|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Oct 8, 2021 14:27:40 GMT
It's true that most sexual abuse by priests seems to be of boys, not girls or men or women. postpubescent boys or teenagers which sounds a lot more like homosexual rape. A lot of the investigations seems to stop looking into the rape once over the legal age for some reason! In my book, it's all just as bad! just getting the terminology right. All should be shoot! I disagree that they should be shot. Why does forgiveness and the principle "hate the sin, love the sinner" not seem to apply to child molesters? They're people, too. I agree they should be punished and kept away from children, but I don't really understand why they are considered beyond the pale of all compassion or understanding. |
|
|
|
Post by Seán Ó Murchú on Oct 8, 2021 14:31:48 GMT
postpubescent boys or teenagers which sounds a lot more like homosexual rape. A lot of the investigations seems to stop looking into the rape once over the legal age for some reason! In my book, it's all just as bad! just getting the terminology right. All should be shoot! I disagree that they should be shot. Why does forgiveness and the principle "hate the sin, love the sinner" not seem to apply to child molesters? They're people, too. I agree they should be punished and kept away from children, but I don't really understand why they are considered beyond the pale of all compassion or understanding. They should be shot because of justice to the victims and send a message to the world that the church does not accept this action. They should be given every opportunity to repent and confess. This was common in the papal states. |
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Oct 8, 2021 15:04:33 GMT
I disagree that they should be shot. Why does forgiveness and the principle "hate the sin, love the sinner" not seem to apply to child molesters? They're people, too. I agree they should be punished and kept away from children, but I don't really understand why they are considered beyond the pale of all compassion or understanding. They should be shot because of justice to the victims and send a message to the world that the church does not accept this action. They should be given every opportunity to repent and confess. This was common in the papal states. I suppose pointing out that the Catechism of the Catholic Church tells us capital punishment is inadmissible won't change your mind. |
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Oct 8, 2021 16:53:02 GMT
They should be shot because of justice to the victims and send a message to the world that the church does not accept this action. They should be given every opportunity to repent and confess. This was common in the papal states. I suppose pointing out that the Catechism of the Catholic Church tells us capital punishment is inadmissible won't change your mind. Truth doesn't change Mal, that teaching is not congruent with tradition and should be a word of warning to modern catechisms. Interest how you square that peg. |
|
|
|
Post by cato on Oct 8, 2021 17:54:03 GMT
I suppose pointing out that the Catechism of the Catholic Church tells us capital punishment is inadmissible won't change your mind.
[/quote]
Truth doesn't change Mal, that teaching is not congruent with tradition and should be a word of warning to modern catechisms.
Interest how you square that peg.[/quote]
I am sympathetic to your views on capital punishment Stephen but do you accept the notion of the development of doctrine , which is also a perfectly orthodox understanding of how doctrine can be understood more deeply over time?
|
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Oct 8, 2021 18:15:32 GMT
I suppose pointing out that the Catechism of the Catholic Church tells us capital punishment is inadmissible won't change your mind. Truth doesn't change Mal, that teaching is not congruent with tradition and should be a word of warning to modern catechisms. Interest how you square that peg.[/quote][brI am sympathetic to your views on capital punishment Stephen but do you accept the notion of the development of doctrine , which is also a perfectly orthodox understanding of how doctrine can be understood more deeply over time?[/quote] That fits with Pope john Paul 2s view, not Pope Francis. |
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Oct 8, 2021 18:20:10 GMT
I suppose pointing out that the Catechism of the Catholic Church tells us capital punishment is inadmissible won't change your mind. Truth doesn't change Mal, that teaching is not congruent with tradition and should be a word of warning to modern catechisms. Interest how you square that peg. [brI am sympathetic to your views on capital punishment Stephen but do you accept the notion of the development of doctrine , which is also a perfectly orthodox understanding of how doctrine can be understood more deeply over time?[/quote] That fits maybe with Pope john Paul 2s view, not Pope Francis. I will rely on scripture, saint and the traditions of the Church. [/quote] |
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Oct 8, 2021 20:49:28 GMT
Truth doesn't change Mal, that teaching is not congruent with tradition and should be a word of warning to modern catechisms. Interest how you square that peg. [brI am sympathetic to your views on capital punishment Stephen but do you accept the notion of the development of doctrine , which is also a perfectly orthodox understanding of how doctrine can be understood more deeply over time? That fits maybe with Pope john Paul 2s view, not Pope Francis. I will rely on scripture, saint and the traditions of the Church. [/quote] [/quote] Who needs a Pope, then? |
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Oct 9, 2021 14:03:01 GMT
[brI am sympathetic to your views on capital punishment Stephen but do you accept the notion of the development of doctrine , which is also a perfectly orthodox understanding of how doctrine can be understood more deeply over time? That fits maybe with Pope john Paul 2s view, not Pope Francis. I will rely on scripture, saint and the traditions of the Church. [/quote] Who needs a Pope, then? [/quote] The World needs the Pope as a Ship needs it Captain. In the case of the death penalty it is very clear the current Holy Father is alone on this issue. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_capital_punishmentYou forget I am being faithful to more than 260 popes since St. Peter that taught this and are still with us in Heaven (Hope they are). Mal can a Pope be wrong? |
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Oct 9, 2021 16:51:25 GMT
That fits maybe with Pope john Paul 2s view, not Pope Francis. I will rely on scripture, saint and the traditions of the Church. Who needs a Pope, then? [/quote] The World needs the Pope as a Ship needs it Captain. In the case of the death penalty it is very clear the current Holy Father is alone on this issue. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_capital_punishmentYou forget I am being faithful to more than 260 popes since St. Peter that taught this and are still with us in Heaven (Hope they are). Mal can a Pope be wrong? [/quote] Yes, he can, but not when he enters something into the Catechism. |
|
|
|
Post by Maolsheachlann on Oct 9, 2021 17:11:43 GMT
That fits maybe with Pope john Paul 2s view, not Pope Francis. I will rely on scripture, saint and the traditions of the Church. Who needs a Pope, then? [/quote] The World needs the Pope as a Ship needs it Captain. In the case of the death penalty it is very clear the current Holy Father is alone on this issue. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_capital_punishmentYou forget I am being faithful to more than 260 popes since St. Peter that taught this and are still with us in Heaven (Hope they are). Mal can a Pope be wrong? [/quote] I presume you believe in slavery because St. Paul told slaves to obey their masters? |
|
|
|
Post by cato on Oct 9, 2021 18:43:12 GMT
The previous few comments between Maolsheachlann and Stephen do highlight the problem Catholics face under the present pontificate if you find it hard to reconcile the new teachings on a variety of topics with traditional teaching.
If we effectively ignore him and stick to previous teaching who decides and where is the cut off date? We are then our own magisterium practically speaking and de facto Sede Vacantinists There is unfortunately no provision in the constitution of the Church to reprove or remove a pope who may be teaching error.
If we simply accept all the various nutty things said on planes and said to atheist Communist buddies in "private" interviews and misguided papal policies on a variety of issues then we are simply pope worshippers. This papacy has been unique in many ways and not in a good way on an array of topics unfortunately.
I hope nobody important in the Vatican reads this lest we get branded as agents of the devil, remarks recently levelled against a certain EWTN panel!
|
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Oct 11, 2021 12:35:27 GMT
The World needs the Pope as a Ship needs it Captain.
In the case of the death penalty it is very clear the current Holy Father is alone on this issue.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_capital_punishment
You forget I am being faithful to more than 260 popes since St. Peter that taught this and are still with us in Heaven (Hope they are).
Mal can a Pope be wrong? _______ I presume you believe in slavery because St. Paul told slaves to obey their masters? _______ Mal can a Pope be wrong?
Interest if you react to the last 2000 years of teaching vs Pope Francis?
On the slavery question:
Everyone is a slave to something.
The slavery topic is interesting one and worth discussing. Maybe on another discussion
|
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Oct 11, 2021 12:38:04 GMT
The previous few comments between Maolsheachlann and Stephen do highlight the problem Catholics face under the present pontificate if you find it hard to reconcile the new teachings on a variety of topics with traditional teaching. If we effectively ignore him and stick to previous teaching who decides and where is the cut off date? We are then our own magisterium practically speaking and de facto Sede Vacantinists There is unfortunately no provision in the constitution of the Church to reprove or remove a pope who may be teaching error. If we simply accept all the various nutty things said on planes and said to atheist Communist buddies in "private" interviews and misguided papal policies on a variety of issues then we are simply pope worshippers. This papacy has been unique in many ways and not in a good way on an array of topics unfortunately. I hope nobody important in the Vatican reads this lest we get branded as agents of the devil, remarks recently levelled against a certain EWTN panel! I agree with you statement in general and it puts the faithful in a very difficult position. Is the SSPX Sede Vacantinists under your definition above? |
|
|
|
Post by cato on Oct 11, 2021 13:10:29 GMT
I have on occasion attended SSPX masses in Dublin and Paris. They maintain a rather nuanced position regarding the pope. They have portraits of the reigning pope on public display and include him in the Canon of the mass. The society also backs any traditional thing the Vatican says or devotional exercise it may promote.
In practical terms they ignore much of what comes out of Rome for obvious reasons. My term practical Sede Vacantinist is meant to cover that . Its hard defending an institution you ignore for most of the time. But then the institution shouldn't be undermining much of traditional belief either. That's a terrible dilemma for traditional catholics.
I think the Society manages to keep a delicate balance that many ordinary traditionalists don't in their interactions on line. I am not referring to anyone here by the way. They are a body of clergy who realise the risks of formally denouncing a pope as illegitimate or heretical.
|
|
