The resignation of Cardinal Robert Sarah

[Peace]

Just now, Era Might said:

Why does that matter?

Well, this is primarily a Catholic website after all.

If you were implying that those views are representative of mainstream Catholic or Christian faith, I would want readers to know that they are not, so that they do not get an incorrect impression of what the mainstream Catholic or Christian faith teaches.

Just now, Era Might said:

If you disagree with something I have to say, then disagree. Jesus said by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.

Well, insofar as these views are not claimed to be Christian, I feel no particular need to respond to all of them, although perhaps some of them are interesting from a purely philosophical perspective.

[Era Might]

Just now, Peace said:

Well, this is primarily a Catholic website after all.

If you were implying that those views are representative of mainstream Catholic or Christian faith, I would want readers to know that they are not, so that they do not get an incorrect impression of what the mainstream Catholic or Christian faith teaches.

Well, insofar as these views are not claimed to be Christian, I feel no particular need to respond to all of them, although perhaps some of them are interesting from a purely philosophical perspective.

No, I don't speak for the Catholic Church.

I've been a member of Phatmass for almost 20 years. There used to be a lot of discussion here, never any expectation that anyone had to be Catholic or Christian or anything else to have an opinion.

You don't need to respond to anything. Take it or leave it however you want.

[Peace]

4 minutes ago, Era Might said:

No, I don't speak for the Catholic Church.

I've been a member of Phatmass for almost 20 years. There used to be a lot of discussion here, never any expectation that anyone had to be Catholic or Christian or anything else to have an opinion.

You don't need to respond to anything. Take it or leave it however you want.

Personally, I welcome all sorts of views (although I find atheism to be repugnant and idiotic, to be frank) regardless of the religious affiliation, or lack thereof, of the people engaged in the discussion. I just wanted to clarify that yours is not an opinion of a Catholic, should anyone be confused by your use of Sacred Scripture to support your opinions. Carry on.

I mean, lets say I went to a Muslim forum and started quoting certain verses from the Quran to support an assertion that Jesus is divine. Certainly the Muslims at that forum would not want anyone to get the impression that what I wrote is an opinion of a Muslim. They would want to make it clear that this is a Christian using the Quran from the perspective of a Christian. I don't think that's very unreasonable.

Edited February 22, 2021 by Peace

[jubilatedeo]

31 minutes ago, Era Might said:

Sure, but the will of God is utterly simple and universal and has been revealed fully in Christ. The will of God is that we love, first ourselves and then each other. The only thing that unites us is being human. People in Zimbabwe need the same things as people in Alabama and Moscow and Calcutta, we need food, clothes, shelter, love and peace. These are the preconditions of life and of religion:

"If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, 'Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,' but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?" (James 2)

We can't seek to know God until we first know ourselves, because God created us to be ourselves. He did not create us to be something other than human. This is the purpose for which we were created, to be human, to be fully alive as men and women. The message of Jesus is very simple: I have a father, and you are my brother. The purpose of religion is not to arrive at this, as though one day we'll all be loving brothers ...this is the precondition of religion. If religion is not human, if its motivating principle is not to reveal the love of God who lives in and through man, then it is vain and useless:

"Though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing." (1Corinthians 13)

"For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do. He said to them, 'All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.’ But you say, ‘If a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban'—(that is, a gift to God), then you no longer let him do anything for his father or his mother, making the word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down. And many such things you do." (Mark 7)

"The woman said to Him, 'Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet. Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, and you Jews say that in Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship.' Jesus said to her, 'Woman, believe Me, the hour is coming when you will neither on this mountain, nor in Jerusalem, worship the Father. You worship what you do not know; we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews. But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.'" (John 4)

The reason why this matters in the context of Africa is because Africa reveals all the failures of religion in the world. Two centuries of Christianity and yet Africans are still drowning in the Mediterranean in search of work in Europe, starving to death while the Western world lives in abundance of food and luxury, women and children dying in war and violence. Jesus came for Africa, and until every last African has the basic needs of humanity, food, clothes, shelter, love and peace, then all the religions of this world (including secular religions such as nationalism) are dead and antichrist. This was the image of a drowned migrant from Honduras trying to make it across the Rio Grande with his daughter. This is the world we live in, and we don't need any new prophets to condemn it, for it stands condemned already. All the prophets bear witness against this world, and if religion does not stand with the prophets, then let all religion die the death, because it is vain and useless. This is the message of Christ, he was no friend of the Pharisees or the Romans, he was the king of the poor.

"The Lord executes righteousness
And justice for all who are oppressed.
He made known His ways to Moses,
His acts to the children of Israel.
The Lord is merciful and gracious,
Slow to anger, and abounding in mercy.
He will not always strive with us,
Nor will He keep His anger forever.
He has not dealt with us according to our sins,
Nor punished us according to our iniquities.

For as the heavens are high above the earth,
So great is His mercy toward those who fear Him;
As far as the east is from the west,
So far has He removed our transgressions from us.
As a father pities his children,
So the Lord pities those who fear Him.
For He knows our frame;
He remembers that we are dust. (Psalm 103)

A word never goes forth without accomplishing its purpose, and if you don't take it seriously, then that means the word wasn't meant for you, and it returns to its giver with nothing lost.

 “Now whatever city or town you enter, inquire who in it is worthy, and stay there till you go out. And when you go into a household, greet it. If the household is worthy, let your peace come upon it. But if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you. And whoever will not receive you nor hear your words, when you depart from that house or city, shake off the dust from your feet." (Matthew 10)

The Catholic Church teaches that everyone is created in the Image and Likeness of God. . .not for ourselves.

From the BC # 3: Why did make us? God made us to show forth His goodness and to share with us HIS everlasting happiness in heaven. 

From the BC #5: From whom do we learn to know, love, and serve God? We learn to know, love and serve God from Jesus Christ, the Son of God, WHO teaches us through the Catholic Church.

Again, we do not love our selves first. We know, love, and serve God first in which enables us to love ourselves in the proper form. 

 

***I am namely putting this out here so that those that may  not recognize that what you spoke of is not the teaching of the Church may know that it is improper teaching and to know what is the proper teaching.***

Edited February 22, 2021 by jubilatedeo

[Era Might]

4 minutes ago, Peace said:

Personally, I welcome all sorts of views (although I find atheism to be repugnant and idiotic, to be frank) regardless of the religious affiliation, or lack thereof, of the people engaged in the discussion. I just wanted to clarify that yours is not an opinion of a Catholic, should anyone be confused by your use of Sacred Scripture to support your opinions. Carry on.

I mean, lets say I went to a Muslim forum and started quoting certain verses from the Quran to support an assertion that Jesus is divine. Certainly the Muslims at that forum would not want anyone to get the impression that what I wrote is an opinion of a Muslim. They would want to make it clear that this is a Christian using the Quran from the perspective of a Christian. I don't think that's very unreasonable.

Well I didn't really post in order to get into a debate, just stating my opinions. But, if I did want to debate, I don't think my knowledge of Catholicism is inferior to anyone here. As Paul said, I'm a Hebrew of Hebrews. If you think you're a zealous Catholic, I've been more zealous than you lol. But I'm just here to discuss God and the Bible, I'm not interested in debating anyone's theology or religion. Believe as you will, and if you find something in my words that is untrue, then that's fine. The important thing is that we all have one Father in heaven, and that God is a living man whose name is Christ.

Anyway, sorry for the detour, back to the original topic of Africa...

[Peace]

20 minutes ago, Era Might said:

But I'm just here to discuss God and the Bible

Well, that is what you say, but it rather appears that you are here to bloviate and use God and the Bible to further secular humanist goals. In principle it's really no different than folks who use God and the Bible to further evil things such as slavery (although it differs from the perspective that some of the things you advocate for are good). But fundamentally it seems that you are attempting to use God and the Bible as a tool to support your particular political or humanist leanings. What you care primarily about are those secular or humanist goals. You are just using God and the Bible as a means to further those goals. That's how I see it at least.

Edited February 22, 2021 by Peace

[Era Might]

Just now, Peace said:

Well, that is what you say, but it rather appears that you are here to bloviate and use God and the Bible to further secular humanist goals. In principle it's really no different than folks who use God and the Bible to further evil things such as slavery (although it differs from the perspective that some of the things you advocate for are good). But fundamentally it seems that you are attempting to use God and the Bible as a tool to support your particular political or humanist leanings.

Yes, obviously I have opinions. I am not you and you are not me. I'm not sure what other purpose there is to be on a forum at all, except to have discussions. Since there doesn't seem to be much discussion going on here, I try to get one going when I see an opportunity, but apparently Phatmass is now just a catechism class. I haven't even really said anything that couldn't be defended even from a strictly orthodox Catholic perspective, and I have a lot of respect for that intellectual tradition, which is one of the reasons why I even come back here at all, it (used to be) one of the few places to have such conversations. But I understand this is a Catholic forum whose purpose is to catechize, so I won't disturb it anymore. Take care and thanks for the discussion!

[Peace]

2 minutes ago, Era Might said:

Yes, obviously I have opinions. I am not you and you are not me. I'm not sure what other purpose there is to be on a forum at all, except to have discussions. Since there doesn't seem to be much discussion going on here, I try to get one going when I see an opportunity, but apparently Phatmass is now just a catechism class. I haven't even really said anything that couldn't be defended even from a strictly orthodox Catholic perspective, and I have a lot of respect for that intellectual tradition, which is one of the reasons why I even come back here at all, it (used to be) one of the few places to have such conversations. But I understand this is a Catholic forum whose purpose is to catechize, so I won't disturb it anymore. Take care and thanks for the discussion!

Oh please. Now you are going to take your ball and go home? How childish. Nobody is attempting to silence you. You are perfectly welcome to discuss whatever you want, and we all know that this forum is not a Catechism class and limited only to Catholic teachings. I wanted to clarify that what you wrote is not Catholic, and that it is humanist, for anyone who may have been confused by your use of the Bible. Please feel free to continue bloviating. But I am also free to continue to identify it as such. There is heat in the kitchen. You know that.

[Era Might]

Just now, Peace said:

Oh please. Now you are going to take your ball and go home? How childish. Nobody is attempting to silence you. You are perfectly welcome to discuss whatever you want, and we all know that this forum is not a Catechism class and limited only to Catholic teachings. I wanted to clarify that what you wrote is not Catholic, and that it is humanist, for anyone who may have been confused by your use of the Bible. Please feel free to continue bloviating. But I am also free to continue to identify it as such. There is heat in the kitchen. You know that.

I don't find you very interesting to discuss with. That's why I'm leaving. You're not very interesting to me and not worth my time, and you're correct that most people on here are just looking for Catholic teaching. That's fine, no hard feelings. I stopped by here to say hello, and I've had some free time to discuss other things. I'm not taking my ball and going home. I'm going back to where I always was, real life. But just so you know, you come across as a childish arse portal who needs to grow up. Take care.

[Peace]

9 minutes ago, Era Might said:

I don't find you very interesting to discuss with. That's why I'm leaving. You're not very interesting to me and not worth my time, and you're correct that most people on here are just looking for Catholic teaching. That's fine, no hard feelings. I stopped by here to say hello, and I've had some free time to discuss other things. I'm not taking my ball and going home. I'm going back to where I always was, real life. But just so you know, you come across as a childish arse portal who needs to grow up. Take care.

Cheers

[Era Might]

Just one last post since this thread was derailed: Cardinal Sarah and Africa was the original topic.

[Clean Water]

How is Era Might wrong in what he's saying? Jesus literally says at the Final Judgement we will go to Heaven or Hell based on our treatment of the poor. He says when we helped them we were literally helping God himself. By all means do all the Catholic religious rituals that you've been taught to do. But if you're claiming the Catholic Church doesn't teach what Jesus does about the Final Judgement then I'm curious why you believe this?

The Final Judgment

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 Before him will be gathered all the nations, and he will separate people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 And he will place the sheep on his right, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, 36 I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.’ 37 Then the righteous will answer him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? 38 And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? 39 And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?’ 40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.’ 44 Then they also will answer, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to you?’ 45 Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’ 46 And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

[Peace]

33 minutes ago, Clean Water said:

How is Era Might wrong in what he's saying?

I find the timing of this post to be quite suspicious. Isn't this a dummy account created by @Era Might? Someone please check the IP address.

Regardless, you are wrong at least insofar you suggest that the primary (and practically exclusive) purpose of the Catholic religion (faith, Church, etc.) is to achieve good things such as eliminating poverty here on Earth, rather than for the salvation of souls, improving our relationship with the Lord, and preparation for eternal life in the world hereafter.

You suggested this in statements such as these:

1) Latin liturgy is not going to do anything for Africa. The last thing the continent needs is another division by a European language. If Catholicism wants to do something constructive for Africa, I'd say it should focus on countering the retreat of the West into anti-global conservatism and aggressive/racist nationalism, ala Trumpism in the USA or Orban in Hungary.

2) As for the church, the Pope is a global leader of over a billion people. Though he is no longer a monarch in the medieval sense, he remains a global power broker and peacemaker. The church itself has recognized its own former isolationism and changed course. There was a time when the Pope was a prisoner of Rome, never leaving its walls. The church recognizes that it is not the spiritual center of the world, that there is a vast world made up of many different peoples, and its role is not to vainly pretend that everyone is going to become Catholic. The church, if it has any role in the world at all, has it in Europe and the West. If the church just wants to be a global parish for old ladies to say their rosaries, well it will continue its slide into irrelevance in the West, but in fact the Church comments all the time on society, and as I mentioned, is involved directly in politics, as in South Sudan because the Pope understands the slaughter that is going on in the world. Pope Francis in particular has spoken out about the global situation driven by capitalism and other modern manias.

Edited February 22, 2021 by Peace

[hakutaku]

28 minutes ago, Clean Water said:

How is Era Might wrong in what he's saying? Jesus literally says at the Final Judgement we will go to Heaven or Hell based on our treatment of the poor.

The iron law of bureaucracy binds all organizations, the secular and religious alike.  There will always be people dedicated to the Church's actual goals of serving the poor.  But such people will always be opposed by (and indeed, ruled by) those dedicated to the bureaucracy itself who cannot abide by anything they perceive as a reduction in the organization's power.  Even if that "reduction" is a shift in focus or softening of rules that better serves the organizations actual goals.

1 hour ago, Era Might said:

Just one last post since this thread was derailed: Cardinal Sarah and Africa was the original topic.

The reason people are upset by the removal of this conservative is that it was done in opposition to the iron law.  This cardinal is the kind of guy that the law says should be in charge, insofar as he is taking a hard line stance in favor of the old bureaucracy over the organizations current goals and objectives.

 

[Ash Wednesday]

On 2/20/2021 at 10:16 PM, dUSt said:

I hate to stereotype, but I would not be surprised if most Trad Catholics are also Trumpers.

A lot of Americans tend to be. The British trads in my experience are more of a mixed bag. American politics are an enigma to many of them and while they aren't ones to cheer on the Democrats like most Europeans, many are pretty arm's length and not comfortable with the heavy handed "America first" nationalism.
 

[truthfinder]

I think the important thing to remember is that American trad-dom is not representative of 'trads' anywhere else.

[Nihil Obstat]

5 hours ago, truthfinder said:

I think the important thing to remember is that American trad-dom is not representative of 'trads' anywhere else.

I would go so far as to argue that "American traditionalism" as a distinct entity is not genuinely traditionalist in several important senses.

[Peace]

34 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

I would go so far as to argue that "American traditionalism" as a distinct entity is not genuinely traditionalist in several important senses.

Hmm. Please explain. What would the major differences be between here and there?

[Nihil Obstat]

Honestly, it goes beyond the scope of discussions I am still willing to dedicate time to on internet fora. 

Btw, are you on Facebook? I would be happy to reconnect with you if you are.

 

In a nutshell, I think that "the American Trad" suffers from serious political errors, as well as endemic laxity in the interior life. By the American Trad I am referring to the sort of archetype, or maybe the stereotype, most probably the same character you have in mind.

I find that Western political conservatism, but especially American republicanism is ideologically compromised right to its roots because of its fundamental basis in classical liberalism. The American traditionalist is quite often just as much a liberal as any progressive. There are exceptions, but in a lot of cases even the exceptions have imbued the same errors.

My personal criticisms also line up with Fr. Ripperger's classic "problems in the Traditionalist Movement" lecture, namely that traditionalists are neglecting the interior life and embracing pride and impiety.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Nihil Obstat

[Peace]

11 minutes ago, Nihil Obstat said:

Honestly, it goes beyond the scope of discussions I am still willing to dedicate time to on internet fora. 

Btw, are you on Facebook? I would be happy to reconnect with you if you are.

 

In a nutshell, I think that "the American Trad" suffers from serious political errors, as well as endemic laxity in the interior life. By the American Trad I am referring to the sort of archetype, or maybe the stereotype, most probably the same character you have in mind.

I find that Western political conservatism, but especially American republicanism is ideologically compromised right to its roots because of its fundamental basis in classical liberalism. The American traditionalist is quite often just as much a liberal as any progressive. There are exceptions, but in a lot of cases even the exceptions have imbued the same errors.

My personal criticisms also line up with Fr. Ripperger's classic "problems in the Traditionalist Movement" lecture, namely that traditionalists are neglecting the interior life and embracing pride and impiety.

Thanks. I'll see if I can find that lecture. Not on FB or IG, but I should be considering how much time I have been spending on here lately.

Yeah it has kind of been my impression that a lot of "Trad" folks here in the US are too influenced by politics. But to be fair that is probably true of most Americans. For most of us it seems that we take our politics too seriously so that our politics influence our religious views, instead of our religion influencing our political views.

Its almost like with a lot of people it feels like their fundamental identity is tied to their political party.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Peace