement in details (ISM, defining oneself by the negatives of others), as it is opposed by the goal of the 21st Ecumenical Council of the (Magisterial jurisdictional) Church: a Church with a message for everyone (as for today through 1140 million people out of 6300 million), defining himself by the similarity of others and by the values of others.

Naturally if you want other statement, just let me know.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)