shelly_freak Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 Prayers for Papa....oh that should be it's own thread.
james Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 (edited) [quote name='littleflower' date='JMJ+Dec 9 2004, 11:57 PM'] hi James! being new at phatmass, i understand you probably didnt' know about it. but so you know considering this is a place that fosters conversion to the One, True Faith--The Catholic Church, from various denominations-- it is known that this is not the place for Catholic debates--and thus is why there are certain guidelines placed and followed. thanks so much for reading. God bless and pax christi. +JMJ+ [/quote] JMJ, I hope you understand that I am not here to challenge the teachings of the Catholic faith. Far be it from that. I am a firm believer in and supporter of the Catholic Faith. I hope that you've seen the distinction--my comments about a person's actions, even if that person happens to be the Roman Pontiff, should not be seen as a challenge to Catholic teachings. If we fail to address the [i]actions[/i] of church authorities when those actions contradict Church teachings, we are compliant in those actions. Is this the environment that we should be creating for bringing in converts to the faith, a church body that doesn't acknowledge it's sins? I believe that this is what St. Thomas Aquinas meant when he wrote: [i]"Thus, St. Paul, who was a subject of St. Peter, questioned him publicly [b]on account of an imminent danger of scandal in a matter of Faith."[/i] [/b] Paul saw that it was necessary to confront Peter in order to avert scandal in a matter of faith. Would he not have acted at least as urgently if faced with the scandal the Church faces today? Edited December 10, 2004 by james
littleflower+JMJ Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 oh i understand james and im glad you read my post. I just wanted to let you know that I have one of my last three finals due tomorrow(a portfolio needing 3 essays tht I have not yet written) by 6 pm tomorrow that I must finish tonite because i work all day tomorrow and will be unable to respond--but the guidelines pretty much stay the same as state above this thread shall however continue with what it was intended for and i do blieve you got the guidelines to go by as well God bless and thanks for reading james. pax christi.
Thy Geekdom Come Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='james' date='Dec 10 2004, 01:53 AM'] I believe that this is what St. Thomas Aquinas meant when he wrote: [i]"Thus, St. Paul, who was a subject of St. Peter, questioned him publicly [b]on account of an imminent danger of scandal in a matter of Faith."[/i] [/b] Paul saw that it was necessary to confront Peter in order to avert scandal in a matter of faith. Would he not have acted at least as urgently if faced with the scandal the Church faces today? [/quote] Thank you for summing up the reason I mentioned the phishy title. We wouldn't want to scandalize others into thinking that your opinions on the Holy Father are the norm or even acceptable. Scandal is a grave matter.
spathariossa Posted December 10, 2004 Author Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='Raphael' date='Dec 10 2004, 02:49 AM'] Thank you for summing up the reason I mentioned the phishy title. We wouldn't want to scandalize others into thinking that your opinions on the Holy Father are the norm or even acceptable. Scandal is a grave matter. [/quote] So why aren't I labeled as "non-catholic?"
spathariossa Posted December 10, 2004 Author Posted December 10, 2004 (edited) [quote name='VoloHumilisEsse' date='Dec 10 2004, 03:08 AM'] hey i tried suggesting it hehe [/quote] Hey that's mean. I don't want the whole "Does not rep the church" label. I don't like it. I would accept "Heretic" "Apostate" or "Schismatic" But Non-Catholic isn't very nice. Besides, I'm technically Catholic. I was baptized and raised Catholic and I'm not Orthodox yet. Plus, I haven't tried converting anyone or misrepresented the views of the church or anything. Edit: Especially when I went and made this nice thread to praise JPII when I think he's just a Bishop. Though I'm really going to have to talk to some orthodox people about that. I don't like the lack of answers I'm getting from the Orthodox side of things on it. Edited December 10, 2004 by spathariossa
Balthazor Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 Yeah sparthariossa you are an odd one. I don't know where you fit either. I thought that you were set on converting to Orthodoxy.
spathariossa Posted December 10, 2004 Author Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='Balthazor' date='Dec 10 2004, 03:24 AM'] Yeah sparthariossa you are an odd one. I don't know where you fit either. I thought that you were set on converting to Orthodoxy. [/quote] I think I am. But I'm not blindly going into things. If I see serious issues that I don't think Orthodoxy is addressing I might be forced to change my mind. Ultimately, I'll just pray and do what I feel is right but if I think Orthodoxy doesn't have a leg to stand on over papal supremacy then I'll have to stick with catholicism whether I like the doctrines and practices or not.
HomeTeamFamily Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 i was just playin around....referencing my post on the first page....my apologies for any offense taken
spathariossa Posted December 10, 2004 Author Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='VoloHumilisEsse' date='Dec 10 2004, 03:28 AM'] i was just playin around....referencing my post on the first page....my apologies for any offense taken [/quote] I'm not offended. Just call me a heretic or schismatic next time and we'll be set.
Balthazor Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 Well there is a lot of variety in the Catholic church for better or for worse. Maybe you will find something that is closer to what you believe and adresses your spiritual needs better. It is good that you are checking everything out first though and praying about it. I respect that. Good luck.
p0lar_bear Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='spathariossa' date='Dec 10 2004, 05:26 AM'] I think I am. But I'm not blindly going into things. If I see serious issues that I don't think Orthodoxy is addressing I might be forced to change my mind. Ultimately, I'll just pray and do what I feel is right but if I think Orthodoxy doesn't have a leg to stand on over papal supremacy then I'll have to stick with catholicism whether I like the doctrines and practices or not. [/quote] spathariossa, I know you're looking for Orthodox resources, but you might try reading "The Divine Primacy of the Bishop of Rome and Modern Eastern Orthodoxy: Letters to a Greek Orthodox on the Unity of the Church" and "Ending the Byzantine Greek Schism" both by James Likoudis. He converted from Greek Orthodoxy, so he might be able to give a different angle on things that you would appreciate. He also has some articles at [url="http://www.expage.com/page/jlikoudis"]http://www.expage.com/page/jlikoudis[/url] OK, hi-jack over... I :wub: JP II!!
james Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='Raphael' date='Dec 10 2004, 02:49 AM'] Scandal is a grave matter. [/quote] Indeed it is. Are you of the opinion that scandal should be dealt with? Or do you believe that scandal should be swept under the carpet? We already know what the Angelic Doctor, St. Thomas Aquinas, has to say on this matter.
cmotherofpirl Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='james' date='Dec 10 2004, 01:47 AM'] Hello LittleFlower+JMJ As a privately owned website, it goes without saying that Phatmass may create and enforce whatever rules it chooses in accordance with the law. It's worth pointing out, however, that Phatmass' concept of obedience to Church authority differs a great deal from that of St. Thomas Aquinas. Phatmass guidelines: [i]Obedience demands that we voice these concerns in private--not in public...[/i] Contrast this with the words of St Thomas Aquinas: [i]"There being an imminent danger for the Faith, prelates must be questioned, [b]even publicly[/b], by their subjects. Thus, St. Paul, who was a subject of St. Peter, [b]questioned him publicly [/b]on account of an imminent danger of scandal in a matter of Faith."[/i] Could you point me to the Catholic resource where Phatmass' concept of Catholic obedience is founded? [/quote] St Thomas Aquinas is not in charge of Phatmass, Dust is. So you go by Dust rules on Dust's board. We do not debate the Magisterium here. Period. Prohibited content:[i]This includes but is not limited to criticism of the Novus Ordo mass and/or our Holy Father.[/i]
homeschoolmom Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 [quote name='Raphael' date='Dec 9 2004, 06:48 PM'] I believe we have a candidate for "phishy"... [/quote] I was thinking the same thing... I was thinking, "my how quiet it is now that all the phishies have left, with the sole exeption of PSPX who enjoys his 'Phishy' title way too much to be any fun at all," and then James showed up...
Guest Eremite Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 [quote]My questioning of John Paul II's actions is completely consistant with Catholic teaching as St. Thomas Aquinas tells us:[/quote] Is it? Let's hear from Leo XIII, that Pope of blessed memory: "Now, the administration of Christian affairs immediately under the Roman Pontiff appertains to the bishops, who, although they attain not to the summit of pontifical power, are nevertheless truly princes in the ecclesiastical hierarchy; and as each one of them administers a particular church, they are 'as master-workers. . . in the spiritual edifice,' and they have members of the clergy to share their duties and carry out their decisions. Every one has to regulate his mode of conduct according to this constitution of the Church, which it is not in the power of any man to change. Consequently, just as in the exercise of their episcopal authority the bishops ought to be united with the apostolic see so should the members of the clergy and the laity live in close union with their bishops. Among the prelates, indeed, one or other there may be affording scope to criticism either in regard to personal conduct or in reference to opinions by him entertained about points of doctrine; but no private person may arrogate to himself the office of judge which Christ our Lord has bestowed on that one alone whom He placed in charge of His lambs and of His sheep. Let every one bear in mind that most wise teaching of Gregory the Great: 'Subjects should be admonished not rashly to judge their prelates, even if they chance to see them acting in a blameworthy manner, lest, justly reproving what is wrong, they be led by pride into greater wrong. They are to be warned against the danger of setting themselves up in audacious opposition to the superiors whose shortcomings they may notice. Should, therefore, the superiors really have committed grievous sins, their inferiors, penetrated with the fear of God, ought not to refuse them respectful submission. The actions of superiors should not be smitten by the sword of the word, even when they are rightly judged to have deserved censure.'" (Encyclical Letter 'Sapientiae Christianae')
qfnol31 Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 (edited) Do you think discussions about phishy would be more proper not in the public...? Edited December 10, 2004 by qfnol31
cmotherofpirl Posted December 10, 2004 Posted December 10, 2004 Good point. Let us drop any phishy part of the discussion if we can.
Recommended Posts