Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Beware! Watchwords of Modernists
Catholic Insight ^ | Mario Derksen

Posted on 08/18/2004 7:43:12 AM PDT by Stubborn

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 261-265 next last
To: Mershon
The point I am trying to make is to non-theologians, so I am mixing terms.

Are you a theologian? And, who the hell cares if one term is more "positive" than another term if they both express the same reality? Oh, I guess the guy who wants to view Protestants as evil people use the term "heretic."

"Sacrament of Reconciliation" is the name for that sacrament now used by the Church.

Positive people are not unrealistic; they can often see solutions where the pessimist simply gives up.

For instance, in the example you use, a positive person would be shoving the child out of the path of the car, whereas the negative person just stands there and yells at the kid, as you did in your example.

Get it?

101 posted on 08/18/2004 3:13:38 PM PDT by sinkspur ("Is it OK to send watered silk to the dry cleaners"?--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

Comment #102 Removed by Moderator

To: pascendi

You won't answer them because, to do so, would prove that you're a bit of a hypocrite. LOL!!


103 posted on 08/18/2004 3:14:34 PM PDT by sinkspur ("Is it OK to send watered silk to the dry cleaners"?--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"You won't answer them because, to do so, would prove that you're a bit of a hypocrite. LOL!!"

Of course I am. I'm an idiot, too, and a jerk. But that's all beside the point.

There's always the truth to deal with. See, Mother Teresa's above statement is inconsistent with Catholic theology. Nothing's going to change the truth of this.
104 posted on 08/18/2004 3:20:48 PM PDT by pascendi (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: pascendi
See, Mother Teresa's above statement is inconsistent with Catholic theology.

Actually, it's not. The Church does not canonize as a saint anyone who was in doctrinal error.

105 posted on 08/18/2004 3:22:48 PM PDT by sinkspur ("Is it OK to send watered silk to the dry cleaners"?--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: sandyeggo

Screaming loudly and continuously at a 2-year-old for no good reason could get your child taken away from you by the State.

However, in a different set of circumstances, what is normally understood as being "negative" is actually the "positive" and charitable thing to do. In fact, as the parent, you would have an OBLIGATION or DUTY to GET HIS ATTENTION--in other cases, someone might call you a child abuser--which is negative. Get it?


106 posted on 08/18/2004 3:25:13 PM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"The Church does not canonize as a saint anyone who was in doctrinal error"

Actually, not true. It's happened. Of course, no Saint has been canonized who had been in obstinate denial of doctrine knowingly, no. But canonized Saints have made plenty of theological errors.
107 posted on 08/18/2004 3:27:06 PM PDT by pascendi (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: pascendi
Of course, no Saint has been canonized who had been in obstinate denial of doctrine knowingly, no. But canonized Saints have made plenty of theological errors.

Was Mother Teresa in obstinate denial of doctrine?

And, if she wasn't, doesn't your objection fall apart?

108 posted on 08/18/2004 3:28:55 PM PDT by sinkspur ("Is it OK to send watered silk to the dry cleaners"?--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: pascendi

Oh, and perhaps you could give us, say, three examples of saints who were in theological error at the time of their deaths?


109 posted on 08/18/2004 3:29:30 PM PDT by sinkspur ("Is it OK to send watered silk to the dry cleaners"?--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

<Are you a theologian?

None of your damned business. Understand that theological term?

<And, who the hell cares if one term is more "positive" than another term if they both express the same reality?

Because the use of the different term doesn't change the reality. They are heretics.

<Oh, I guess the guy who wants to view Protestants as evil people use the term "heretic."

Once again, adding your own qualifiers. Please point out any posts where I said Protestants were "evil people." The silence is deafening, Mr. "put words in others' mouths."

<"Sacrament of Reconciliation" is the name for that sacrament now used by the Church.

Really, I just re-read the new Catechism today. It looks like the term "sacrament of Penance" is used almost exclusively. What church do you go to? Does it start with "Am"?

<Positive people are not unrealistic; they can often see solutions where the pessimist simply gives up.

Sinky, we could all be dreaming right now. We are to work to unify ourselves with God. Most of the saints were joyful, but suffered a great deal, and certainly would not be called or considered "positive people" in today's sense of the term. "Positive people" often live in a fantasy land and despise anyone who tries to bring them out of it? Ring a bell?

<For instance, in the example you use, a positive person would be shoving the child out of the path of the car, whereas the negative person just stands there and yells at the kid, as you did in your example.

Unless of course, you were 50 yards away, while the car was 10 ft. away from your child. An overly "positive" person would say, "Oh well, I didn't want to yell at Timmy, but now he is dead. Perhaps it was God's will for whatever reason..."

Get it?


110 posted on 08/18/2004 3:32:37 PM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Mershon

Yes, there is also an unorthodox use of "active participation", just as the Sabellians used the word "consubstantial" to denote their particular heresy.

But if the Church also uses these words in an orthodox way, one cannot say that their use alone can identify a neo-Modernist, especially since that leads to the conclusion of Derksen that the Church has become heretical and defected.


111 posted on 08/18/2004 3:34:09 PM PDT by gbcdoj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Mershon
Most of the saints were joyful, but suffered a great deal, and certainly would not be called or considered "positive people" in today's sense of the term.

How do you know this? You don't. It's your pessimistic view of the world that brings you to this bit of wishful thinking.

"Positive people" often live in a fantasy land and despise anyone who tries to bring them out of it? Ring a bell?

No, it doesn't.

You don't seem to know the first thing about "positive people."

112 posted on 08/18/2004 3:38:33 PM PDT by sinkspur ("Is it OK to send watered silk to the dry cleaners"?--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"Was Mother Teresa in obstinate denial of doctrine? And, if she wasn't, doesn't your objection fall apart?"

No and no.

As to the first question, I would presume not, because she was dished up the modernist new theology from the conciliar Church. Maybe she wasn't even aware of the implications of her words when measured against hard perennial doctrine. Who knows.

No, the objection doesn't fall apart, of course not. We have Catholic doctrine, we have access to the sources of Catholic doctrine. It doesn't change. What Mother Teresa said does not square with Catholic doctrine.

We get our doctrine from the Church, not from Mother Teresa. There have been no new doctrines for 2,000 years.
113 posted on 08/18/2004 3:39:06 PM PDT by pascendi (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Oh, and perhaps you could give us, say, three examples of saints who were in theological error at the time of their deaths?

Photios, Symeon of Thessalonika, and Mark of Ephesus. The last two died Eastern Orthodox and Photios attempted to depose the Pope. Look at CCC 1690 and Symeon is accorded the title of Saint when he is quoted on the matter of funerals. He also had this to say:

Let [the Latins] only show that the pope perseveres in the faith of Peter ... and we will obey him not only as Peter, but as if he were the Savior himself. But if he is not the inheritor of the faith of the saints, then he will not be the inheritor of the Chair of Peter either.

114 posted on 08/18/2004 3:39:59 PM PDT by gbcdoj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj

Well, I knew you'd find three, but I must say I've never heard of any of them.


115 posted on 08/18/2004 3:43:45 PM PDT by sinkspur ("Is it OK to send watered silk to the dry cleaners"?--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"Oh, and perhaps you could give us, say, three examples of saints who were in theological error at the time of their deaths?"

St. Alphonsus Liguori, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine.

All three are among my favorites. They made theological errors from time to time. It's no big deal.
116 posted on 08/18/2004 3:46:28 PM PDT by pascendi (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: gbcdoj; sinkspur

"one cannot say that their use alone can identify a neo-Modernist"

I do not believe that was the intention of the post. It was offered as a more light-hearted or "be on the ball" sort of approach for the misuse of these terms, rather than a complete theological treatise on modernism. However, I agree with your statement as offered. The modernists overuse and misuse these terms. Of course, it doesn't matter what the author's opinion about the current Church is, as we are to seek "elements of truth" from all. This would keep us all "positive," as Sinky supposedly enjoys--but I haven't seen much of it from him. Perhaps he is reserving it for other "positive" people so they can all be "positive" together.

Lights out...


117 posted on 08/18/2004 3:46:42 PM PDT by Mershon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur; Mershon
M: "Most of the saints were joyful, but suffered a great deal, and certainly would not be called or considered "positive people" in today's sense of the term..."

S: "How do you know this? You don't."

It can be determined by reading the works of the Saints themselves. Their works, for the most part, uphold the truth of this statement.
118 posted on 08/18/2004 3:52:31 PM PDT by pascendi (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: pascendi
It can be determined by reading the works of the Saints themselves. Their works, for the most part, uphold the truth of this statement.

Not the ones I read.

But, then, people see what they want to see, so there will be no resolution to this question.

119 posted on 08/18/2004 3:55:17 PM PDT by sinkspur ("Is it OK to send watered silk to the dry cleaners"?--Cardinal Fanfani)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"But, then, people see what they want to see, so there will be no resolution to this question."

This we can agree on.
120 posted on 08/18/2004 3:57:25 PM PDT by pascendi (Quicumque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 261-265 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson