Addition to the rules
#1
Please become familiar with the following addition to the rules.  I will begin enforcing them immediately:

Quote:When speaking about the current Holy Father or any previous Pope, he will be spoken of respectfully. He may be referred to using his proper titles, e.g., The Holy Father, or his Papal name, e.g., in the case of the current Pontiff, Benedict XVI or Benedict.

Any criticism of Papal actions must be done respectfully with due consideration given both to the person and office of the Pope, remembering that he is the Vicar of Christ and holds the Keys. This means referring to him as an heretic, accusing him of heresy, etc. is not allowed on this forum. Sarcastic or vitriolic comments, or anything not worthy of the dignity of the Papacy is not allowed. He should always be given the benefit of the doubt for his actions, as far as reason allows, out of respect for the Throne of Peter and the Magisterium.

There is a balance between open discussion and respectful discussion.  Things have gone way past respectful discussion here, and there is no way in good conscience this could be called a Catholic Forum with the amount and level of disrespect that has been aimed at the Pope and his office.

If you want to disagree with the Pope on a non-dogmatic issue, and that is something that shouldn't be done lightly, fair enough, but it must be done respectfully.  If you want to call the Pope an heretic or such, there are Orthodox and Protestant forums that will not only allow it, but will help you stack wood to burn him in effigy.  Not here.
Reply
#2
I have two practical questions:

Can we say that a statement made by Supreme Pontiff, on the face of it, seems false to us?

If we believe that we have good reason, can we respectfully conclude that the Holy Father has said or done something imprudently*? This seems to be a more serious charge (than saying something seems false) and certainly we ought to think very carefully before making such a comment, keeping in mind our obligation to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Thank you and God bless.

*Please note that such a conclusion does not necessarily imply that he is guilty of any sin, but that he's simply made a mistake, or even just wasn't clear enough on some matter (when we believe he should have been).
Reply
#3
Yeah, I have no problem saying things are imprudent, especially if qualified by "in my opinion".

By benefit of the doubt I mean we should assume they are doing things in good faith and we shouldn't jump to the conclusion that something is wrong just because, for example, JP2 said it, nor should we look at everything in the worst possible light.  Note this is "as reason allows".  I can't reasonably say, for example, a Pope kissing the Koran is a good idea, nor will I make imaginary excuses for him (e.g., he didn't know it was the Koran - ::)).  Obviously different people will have different takes on things, but if we have a negative take, it should be voiced respectfully.

As far as a statement made by the Pontiff being false, I think it is valid to discuss what he said and the merits and problems with that, and it can be done without making any accusations about the Pope.  For example, we can discuss the problems with the statement he made on condoms without attacking him, accusing him of scandal, accusing him of Modernism, etc.  Those types of accusations, if they belong to anyone, belong to the clergy especially the bishops in council.

In the past I was more tolerant of certain things, but the lack of respect has gotten out of hand, and I think many of us are forgetting our low place on the totem pole as laity, so the pendulum is swinging a bit the other way, at least for now.
Reply
#4
I have a practical observation, and I refrain from posting on these types of thing because I am never sure immediately..

In this particular case it seems the reporting was the problem, yet we went after the Holy Father, which leads me to think some of us here have an axe to grind. That's all, and I'll shut up now.
tim
Reply
#5
Mmmmmm
maybe it's too early I'm a bt confused I'm not sipped me mornn scotch and Joe yet so pls bear with me
anyhoo are the new rules of not reffering to the pope as heret foe just the current pope or any past popes? Such as liberius as an example
I'm stayin out of all this for a few reasons but I'm very scepitcal of the modernist here who have used the current firestorm to attemp to gag trads who got a wee wiplash from this new bullshit. Ie the press doing what the press does and the Vatican newspaper doing what it always does sadly spew nonsence. I dunno yesterday I got I to it a bit I. A place I shouldn't of a out th because of a lid disussion of twits swung now we can use rubbers. The pope says so I came int it l owing I shouldn't alas
such is th current state of the church. Truly the rubber thng isn't nearly as disturbng as the latest ver dangerous statements on the Jews and so n
for me anyway
ah I'm rambling
I need a sip
anyway quis ifbu sn make any heads or tails of my above rambles I even forgot my initial quetions
phew long night
Reply
#6
(11-24-2010, 07:49 AM)QuisUtDeus Wrote: Please become familiar with the following addition to the rules.  I will begin enforcing them immediately:

Quote:When speaking about the current Holy Father or any previous Pope, he will be spoken of respectfully. He may be referred to using his proper titles, e.g., The Holy Father, or his Papal name, e.g., in the case of the current Pontiff, Benedict XVI or Benedict.

Any criticism of Papal actions must be done respectfully with due consideration given both to the person and office of the Pope, remembering that he is the Vicar of Christ and holds the Keys. This means referring to him as an heretic, accusing him of heresy, etc. is not allowed on this forum. Sarcastic or vitriolic comments, or anything not worthy of the dignity of the Papacy is not allowed. He should always be given the benefit of the doubt for his actions, as far as reason allows, out of respect for the Throne of Peter and the Magisterium.

There is a balance between open discussion and respectful discussion.  Things have gone way past respectful discussion here, and there is no way in good conscience this could be called a Catholic Forum with the amount and level of disrespect that has been aimed at the Pope and his office.

If you want to disagree with the Pope on a non-dogmatic issue, and that is something that shouldn't be done lightly, fair enough, but it must be done respectfully.  If you want to call the Pope an heretic or such, there are Orthodox and Protestant forums that will not only allow it, but will help you stack wood to burn him in effigy.  Not here.

Thank God. I applaud you and Vox.
Reply
#7
Bravo. Keep up the good work.
Reply
#8
Understood. :)
Reply
#9
Thank you for this clarification.  It is much appreciated.
Reply
#10
Thank you!!!  :)
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)