Christian Discussion Thread XI: Anicetus’ Revenge

[Salus Maior]

While I'm not a sedevacantist, nor an advocate for it, I'd suggest simply for the sake of thread hospitality that we not go out of our way to pick fights with new posters. If the subject turns that way that's one thing, but to do preemptive strikes is another.

[Salus Maior]

As an aside, I've been reading up on St. Gregory of Nyssa as part of a Christian abolitionism essay I'm writing and his criticism of slave owning is pretty rad.

“For what price, tell me? What did you find in existence worth as much as this human nature? What price did you put on rationality? How many obols did you reckon the equivalent the likeness of God? How many staters did you get for selling the being shaped by God?”

[Luminesa]

While I'm not a sedevacantist, nor an advocate for it, I'd suggest simply for the sake of thread hospitality that we not go out of our way to pick fights with new posters. If the subject turns that way that's one thing, but to do preemptive strikes is another.

Agreed. I was trying to specifically talk to the person, I was more simply surprised to see a Sede. It’s like seeing an Orthodox Irishman. They exist, but not in large numbers. I’m not looking for a fight, just was curious.

[Auze]

While I'm not a sedevacantist, nor an advocate for it, I'd suggest simply for the sake of thread hospitality that we not go out of our way to pick fights with new posters. If the subject turns that way that's one thing, but to do preemptive strikes is another.

Agreed. I was trying to specifically talk to the person, I was more simply surprised to see a Sede. It’s like seeing an Orthodox Irishman. They exist, but not in large numbers. I’m not looking for a fight, just was curious.

I misread Sede as Swede for most of the last page and was very confused, though not surprised, considering how religious the population of Sweden is.

[The Blaatschapen]

https://www.rte.ie/amp/1139233/

I like how rituals adapt to the current situation

[The New California Republic]

https://www.rte.ie/amp/1139233/

I like how rituals adapt to the current situation

Now it just needs an entire gang in the car to roll down their windows and drive-by him with super soakers...

[Luminesa]

https://www.rte.ie/amp/1139233/

I like how rituals adapt to the current situation

It’s funny cause my pastor has suggested using squirt guns for blessings before, but now it actually turns out this was the healthiest way to give a blessing in a pandemic.

[New Visayan Islands]

https://www.rte.ie/amp/1139233/

I like how rituals adapt to the current situation

It’s funny cause my pastor has suggested using squirt guns for blessings before, but now it actually turns out this was the healthiest way to give a blessing in a pandemic.

I've heard jokes suggesting that priests use fire hoses instead, but I don't know if that would be overkill.

[Dylar]

It’s funny cause my pastor has suggested using squirt guns for blessings before, but now it actually turns out this was the healthiest way to give a blessing in a pandemic.

I've heard jokes suggesting that priests use fire hoses instead, but I don't know if that would be overkill.

Definitely fun for the priest. The priest I had 3 years ago would flick the aspergillum so hard that half of your face would be soaked in holy water if you were unlucky enough to sit at the end of the pew

[Lower Nubia]

It’s funny cause my pastor has suggested using squirt guns for blessings before, but now it actually turns out this was the healthiest way to give a blessing in a pandemic.

I've heard jokes suggesting that priests use fire hoses instead, but I don't know if that would be overkill.

That would quench the Holy Spirit.

[Joohan]

I've heard jokes suggesting that priests use fire hoses instead, but I don't know if that would be overkill.

Definitely fun for the priest. The priest I had 3 years ago would flick the aspergillum so hard that half of your face would be soaked in holy water if you were unlucky enough to sit at the end of the pew

I just wanna sea the priest chucking water balloons into the crowd.

[Tarsonis]

Definitely fun for the priest. The priest I had 3 years ago would flick the aspergillum so hard that half of your face would be soaked in holy water if you were unlucky enough to sit at the end of the pew

I just wanna sea the priest chucking water balloons into the crowd.

A reading from the book of armaments.

[Luminesa]

It’s funny cause my pastor has suggested using squirt guns for blessings before, but now it actually turns out this was the healthiest way to give a blessing in a pandemic.

I've heard jokes suggesting that priests use fire hoses instead, but I don't know if that would be overkill.

Just get the big ol’ squirt guns like the ones you play with in a pool.

[Jedi Council]

I've heard jokes suggesting that priests use fire hoses instead, but I don't know if that would be overkill.

Just get the big ol’ squirt guns like the ones you play with in a pool.

Ask and you shall receive

[Andechs-Sisebut]

Yes, the Pope is wrong. He is a human being, he can be wrong, and this one often is. John XXII was wrong about the Beatific Vision; if Francis condemns the death penalty as inherently evil, he is wrong and contradicts every Pope before him. This isn’t an infallible pronouncement, so I don’t know where you’re getting that?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is an exercise of the Ordinary Magisterium, he is not wrong and as a lay Catholic you must be obedient to it - it IS infallible. Church teaching on this issue hasn't changed but it has evolved. In the modern world, there is no place for the death penalty because we have advanced beyond the need for it. It was recognized as necessary for preserving the common good before developments made overtime. And the notion that the death penalty was always affirmed by every pope is wrong. The Church Fathers were split on the issue, some rejected it outright and some enthusiastically supported it. Clement of Rome seemed to imply that a legitimate moral authority could carry it out, but Athenagoras of Athens and Justin Martyr rejected it. The most popular opinion seemed to be that it was morally permissible for a legitimate authority to carry out the death penalty, but righteous for them not to.

Catholic teaching doesn’t evolve, it develops, and it doesn’t develop in contradiction to its perennial teachings. To argue that ‘it is inherently evil’ is to call evil that which was endorsed by the Church; and the death penalty HAS been endorsed by the Church, the Papal States even had its own executioner. St. Robert Bellarmine wrote in favour of the Death Penalty, St. Thomas Aquinas spoke in its favour, so did St. Innocent of Rome, Pope Innocent III, St. Augustine, Ven. Pius XII, and the Council of Trent. More recently, Pope St. JPII and Pope Benedict XVI acknowledged this as the traditional and orthodox teaching, but have stipulated their own prudential judgement. It has been a part of every justice system in Christian Europe until very recently. No Pope, to my knowledge, ever condemned it. You say,

In the modern world, there is no place for the death penalty because we have advanced beyond the need for it.

This would be a prudential judgement, and I would accept that, but to suggest that it is evil, is false. Which brings me to what you say in the beginning,

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is an exercise of the Ordinary Magisterium, he is not wrong and as a lay Catholic you must be obedient to it - it IS infallible.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is an exercise of the Ordinary Magisterium, yes, but it is only infallible insofar as it communicates infallibly defined doctrines of the Church. Saying that ‘the death penalty is inherently evil’ is contradictory to most of the Church prior to Francis, and would not be infallible. As a layperson, I must assent to the authority of the Church and I do so, but I do not admit that ‘the death penalty is evil’ as true, because it isn’t. And as far as I can tell, the Pope hasn’t compelled the Church to believe his addition.

ÉDIT: I will likely not return under any profile after this point because I know this place to make me angry and malignant to put it harshly. However, I hope this generates fruitful discussion, or gives you a glimpse into what I say. Goodnight and Godbless!

[Luminesa]

Just get the big ol’ squirt guns like the ones you play with in a pool.

Ask and you shall receive

Yep! That’s one way to bless a crowd that big! O.o

[Luminesa]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is an exercise of the Ordinary Magisterium, he is not wrong and as a lay Catholic you must be obedient to it - it IS infallible. Church teaching on this issue hasn't changed but it has evolved. In the modern world, there is no place for the death penalty because we have advanced beyond the need for it. It was recognized as necessary for preserving the common good before developments made overtime. And the notion that the death penalty was always affirmed by every pope is wrong. The Church Fathers were split on the issue, some rejected it outright and some enthusiastically supported it. Clement of Rome seemed to imply that a legitimate moral authority could carry it out, but Athenagoras of Athens and Justin Martyr rejected it. The most popular opinion seemed to be that it was morally permissible for a legitimate authority to carry out the death penalty, but righteous for them not to.

Catholic teaching doesn’t evolve, it develops, and it doesn’t develop in contradiction to its perennial teachings. To argue that ‘it is inherently evil’ is to call evil that which was endorsed by the Church; and the death penalty HAS been endorsed by the Church, the Papal States even had its own executioner. St. Robert Bellarmine wrote in favour of the Death Penalty, St. Thomas Aquinas spoke in its favour, so did St. Innocent of Rome, Pope Innocent III, St. Augustine, Ven. Pius XII, and the Council of Trent. More recently, Pope St. JPII and Pope Benedict XVI acknowledged this as the traditional and orthodox teaching, but have stipulated their own prudential judgement. It has been a part of every justice system in Christian Europe until very recently. No Pope, to my knowledge, ever condemned it. You say,

In the modern world, there is no place for the death penalty because we have advanced beyond the need for it.

This would be a prudential judgement, and I would accept that, but to suggest that it is evil, is false. Which brings me to what you say in the beginning,

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is an exercise of the Ordinary Magisterium, he is not wrong and as a lay Catholic you must be obedient to it - it IS infallible.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is an exercise of the Ordinary Magisterium, yes, but it is only infallible insofar as it communicates infallibly defined doctrines of the Church. Saying that ‘the death penalty is inherently evil’ is contradictory to most of the Church prior to Francis, and would not be infallible. As a layperson, I must assent to the authority of the Church and I do so, but I do not admit that ‘the death penalty is evil’ as true, because it isn’t. And as far as I can tell, the Pope hasn’t compelled the Church to believe his addition.

ÉDIT: I will likely not return under any profile after this point because I know this place to make me angry and malignant to put it harshly. However, I hope this generates fruitful discussion, or gives you a glimpse into what I say. Goodnight and Godbless!

http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/ ... 996-12.cfm

John Paul II called for states to work for an end to the death penalty. A lot of saints have called for the death penalty to continue, sure, but they were not the Pope.

[Diopolis]

Catholic teaching doesn’t evolve, it develops, and it doesn’t develop in contradiction to its perennial teachings. To argue that ‘it is inherently evil’ is to call evil that which was endorsed by the Church; and the death penalty HAS been endorsed by the Church, the Papal States even had its own executioner. St. Robert Bellarmine wrote in favour of the Death Penalty, St. Thomas Aquinas spoke in its favour, so did St. Innocent of Rome, Pope Innocent III, St. Augustine, Ven. Pius XII, and the Council of Trent. More recently, Pope St. JPII and Pope Benedict XVI acknowledged this as the traditional and orthodox teaching, but have stipulated their own prudential judgement. It has been a part of every justice system in Christian Europe until very recently. No Pope, to my knowledge, ever condemned it. You say,

This would be a prudential judgement, and I would accept that, but to suggest that it is evil, is false. Which brings me to what you say in the beginning,


The Catechism of the Catholic Church is an exercise of the Ordinary Magisterium, yes, but it is only infallible insofar as it communicates infallibly defined doctrines of the Church. Saying that ‘the death penalty is inherently evil’ is contradictory to most of the Church prior to Francis, and would not be infallible. As a layperson, I must assent to the authority of the Church and I do so, but I do not admit that ‘the death penalty is evil’ as true, because it isn’t. And as far as I can tell, the Pope hasn’t compelled the Church to believe his addition.

ÉDIT: I will likely not return under any profile after this point because I know this place to make me angry and malignant to put it harshly. However, I hope this generates fruitful discussion, or gives you a glimpse into what I say. Goodnight and Godbless!

http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/ ... 996-12.cfm

John Paul II called for states to work for an end to the death penalty. A lot of saints have called for the death penalty to continue, sure, but they were not the Pope.

And yet the council of trent infallibly defined the death penalty as being a permissible part of the state's justice.

[Tarsonis]

http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/ ... 996-12.cfm

John Paul II called for states to work for an end to the death penalty. A lot of saints have called for the death penalty to continue, sure, but they were not the Pope.

And yet the council of trent infallibly defined the death penalty as being a permissible part of the state's justice.

Just because it's considered permissable doesn't make it a moral good. And the pope is free to restrict teachings if he sees fit.

[Auristania]

As an aside, I've been reading up on St. Gregory of Nyssa as part of a Christian abolitionism essay I'm writing and his criticism of slave owning is pretty rad.

“For what price, tell me? What did you find in existence worth as much as this human nature? What price did you put on rationality? How many obols did you reckon the equivalent the likeness of God? How many staters did you get for selling the being shaped by God?”

30 shekels Sanctuary of silver is the standard price of a Man. Therefore 15 staters Athenian = 360 obol. Next question?

[Luminesa]

As an aside, I've been reading up on St. Gregory of Nyssa as part of a Christian abolitionism essay I'm writing and his criticism of slave owning is pretty rad.

“For what price, tell me? What did you find in existence worth as much as this human nature? What price did you put on rationality? How many obols did you reckon the equivalent the likeness of God? How many staters did you get for selling the being shaped by God?”

30 shekels Sanctuary of silver is the standard price of a Man. Therefore 15 staters Athenian = 360 obol. Next question?

This reminds me of a joke I found on Tumblr where someone asked something about how much the soul was worth in gold, since the Devil bet a fiddle of gold against Johnny's soul in "The Devil Went Down to Georgia". It was a bizarre post.

[Luminesa]

http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/ ... 996-12.cfm

John Paul II called for states to work for an end to the death penalty. A lot of saints have called for the death penalty to continue, sure, but they were not the Pope.

And yet the council of trent infallibly defined the death penalty as being a permissible part of the state's justice.

Permissible, sure, but only in the most extreme of cases.

[Tarsonis]

So I'm watching season 4 of Lucifer and it got me thinking. Can the devil be redeemed? And if not is it his choice or God's?

[Neanderthaland]

So I'm watching season 4 of Lucifer and it got me thinking. Can the devil be redeemed? And if not is it his choice or God's?

I mean, if he can't... then Christianity has forfeited it's "top redemptive religion" spot to Buddhism.

They redeemed Monkey. That's an impressive bit of forgiveness right there.

[Tarsonis]

So I'm watching season 4 of Lucifer and it got me thinking. Can the devil be redeemed? And if not is it his choice or God's?

I mean, if he can't... then Christianity has forfeited it's "top redemptive religion" spot to Buddhism.

They redeemed Monkey. That's an impressive bit of forgiveness right there.

It's purely hypothetical. Scripture tells us the Devil won't be redeemed. The question is more is it mechanically possible.