seven deadly sins

[Guest Rick777]

[TheoGrad07]

[quote name='Rick777' date='Nov 22 2005, 01:14 AM']   
[right][snapback]797456[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Lol

Nice picture, Rick

Hmmmm ... this whole thread just sounds like a lack of basic catechetical knowledge of the deffinitions of the vices & virtues and a true understanding of them. For example: true humility is recognizing that everything you have comes from God --- I mean everything, because God gives us gifts, and we need to recognize them, be grateful, and know they come from him. Thus we can be glad when we do well and "proud" of our accomplishments, but at the same time recognize what we've been given is a gift and not take the final credit for ourselves. Afterall, we're instruments in his hands.

Check out the Catechism of the Catholic Church for straightforward answers:
[url="http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm"]http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm[/url]

[TheoGrad07]

[quote name='Rick777' date='Nov 22 2005, 01:14 AM']   
[right][snapback]797456[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


You changed your picture ... the one of the Tridentine Mass was beautiful. So's this one. Who's the saint? I recognize him, but can't place a name.

[Paphnutius]

Here you go dairy

In medio virtus stat!

[Paphnutius]

I do think this is a problem with understanding. A vice is bad by definition, but it is bad because it is either an excess or a defect of something otherwise good. It is not that pride could be good, not in the sense that we mean pride. Here pride by its defninition is an excess of something. When a vice as you say "becomes good" it is no longer a vice, but the moderation that is virtue. The same applies for defects.

e.g. Hope is the virtue for it is inbetween the excess of presumption and defect of despair.

another: Temperance is the virtue for you eat enough for nourishment but avoid the excess of gluttony and the defect of over self-denial. *

*This gets tricky here because self-mortification is penitential, but even there one must stay within certain bounds.

[Cam42]

[quote]All of them, in a general sense, can be good or bad. For definitions, I refer you to www.dictionary.com If there's more than one definition, pick the one that makes my argument make sense.  There'll be one. I'll give you the opposite situation for what each is usually expected to have.[/quote]

Actually not. You really have not even started this discussion. In a general sense? What does that mean? If you think that by saying that anger (for instance, but apply any) in a general sense, without that necessity of bad, can be good. That is not correct.

[quote]Pride in one's work is not bad we all agree?[/quote]

No, we don't agree. Again, I believe your premise is wrong.

I asked you to look to Sirach (Ecclesiasticus)10:6-18 for one of the most complete views on pride. Pride is never acceptable. People apply the word pride incorrectly, often times. To be "proud" of one's work is not pride, but rather "acceptance of the good that they have done." Two totally different ideas. And an incorrect notion of pride.

[quote]After all this, I retract my argument, sort of. Ironically not because of what you all argued. Cam was on the right track with the definition thing.[/quote]

So we're not going to get definitions? I'm sad. If you are telling us to simply define it ourselves and then you will refute our definitons, I refuse to accept that. That is not being authentic in your motives, but rather combative and not open to a true sense of dialogue.

Again, this idea of "generalities" is flawed from the beginning. So, your whole post makes no sense, until YOU actually define your postion. Your position cannot be "I'm going to refute your position, without giving my own."

[quote]This helps remember as I initially said that the opposites in a general sense are good.[/quote]

Define your terms, then this thread can continue.

[tojo]

Perhaps Dairy, a sloppy, modern use of the English language could cause some vices, like "anger" or "pride" to be seen as not all bad, and some of the virtues, such as "humility," to seem like they could be bad, perhaps. However, the seven deadly sins, and indeed all vices and virtues are not defined in Catholic teaching according to modern, sloppy English, and the usuage of such modern, sloppy English, while it could cause confusion to some, does not and cannot reflect poorly on Church teaching. The teachings are fine, you have to make the effort to understand them as they were actually defined, and not in accordance with modern, sloppy English.

Edited November 22, 2005 by tomasio127

[beatty07]

I'm pretty much in agreement with dairy's most recent post, if I understand correctly. As cam has so strongly insisted, these terms have different usages in our society. The traditional theological definitions of the seven capital sins are not the definitions envisioned by most english-speakers when they use those words.

I had a long argument with a buddy once about lust. He kept insisting that you need lust AND love. He was defining lust as "physical attraction to another person." I just couldn't get him to understand that the "lust" of the seven deadlies is much more than that, and that it was exclusive of love. He refused to accept the context and presupposed definitions behind the list, and thus rendered it incoherent and ridiculous. You just can't do that!

I'm not saying we should abandon this great formulation of our tradition...I'm saying we should use it carefully. If we just rattle them off and don't communicate the crucial contexts and definitions, we're only going to confuse people and make a caricature of the faith.

[dairygirl4u2c]

I know sometimes I like to point out flaws more than present my own arguments, but I don't think this is the case. I said go to dictionary.com, and that website has definitions that would make my general argument make sense.

I think everything got straightened out in my last thread, unless you didn't look the words up or read everything I wrote about intent. It's interesting some of you agree with my recent post but some are somehow still arguing. The only point that I can see you possibly trying to draw out at this point is that one cannot have two opposing definitions to the same word. What you miss, if this is your argument, is that you can have such a broad definition so as to encompass both, which you would see if you looked it up:

Pride: Pleasure or satisfaction taken in an achievement
This pleasure can be taken to extreme and become bad, or it cannot. It depends; it's relative.

Here's this even from the website:
[quote]anger
the emotion of instant displeasure on account of something evil that presents
itself to our view. In itself it is an original susceptibility of our nature,
just as love is, and is not necessarily sinful. It may, however, become sinful
when causeless, or excessive, or protracted (Matt. 5:22; Eph. 4:26; Col. 3:8).
As ascribed to God, it merely denotes his displeasure with sin and with sinners
(Ps. 7:11).[/quote]

Note the core definition: anger: the emotion of instant displeasure on account of something evil that presents itself to our view
It can be used in a bad way or a good way.

Again, you can find a definition to fit all of my words. (I do agree I did a bit much of twisting with avarice but hey)

These are legitimate definitions. If people use them in these ways and if the dictionary does, then how am I wrong to use them in that way? The only thing wrong that I did was distort the intent of the list, and I corrected myself in my last post.

Edited November 23, 2005 by dairygirl4u2c

[beatty07]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Nov 23 2005, 12:56 AM']These are legitimate definitions. If people use them in these ways and if the dictionary does, then how am I wrong to use them in that way? The only thing wrong that I did was distort the intent of the list, and I corrected myself in my last post.
[right][snapback]798287[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Yeah, that's the point that I was trying to express agreement with! The Church doesn't claim jurisdiction over the changing definitions of words. If people begin using "pride" or "anger" in a different sense then those intended in the deadly sins, that's inconvenient for us but just a minor obstacle really. Language is a fluid and fickle thing, and everyone has to deal with it. I didn't mean to accuse you of any wrongdoing!

[Cam42]

humility:
[quote name='dictionary.com']Marked by meekness or modesty in behavior, attitude, or spirit; not arrogant or prideful.[/quote]
[quote name='Traditional Catholic defintion']A quality by which a person considering his own defects has a lowly opinion of himself and willingly submits himself to God and to others for God's sake.[/quote]

liberality:
[quote name='dictionary.com']The quality or state of being liberal or generous.[/quote]
[quote name='Traditional Catholic definition']Generosity for a proper and worthy charity that may involve the donation of our time, our money, or other possessions.[/quote]

brotherly love:
[quote name='dictionary.com']A kindly and lenient attitude toward people [syn: charity][/quote]
[quote name='Traditional Catholic definition']Happiness in response to another’s success.[/quote]

meekness:
[quote name='dictionary.com']The feeling of patient submissive humbleness.[/quote]
[quote name='Traditional Catholic definition']A form of temperance that controls every inordinate resentment at another’s character or behavior.[/quote]

continued (too many quotes).......

[Cam42]

chastity:
[quote name='dictionary.com']Morally pure in thought or conduct; decent and modest.[/quote]
[quote name='Traditional Catholic definition']Moderates desire for sexual pleasure, the body’s most imperious passion, according to principles of faith and right reason.[/quote]

temperance:
[quote name='dictionary.com']Moderation and self-restraint, as in behavior or expression.[/quote]
[quote name='Traditional Catholic definiton']The virtue that moderates the desire for pleasure.[/quote]

diligence:
[quote name='dictionary.com'] Earnest and persistent application to an undertaking; steady effort; assiduity.[/quote]
[quote name='Traditional Catholic definition']The decision to fulfull all of the responsibilities in our vocation or state in life.[/quote]

Ok, dairy, I did your work for you, but as you (and everyone else) can see, the definitions are the same. Your point is not proven. Now, would you like to enter into this discussion and stop with the platitudes. You are simply making yourself look silly.

I assure you that the vices are the opposite as the virtues in definition, yet they are similar in their own correlations. They are not "a bunch of hooey." They are accepted by both the secular as well as the religious as meaning the same thing, by defintion.

So, enter into this discussion and defend your position or get out. I am straight calling you out on this topic. It is time to see if you can put up, or if this will just be a means to having you shut up.

Let's see you bring it. If you think you got it. I don't think you do. I think that you like to stir the pot and troll. No more trolling. How about a discussion on the topic you started. If not, my point on this is proven. My point? The capital virtues are universal. They transcend Catholicism and Christianity; they extend to every living person who employs right reason.

What say you?

[Guest Rick777]

st. dominic savio

patron saint of altar boys!

[dairygirl4u2c]

I don't deny I engage in platitudes sometimes. But it's funny the ones who like to point the finger in this regard are the ones who themselves engage in it. At least I admit it.


You must be using a different dictionary. I would bet you're using a catholic dictionary or something? If this is what you did, then you are really only pointing out the intent thing, which has been resolved.

Here for example is meekness using dictionary.com:
meek: Easily imposed on; submissive
You shouldn't always be easily imposed on or submissive even by Christian standards.

Some using your definitions even show my point:
diligant: Earnest and persistent application to an undertaking; steady effort; assiduity.
You shouldn't be earnest etc when undertaking sin..

Chasity isn't good if you're married, if you use the virginal definition espoused by seclar dictionaries and people's etc.

I only see you causing artificial confusion using words not in dictionary.com I don't think I am wrong to use common usage of of the words or a dictionary usage. Maybe this is where you could show me my error? But I don't know what's to show; again, if your point is to use a catholic dictionary etc, that's fine, but we've resolved the intent thing. I am not sure what the point of going further with this thread is.

Edited November 23, 2005 by dairygirl4u2c

[Guest T-Bone]

[quote]Chasity isn't good if you're married, if you use the virginal definition espoused by seclar dictionaries and people's etc.[/quote]

I hope and pray that you're confusing chasity with celebacy...

[Guest T-Bone]

[quote]I only see you causing artificial confusion using words not in dictionary.com I don't think I am wrong to use common usage of of the words or a dictionary usage. Maybe this is where you could show me my error? But I don't know what's to show; again, if your point is to use a catholic dictionary etc, that's fine, but we've resolved the intent thing. I am not sure what the point of going further with this thread is.[/quote]

You are wrong to use common usage of words in interpeting things that were written long ago.

You are wrong in using common usage of words if that usage is wrong. Case in point:

Romeo and Juliet:

"Wherefor aret thou, Romeo?"

Does NOT mean "Where are you, Romeo," but "WHY are you Romeo?" Despite the common misinterpetation of wherefore that is common.

As a side note: What died and made dictionary.com the grand master of the English language?

[zunshynn]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Nov 23 2005, 10:52 AM']You must be using a different dictionary. I would bet you're using a catholic dictionary or something? If this is what you did, then you are really only pointing out the intent thing, which has been resolved.
[right][snapback]798812[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

last time I checked, Catholics weren't running dictionary.com

You still haven't explained how kindness, self-control and humility could be sins, or in what situation lust and greed could be virtues.

[quote]I am not sure what the point of going further with this thread is.[/quote]

In that case, was there a point in starting it?

[Cam42]

Nope, used dictionary.com.

Sorry. Try it....

Example......[url="http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=brotherly%20love"]Brotherly love[/url]

They are all there.....and the Traditional Catholic definitons were from a Catholic dictionary, but I suppose they should be.

Don't call me disingenious.....I have nothing to lose.....only you.....

Time to put up or shut up. Defend your position.....

What say you, dairy?

[Socrates]

This is one of the most pointless threads I have seen.
Some ambiguities caused by changing and imprecise uses of the English language are no reason to denounce the traditional concept of virtues and vices as "hooey."

I also think most people who care about this have a pretty good idea of what is being condemned as the Seven Deadly Sins, and anyone who takes this seriously, can take the time to look up what their meanings are.

The idea of the Seven Deadly Sins, and their proper definitions has a much longer and venerable history than dictionary.com.

Your silly game of pulling out dictionary defintions and playing semantics does nothing to discredit Catholic morality. That is a lot of hooey.

[Cam42]

pride:
[quote name='dictionary.com'] An excessively high opinion of oneself; conceit[/quote]
[quote name='Traditional Catholic definition']Pride is inordinate esteem of oneself[/quote]

avarice:
[quote name='dictionary.com']Immoderate desire for wealth; cupidity.[/quote]
[quote name='Traditional Catholic definition']Greed, the inordinate love of earthly things[/quote]

envy:
[quote name='dictionary.com']A feeling of discontent and resentment aroused by and in conjunction with desire for the possessions or qualities of another.[/quote]
[quote name='Traditional Catholic definition']Sadness in response to another’s success.[/quote]

wrath:
[quote name='dictionary.com']Forceful, often vindictive anger.[/quote]
[quote name='Traditional Catholic definition']Anger, is emotional violence[/quote]

continued......(for the same reason)