A few comments on pride

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Sock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Loving God with all our soul, heart, mind and strength is another sin that I regularly confess.
Is this what you really meant to say? CCC 1 states “He calls man to seek him, to know him, to love him with all his strength.”

I am aware that putting spiritual practices above humanly duties is sinful. However if someone truly loves God with all their soul, heart, mind and strength they will do their duties for God.
 
When we say we are proud of someone, we are not always feeling true pride but something else that we erroneously call “pride.” If it’s not internalized onto the ego, it’s not true pride. Whenever we feel pride over love, we sin. I’ll emphasize again that pride can be very subtle, such as in feeling truly proud of someone.

If you still disagree, please explain the qualitative difference between sinful and non-sinful pride?
How many times do I have to repeat this. I gave you TWO examples of non-sinful pride.
 
How many times do I have to repeat this. I gave you TWO examples of non-sinful pride.
If what you call pride is feeding the ego, then it’s sinful. If it’s not feeding the ego, then it’s not true pride.
 
Pride is said to drive the other carnal sins. Pride is so tough to conquer because it centers on the illusion of self. Condemning inner pride then feels like we are crushing our very self, which we are. Sometimes our pride is obvious, but through experience, I believe it can be ever so subtle. If there is one sin that most everyone is guilty, it’s pride. With some deeper introspection, these subtle forms of pride can be detected. All pride is deadly to the soul, and needs to be confessed often.
From Catholic Encylopedia;Pride is the excessive love of one’s own excellence. It is ordinarily accounted one of the seven capital sins. St. Thomas, however, endorsing the appreciation of St. Gregory, considers it the queen of all vices, and puts vainglory in its place as one of the deadly sins. In giving it this pre-eminence he takes it in a most formal and complete signification. He understands it to be that frame of mind in which a man, through the love of his own worth, aims to withdraw himself from subjection to Almighty God, and sets at naught the commands of superiors. It is a species of contempt of God and of those who bear his commission. Regarded in this way, it is of course mortal sin of a most heinous sort. Indeed St. Thomas rates it in this sense as one of the blackest of sins.

Delany, J. (1911). Pride. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
newadvent.org/cathen/12405a.htm
 
I do not intend to judge, however I see a blatant irony developing in this thread.

Robert seems to assert that his own definition and idea of pride should be accepted by everyone else. He also suggests that his “expertise” makes providing evidence (sources) for his argument unnecessary.
Did I not define the process? This process is my operational definition of pride. Please feel free to refute this process if you disagree.

Why a cited definition? Am I not allowed to define it myself given my expertise on the subject?
(name removed by moderator);13109702 said:

: an inordinate esteem of oneself.
How many times do I have to repeat this. I gave you TWO examples of non-sinful pride.
Thistle has given Robert the examples that he asked for in refutation of Robert’s idea.
If what you call pride is feeding the ego, then it’s sinful. If it’s not feeding the ego, then it’s not true pride.
Robert seems to completely ignore Thistle’s ideas in favor of Robert’s own idea of pride. Robert seems to hold his opinions of pride in very high esteem.
From Catholic Encylopedia;Pride is the excessive love of one’s own excellence.
Like I said, I just had to point out the irony.
 
I do not intend to judge, however I see a blatant irony developing in this thread.

Robert seems to assert that his own definition and idea of pride should be accepted by everyone else. He also suggests that his “expertise” makes providing evidence (sources) for his argument unnecessary.

Thistle has given Robert the examples that he asked for in refutation of Robert’s idea.

Robert seems to completely ignore Thistle’s ideas in favor of Robert’s own idea of pride. **Robert seems to hold his opinions of pride in very high esteem.

**
Like I said, I just had to point out the irony.
Sounds judgmental, attacking my character.
 
Sounds judgmental, attacking my character.
There is a difference between judging and expressing an opposing opinion. If Americans understood that then our country would be far different.

The important point is that Catholics are suppose to treat others as they themselves want to be treated. Robert you expect everyone else to accept your (unsourced) view of pride. Why don’t you accept Thistle’s view of pride?
 
There is a difference between judging and expressing an opposing opinion. If Americans understood that then our country would be far different.

The important point is that Catholics are suppose to treat others as they themselves want to be treated. Robert you expect everyone else to accept your (unsourced) view of pride. Why don’t you accept Thistle’s view of pride?
When a person attacks my character, it’s time to ignore them.
 
When a person attacks my character, it’s time to ignore them.
It was not an attack on your character. The point is that if people cannot see beyond their own opinion, then a discussion on pride is pointless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top