tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post3874247407006537901..comments2024-03-29T00:16:25.097-07:00Comments on The Eponymous Flower: Vox Populi Vox Dei: Pope Attacked by Hoard of Angry Italians in Twitter RampageTancredhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16015531337154301560noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-412171393863429672019-07-17T23:50:59.648-07:002019-07-17T23:50:59.648-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.PWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-33813113410521375042019-07-17T22:26:09.373-07:002019-07-17T22:26:09.373-07:00The imaginary Christian setting a high bar for the...The imaginary Christian setting a high bar for the people who believe what he stopped believing in long ago.Tancredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16015531337154301560noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-45476724923114272972019-07-17T21:43:40.508-07:002019-07-17T21:43:40.508-07:00You might impress the reader if you attempted to r...You might impress the reader if you attempted to respond to what I have been saying. Instead, you trot out the same old lazy Mundabor one line tinny throw aways that do nothing more than to keep you boxed into a reputation for slutty insults and an unfortunate mono-dimensional brand of Catholicism. <br /><br />You need to do better.Peter Watsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-27516846851353593922019-07-17T20:46:52.868-07:002019-07-17T20:46:52.868-07:00Your MO isn’t Christian. It might be an attempt at...Your MO isn’t Christian. It might be an attempt at worldweary, supercilious sodomite from<br />Late Antiquity, a bad imitation of Constantine Cavafy.Tancredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16015531337154301560noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-90736003128468214692019-07-17T15:49:22.234-07:002019-07-17T15:49:22.234-07:00And Tancred, what I have set out clearly, in their...And Tancred, what I have set out clearly, in their own words, is the teaching on the freedom of conscience articulated by St Paul, Thomas Aquinas, the solemn Magisterium of the Catholic Church to say nothing of the clear teaching of the darling of the conservatives, Joseph Ratzinger, Benedict XVI. <br /><br />If you have anything more persuasive to offer, then please spell it out so all may be edified and enriched.PWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-91521886085371824792019-07-17T08:43:48.751-07:002019-07-17T08:43:48.751-07:00Does Gaybreielle think he’s a legitimate Christian...Does Gaybreielle think he’s a legitimate Christian? His witness here doesn’t strike me as such.Tancredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16015531337154301560noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-60557536681473640062019-07-17T07:25:16.492-07:002019-07-17T07:25:16.492-07:00Peter Watson. Freedom of conscience does have its...Peter Watson. Freedom of conscience does have its place especially when the issue is challenging perceived heresy. We should all be grateful for what he did. Surely it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Imagine what things would be like if he hadn't done what he did.Michael Dowdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16650782589323136700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-12860922686234719752019-07-17T00:45:34.203-07:002019-07-17T00:45:34.203-07:00The founder of breakaway SSPX, Archbishop Lefebrve...The founder of breakaway SSPX, Archbishop Lefebrve explicitly appealed to freedom of conscience when he refused to assent to the authority of the Holy See in regard to the ordination of bishops and to the Magisterium of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council.<br />Now there's a classic case of a cafeteria, cherry picking Catholic if ever there was one. But Lefebvre was in the right while the rest of the Church was in error wasn't he? That's how the SSPX narrative rolls out.<br /><br />I've told you that before, but clearly you don't care.Peter Watsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-54126317443772647092019-07-16T17:37:03.656-07:002019-07-16T17:37:03.656-07:00I’ve pointed that out to him before. Doesn’t care....I’ve pointed that out to him before. Doesn’t care.Tancredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16015531337154301560noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-12904170116037693572019-07-16T13:36:56.973-07:002019-07-16T13:36:56.973-07:00The Church taught before 1960 that a conscience mu...The Church taught before 1960 that a conscience must be well formed before it is a valid moral compass. That formation comes from learning the teachings of the magisterium which were immutably codified by the Council of Trent. Vatican II was a pastoral council and by its own pronouncements added nothing to the faith. Let those who disagree be anathema. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-85581863765372892092019-07-14T07:29:43.859-07:002019-07-14T07:29:43.859-07:00"A free conscience is free only if the option..."A free conscience is free only if the options are properly presented the person, and that person finds the Truth. Otherwise, he never had a free conscience to begin with."<br /><br />Agree. As a practical matter I think we should obey Church law on all occasions and make it a matter of confession when we don't. Let God decide our real culpability. We are too subjective to decide this ourselves. Michael Dowdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16650782589323136700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-28365596207084660122019-07-14T06:28:22.400-07:002019-07-14T06:28:22.400-07:00St. Thomas Aquinas is one of many voices in the Ma...St. Thomas Aquinas is one of many voices in the Magisterium. You are using some if his arguements to justify any opinion as a free choice. Opinions are manipulated. Any peson who seeks Gos will find Him. The Church has taught that God grants every one the Graces to find Him if he sincerely seeks Him out. There is no excuse . A free conscience is free only if the options are properly presented the person, and that person finds the Truth. Otherwise, he never had a free conscience to begin with.Constantinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15957650751915614843noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-2296049494373583362019-07-14T01:04:31.444-07:002019-07-14T01:04:31.444-07:00Peter Watson.
IMO any form of artificial birth ...Peter Watson. <br /><br />IMO any form of artificial birth control is wrong simply because there is a natural form of family planning available to all married folks, i.e., abstinence. In other words, being a Christian demands self denial. Controlling our sexual desire is one of the first places abstinence should be used. We do not get to heaven by having our cake and eating it too. We must control our eating, drinking, smoking, sex, etc. If we can not control our appetites we must practice total abstinence in matters such drinking, smoking and sex for unmarried people. I do not think there should be any question about this. It would have been simpler for everyone if Pope Paul VI had simply said the above words instead of Humane Vitae.Michael Dowdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16650782589323136700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-70025599363429300122019-07-13T22:47:47.268-07:002019-07-13T22:47:47.268-07:00Constantine,
The teaching of St Thomas Aquinas ha...Constantine,<br /><br />The teaching of St Thomas Aquinas has been adopted by the Church as its own standard doctrine on the primacy and freedom of conscience and Aquinas directly follows what St Paul wrote about conscience in 1 Corinthians and Philemon (that's divine revelation). Joseph Ratzinger summed it all up in the passage I cite above. <br /><br />And who is arguing about 'rights?' The issue being discussed here is freedom of conscience which is integral to what it means to be an adult human being.Peter Wnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-89248456460861740192019-07-13T22:04:46.286-07:002019-07-13T22:04:46.286-07:00"Peter Watson" I see that you like revis..."Peter Watson" I see that you like revisionist history of your own brand. Vatican II does not represent the Church, including "Humanae Vitae". You are correct in saying that the "rhythm method" is contraception and a contraceptive mentality. However, Humanae Vitae distorts this, as did the traitorous Popes and clergy under Paul 6, Jp2 , Frankie 1, and Benedict 16. They, as most post V2 laiety, believe in rights--"human rights" which I condemn, as I know God does not grant people any "rights" including a "right to life". Because human rights are negotiated legal and social compromises legislated to determine which aspects of God's given HUMAN DIGNITY will be honored as practical. Human Dignity is not a compromise which people in any kind of decision making can discuss. Why? Because we don't have a right to freedom of expression of opinion in public (in private too, but we can't know what one thinks in private, unless he tells us). No one has a right to offend God. We can only defend God's honor and name but God will punish the rest in His own time. Man has a "right" to act on what is good, not to act toward evil. And every Human being as this one sole right: to know, love and seek God in truth, so he can fulfill his destiny to be with God forever in eternity.But this "Right" is ultimately not a human right, but God's Right to save every human soul for Himself. In discussing St. Thomas Aquinas, it does not impress me. He does not stand out as<br />one who represents the whole Magisterium. He is but one voice among many. So quoting a comment made by St Thomas Aquinas does not settle an argument. We see the actions, and words of the Church and Christ in scripture whipping the money changers, and scolding the Pharises, telling us that "one who does not eat my body and drink my blood has no life in him. We. See that Christ gave authority to political leaders to be obeyed, as stated by Christ to Pilate. And it was clear to Pilate as well as to us that the correct moral choice for Pilate and the Israelite would have been to release Christ.No hiding behind "free conscience" clauses.Constantinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15957650751915614843noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-20981084938048839222019-07-13T17:24:08.159-07:002019-07-13T17:24:08.159-07:00Michael Dowd, one of the most effective methods of...Michael Dowd, one of the most effective methods of controlling the thinking, instincts/Baptised intuitions and behaviour of the Catholic laity was the use of guilt. The Irish hierarch became adept at this especially by targeting married women. The insisted that they and their husband have as many children 'as God gave them' without regard to other factors like health, finances, social means to support large families etc. <br /><br />The Church authorities have in modern times been guilty of moral relativism by banning artificial means of contraception but, by and large, not the Rhythm method that you Michael and your wife were warned off. <br /><br />There is no divine or natural law for limiting the size of families either by 'natural' (no figures mentioned for failures!) or artificial.<br /><br />Cardinal Ottaviani, the promotor of the minority report written by two ethics professors, counselled Pope Paul VI that if he endorsed the majority report that argued against the ban on contraception, the credibility of the Papacy would be destroyed. Ironically, it was almost terminally damaged by Paul VI's acceptance of Ottaviani's advice. No wonder Paul never wrote another Encyclical. He knew he had made one of the biggest mistakes in Church history.Peter Watsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-261137932860832692019-07-13T16:31:25.503-07:002019-07-13T16:31:25.503-07:00Constantine, the authors of Casti Conubii and Huma...Constantine, the authors of Casti Conubii and Humanae Vitae claimed that the moral prohibition on articifical contraception is based not only what they argued was divine law and Natural Law, written into the human heart and accessible to human reason. On both counts, the counter arguments were/are that there is no demonstrable and credible evidence that contraception is grounded in either law. In fact, when it became clear that the overwhelming number of Catholic couples throughout the world emphatically rejected any divine or natural binding claim on their consciences in this matter, the Magisterium back tracked on its teaching about Natural Law. It clearly retreated from its former teaching that it could be accessed by reason alone and insisted that the ultimate interpreter of the Natural Law is the Pope. So now the Natural Law and its applications are come under the papal magisterium.<br /><br />As for ‘Natural Family Planning’ sometimes called the Rhythm Method, also the “Billings” method, the Magisterium has not maintained moral consistency. These ‘natural’ methods are just as much contraceptive as the Pill/condoms etc because the moral intention is not to conceive. Ironically, the more shrill supporters of the “natural’ methods of contraception accuse their opponents of having a ‘contraceptive mentality’ while that is precisely the mentality of those who employ the so-call non artificial means.<br /><br />Furthermore, if you look at the history of the Church’s teaching on the Natural Law, you will find that it has been used as a pragmatic ideological tool of the ruling powers to justify the slavery (as recently as Pius IX), preemptive war, torture, the suppression of the human rights of millions of people etc, etc.<br /><br />Constantine, I am willing to continue the conversation if you wish.<br />Peter Watsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-27870576440634239962019-07-13T14:53:25.981-07:002019-07-13T14:53:25.981-07:00Thanks Peter Watson. Are you a Catholic theologia...Thanks Peter Watson. Are you a Catholic theologian? What you are saying is new to me. <br /><br />Contraception is a mortal sin according to Church teaching. What you are saying is if we do not believe contraception to be a mortal sin it isn't for us. If an individual conscience trumps the Church's moral teaching how does the Church have any authority over our moral decisions? It seems to me you are saying the Church does not have authority of our individual moral decisions. I thought we have an obligation to know Church law and follow regardless of what our conscience says. Another point is how can we make objective decisions about our conscience?<br /><br />My wife and I had 11 kids and were under the impression that no form of contraception could be used including the rhythm method. If extreme hardship could be proved then the rhythm could be used which didn't apply in our case. We were never informed that conscience could abrogate these moral laws of the Church. Personally, I thought the Church's teaching on contraception was overly severe and contradictory given that the rhythm was allowed. We were told Church law trumps conscience. Wonder why we were told this?<br /><br />Michael Dowdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16650782589323136700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-35050428446122191122019-07-13T14:16:19.825-07:002019-07-13T14:16:19.825-07:00Michael Dowd,
St Thomas Aquinas is unambiguous abo...Michael Dowd,<br />St Thomas Aquinas is unambiguous about the binding force of conscience:<br /><br /> "Every judgment of conscience is obligatory, be it right or wrong, be it about things evil in themselves or morally indifferent, in such wise that he who acts against his conscience always does moral evil." [III Quodlibet, 27]. His discussion on whether one is bound to do what an erring conscience calls for in the Summa Theologica I-II, q 19, art 5 is rather involved, but, finally, the answer is in the affirmative: every conscience binds, even one which is objectively erring.<br /><br />As for contraception, 98% of Catholic couples have rejected the teachings of Casti Conubii and Humanae Vitae as authentic Catholic doctrine on the grounds that the reasoning supporting it is fundamentally flawed in its claims to be intrinsic to natural law and sound moral principles. The Magisterium found itself caught in a hypocritic bind when it failed to condemn the so called rhythm method as it involves the intention to avoid conception. I am happy to continue discussing this matter if you wish.Peter Watsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-12633044089146728692019-07-13T05:15:00.906-07:002019-07-13T05:15:00.906-07:00I agree with Constantine. Conscience is problemat...I agree with Constantine. Conscience is problematic. It should be rare to make a decision opposed to the law. For example, Catholics practicing contraception cannot use conscience as an excuse as it is clearly prohibited. But that is what they do and are no doubt supported by many in the clergy. Michael Dowdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16650782589323136700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-42499816291951695802019-07-13T03:54:21.960-07:002019-07-13T03:54:21.960-07:00Restricting someone from expressing a falsity or e...Restricting someone from expressing a falsity or error damaging to others has always been practiced and taught by the Church. What one does believe in their conscience, can never be proven to be genuine expression of conscience or evil. Moreoverwhile someone subjectively acts on what they think is their conscience it does not bar others from acting on suppressing evil. Again, you take everything out of context, not just within St. Thomas Aquinas' reasoning, but with the whole body of history of the Church. If actions (not conscience or a person's sick perception of what he thinks his conscience is telling him) are not suppressable, then we could not even try to pressure someone from following a cult like Jim Jones, or prevent "Son of Sam" from acting on his perceptions. Just as a father has a paternal obligation to prevent madness and mad actions to be done by a son, out of love for what is objectively true and good for the son and the entire family, restriction or suppression of actions and expressions that are spiritually, emotionally, psychologically and physically damaging, in spite of someone's madness or hallucinations, a spiritual father who us leader of a country, or state, or province or parish that spiritual father has also that much of a duty ( of conscience) to prevent evil in his family.Constantinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15957650751915614843noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-65518813725741212019-07-12T23:09:19.981-07:002019-07-12T23:09:19.981-07:00Constantine, this is objectivity right from the Ch...Constantine, this is objectivity right from the Church's Tradition:<br /><br />The Church's standard theology of the primacy and freedom of conscience is as old as the writings of St Paul and later confirmed by St Thomas Aquinas and in turn validated by Joseph Ratzinger.<br /><br />What Paul says to Philemon: ‘act feely out of your goodness and not by compulsion” (Philemon 14) and earlier on to the Corinthians provided Thomas Aquinas with the biblical foundations for his teaching on conscience. In his commentary on 2 Corinthians 3:17-18 Aquinas wrote:<br /><br />"Whoever acts of his own accord acts freely, but one who is impelled by another is not free. He who avoids evil, not because it is evil, but because a precept of the Lord forbids it, is not free. On the other hand, he who avoids evil because it is evil is free."<br /><br />Aquinas elaborated: "Every judgment of conscience is obligatory, be it right or wrong, be it about things evil in themselves or morally indifferent, in such wise that he who acts against his conscience always does moral evil." [III Quodlibet, 27]. His discussion on whether one is bound to do what an erring conscience calls for in the Summa Theologica I-II, q 19, art 5 is rather involved, but, finally, the answer is in the affirmative: every conscience binds, even one which is objectively erring.<br /><br />Fr Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) was a theological expert or peritus in 1967 during the Second Vatican Council. In his Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II (his Council Diaries) Ratzinger wrote a section on Conscience following the debate on Religious Freedom. It reflects the moral position of Thomas Aquinas and the standard doctrine of the Catholic Church:<br /><br />"Over the pope as expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority, there stands one's own conscience which must be obeyed before all else, even if necessary against the requirements of ecclesiastic authority. This emphasis on the individual, whose conscience confronts him with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, and one which is the last resort, is beyond the claims of external social groups, even the official church, and also establishes a principle in opposition to totalitarianism."<br /><br />Paul's attitude towards compliance with law and blind obedience to it is important to understand as it provided an important theological foundation for Aquinas' teaching on the development of virtue. A habit is transformed into a virtue only when there is a free acceptance of the intrinsic value of that which is commanded.<br /><br />Truth can be a great disappointment, can't it Constantine? And your censor can’t handle anything countering his ideology.<br />Peter Watsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-31482935342728996462019-07-12T21:43:17.992-07:002019-07-12T21:43:17.992-07:00@"Peter Watson". You quote St.Thomas out...@"Peter Watson". You quote St.Thomas out of context from the whole body of Teaching of the Church. One does not have a Right to Conscience for things intrinsically evil. One can have a differing opinion about the "right to bear arms" or on prudential judgements on immigration. One does not have a right to embrace intrincally evil thoughts words or deeds. The "Law which is written in the hearts of all men" as St Paul says. One cannot make judgement calls in matters one would be expected to know better. One cannot say, for example, a man is a woman, or a woman is a man, or a dolphin has the same human dignity as a human being, or that a man can be rational and still claim suicide is his right. As St.Thomas Aquinas also said that the Truth is objective, not subjective. Only a well-informed conscience has a right to certain expression. And if it were a well-informed conscience we believe that God grants every person sufficient Grace to find the Truth..<br />absolute Truth in the Catholic Church.Constantinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15957650751915614843noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-41365694563903047062019-07-12T15:24:32.146-07:002019-07-12T15:24:32.146-07:00Vatican II declared in Dignitatis Humanae that err...Vatican II declared in Dignitatis Humanae that error has a public right to not only free conscience, but public respect; that no government or group has a right to put pressure even on people with erroneous consciences publically expressed.. This is where the evil all started--Dignitatis Humanae. Once an erroneous conscience is recognized as publically respectable, then you cannot criticize abortionists, feminists, homosexualist activists, altar girls, women deacons, women priests, Amazonian Tarzan priests etc.<br /> Everything is not only merely tolerated, but even required to be respected publically. Constantinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15957650751915614843noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4404498638452030181.post-53778692224628979292019-07-12T14:49:05.188-07:002019-07-12T14:49:05.188-07:00"Anonymous Anonymous said...
Europeans have a..."Anonymous Anonymous said...<br />Europeans have a right to borders religion language and culture.<br />-Andrew"<br /><br />Tell that to loser man Pope Francis, who doesn't believe or buy that argument for a second. He wants swarms of Muslims to invade Europe....and migrants. All the better to him if the migrants are Muslims.<br /><br />Not to be defamatory about them, but I never knew there were so many ways to spell what they are.....Muslims, Moslems, Mooslems(yes, I actually saw that spelling in an article), Islamisti, and Musselmani. Take your pick :)<br /><br />Damian Malliapalli<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com