Among first synod discussions: changing harsh language, trying 'graduality'

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
johnnyc176 said:
Yep…I guess you are…there are many communities that accept that sin…they won’t have Jesus as their founder but you will ‘feel’ better.

Well a good part of the Catholic Church’s mission is to save souls. If God is first in your life then you will follow the Church’s teachings. Jesus Christ and His Church, the Catholic Church, are One and the Same. Jesus spoke much about sin, satan and hell. In fact Jesus spoke more about the place of eternal damnation than He did Heaven. You might want to read the whole Gospel.
Click to expand...
You might want to read CCC where it speaks of people in other ecclesial communities having the faith of Christ and that your church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers. And that they are Christians incorporated into Christ. And that Christ’s spirit uses these communities as a means of salvation. (CCC 818 & 819)
 
Lion_IRC said:
Hey, go easy on McCall1981

Remember, Jesus didnt go looking for sinners to rebuke and call vipers and neither do those of us who strive to follow His teaching.

The ‘vipers’ and ‘hypocrites’ put themselves in the way of Jesus and deliberately baited Him.

So I ask the same as McCall1981.

Having said what He said and having spoken truly, are we to agree with Jesus’ word choice or disagree?

Do we agree that the money changers HAD in fact made God’s house into a den of thieves or not?

Do we agree with Jesus that the woman caught in adultery WAS in fact sinning? (Otherwise the words…“go and sin no more” seem irrelevant.)

And if asked by one of Jesus’ enemies in the worldly, political, establishment circles of power whether adultery ( a woman doing what she wants with her own body) is a “sin”, what are we to say?

For how long and how far can we soften our language to keep up with the changing times so as not to provoke the rage against God?

Eventually we are left with no choice but to let our yes be yes and out no be no.
Click to expand...
Pointing out that someone isn’t Jesus isn’t being harsh. None of us are…

It’s kind of a silly and loaded question to ask if we “agree” with Jesus. Perhaps you could correct the premise?
 
johnnyc176 said:
Well from what I understand that is for venial sin. Are you saying that the sacrament of confession is bogus?
Click to expand...
No I’m not saying that at all. Now I may not be convicted of it being the only means to be healed. That may be one reason of many why I don’t adhere to your faith. But it can be and is a means toward forgiveness for many. So no. It’s not bogus. Peace.
 
Seraphim73 said:
Pointing out that someone isn’t Jesus isn’t being harsh. None of us are…

It’s kind of a silly and loaded question to ask if we “agree” with Jesus. Perhaps you could correct the premise?
Click to expand...
  1. Jesus, in addition to other methods, sometimes used the phrases “brood of vipers”, “hypocrits”, “Satan”, “wicked”, etc in order to describe people and sins.
  2. We are called to imitate the actions of Jesus.
Thus, in addition to other methods, we are called to sometimes use these, or equivalent phrases, in order to describe people and sins.

Please point out where there is confusion.
 
CHCL said:
I am sorry, but this is against Church teaching. God is unchanging, so his teachings will not change ether. It is a skewed version of love that can never be made holy. Anyone that says otherwise is heretical.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry but I’m confused by what you are saying. I think you’re saying what Emily2014 said is against CC teaching. So are you judging her heretical?
 
Eternal_One said:
In Catholicism, we are called to imitate the life of Jesus. He is the perfect example for us all.
Click to expand...
McCall1981 said:
  1. Jesus, in addition to other methods, sometimes used the phrases “brood of vipers”, “hypocrits”, “Satan”, “wicked”, etc in order to describe people and sins.
  2. We are called to imitate the actions of Jesus.
Thus, in addition to other methods, we are called to sometimes use these, or equivalent phrases, in order to describe people and sins.

Please point out where there is confusion.
Click to expand...
I’ll go two for one.

We can imitate Jesus all we want but we will still be sinners. If you can use those phrases and not sin, not be judgmental, not hypocritical, not self righteous, not vain, not a stumbling block to others, then go ahead. Don’t forget what St Paul said quoting Isaiah: “My name is blasphemed among the Nations because of you”, and also: “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.”

So the point still remains. We ain’t Jesus. We don’t know what He knew, we don’t have the discernment Jesus has, we don’t have His purity, all of us are hypocrites because we are all sinners. The question shouldn’t be “what would Jesus say” but rather “what would Jesus have me say.” Those are two very different things.
 
Eternal_One said:
In Catholicism, we are called to imitate the life of Jesus. He is the perfect example for us all.
Click to expand...
Yes that may be. I’ll just ask all the harshness advocates to let me know when you actually reach His perfection, again for instance can walk on water (good luck imitating that action) and are without sin (so you have a license to cast stones). In the meantime may God bless us all with His unending love and mercy and peace.
 
Seraphim73 said:
Actually I’m pretty sure him and Calvin both only read Romans. 😃
Click to expand...
I assure you, my friend, that is incorrect. Luther’s biblical exegeses just about killed me. I do, however, have a pretty good grasp of avoiding the works mentality and accepting the grace of God. :rolleyes:👍

(Uh,and Luther does believe in works, BTW, you do them out of thankfulness; they flow naturally from grace. If you don’t perform them, it indicates that you don’t have real faith.)
 
Seraphim73 said:
I’ll go two for one.

We can imitate Jesus all we want but we will still be sinners. If you can use those phrases and not sin, not be judgmental, not hypocritical, not self righteous, not vain, not a stumbling block to others, then go ahead. Don’t forget what St Paul said quoting Isaiah: “My name is blasphemed among the Nations because of you”, and also: “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Against such there is no law.”

So the point still remains. We ain’t Jesus. We don’t know what He knew, we don’t have the discernment Jesus has, we don’t have His purity, all of us are hypocrites because we are all sinners. The question shouldn’t be “what would Jesus say” but rather “what would Jesus have me say.” Those are two very different things.
Click to expand...
It’s true that we ain’t Jesus and don’t know what He knew.

Why then do you think we are capable of making the choice to imitate part of what He did (the “nice” stuff) and choose not to imitate another part (the “harsh” stuff). Since we don’t know what He knew, it makes no sense to assert that we are capable of choosing what to imitate and what not to imitate.

Your assumption is" "Jesus knew everything, and this knowledge gave Him the authority to determine when to be “nice” and when to be “harsh”. We humans do not have that knowledge, so we do not have the authority to chose to be “harsh”, and must therefore default to only choosing to be “nice”.

But that conclusion doesn’t follow, because you can just as easily say: "We humans do not have Jesus’ knowledge, so we do not have the authority to choose to be “nice”, and must therefore default to only choosing to be “harsh”.

In other words, with our imperfect knowledge, and imperfect moral discernment, who are we to make that decision either way?

It is just as prideful for us to eliminate the “harsh” aspect of moral discussion as it is to eliminate the “nice” aspect, because Jesus chose to use both. Who are we to choose for ourselves by picking only one?
 
McCall1981 said:
It’s true that we ain’t Jesus and don’t know what He knew.

Why then do you think we are capable of making the choice to imitate part of what He did (the “nice” stuff) and choose not to imitate another part (the “harsh” stuff). Since we don’t know what He knew, it makes no sense to assert that we are capable of choosing what to imitate and what not to imitate.

Your assumption is" "Jesus knew everything, and this knowledge gave Him the authority to determine when to be “nice” and when to be “harsh”. We humans do not have that knowledge, so we do not have the authority to chose to be “harsh”, and must therefore default to only choosing to be “nice”.

But that conclusion doesn’t follow, because you can just as easily say: "We humans do not have Jesus’ knowledge, so we do not have the authority to choose to be “nice”, and must therefore default to only choosing to be “harsh”.

In other words, with our imperfect knowledge, and imperfect moral discernment, who are we to make that decision either way?

It is just as prideful for us to eliminate the “harsh” aspect of moral discussion as it is to eliminate the “nice” aspect, because Jesus chose to use both. Who are we to choose for ourselves by picking only one?
Click to expand...
Well Jesus didn’t know everything, He was a man after all. But that’s another discussion. You have to look at the entirety of the Scriptures and not take just a couple of verses. Jesus wasn’t always harsh. The point is most of us don’t have the discernment to know and all of us are sinful. Jesus did those things with no sin. But as I said if you have the discernment to recognize when being harsh will drive others away from God and are purified enough yourself to not judge people or fall into pride, vanity and self righteousness then go ahead. Most of us aren’t at that point.
 
Seraphim73 said:
Well Jesus didn’t know everything, He was a man after all. But that’s another discussion. You have to look at the entirety of the Scriptures and not take just a couple of verses. Jesus wasn’t always harsh. The point is most of us don’t have the discernment to know and all of us are sinful. Jesus did those things with no sin. But as I said if you have the discernment to recognize when being harsh will drive others away from God and are purified enough yourself to not judge people or fall into pride, vanity and self righteousness then go ahead. Most of us aren’t at that point.
Click to expand...
Jesus didn’t know everything? Whoa, wait a minute. Jesus was God and Man, correct?

Have you looked at the entirety of Scriptures - and by that I mean actually read (studied) them? There is no way in my view that someone who has would be saying this…Jesus cautioned people against falling into sin and going to hell ALL OVER THE GOSPELS. He was frantic about it. Through his transforming grace, which you receive through faith, you begin to nurture the “inner man” or spiritual man in accordance with Jesus’ teaching (including moral teaching). To the extent that the old man lives (in the flesh) you are dead and a slave to sin. To explain that to someone is to expound basic Christianity; it’s not some fuzzy form of “judgment.” (Likewise to reject it is to reject Jesus and Christianity.)
 
I would also add it’s important to try and understand what God is trying to say to us. Some people look at verses where Jesus is harsh with people and think they should imitate that when admonishing people. But look at who Jesus was criticizing. If you are a hypocrite who lays burdens on others that you won’t help bear, or if you insist on the letter of the law without understanding the spirit, if you cast stones at others when you yourself are a sinner, or if you turn the Church into a den of thieves by gossip or backstabbing or anything like that then He was talking to you. We should be a little more humble and show a little more fear of God. And by you I don’t mean you as an individual but all of us.
 
FollowChrist34 said:
Jesus didn’t know everything? Whoa, wait a minute. Jesus was God and Man, correct?
Click to expand...
Yes of course. Don’t forget the man part though. Humans are not omniscient. If you would like to discuss it in apologetics or somewhere I’ll be happy to join you.
FollowChrist34 said:
Have you looked at the entirety of Scriptures - and by that I mean actually read (studied) them? There is no way in my view that someone who has would be saying this…Jesus cautioned people against falling into sin and going to hell ALL OVER THE GOSPELS. He was frantic about it. Through his transforming grace, which you receive through faith, you begin to nurture the “inner man” or spiritual man in accordance with Jesus’ teaching (including moral teaching). To the extent that the old man lives (in the flesh) you are dead and a slave to sin. To explain that to someone is to expound basic Christianity; it’s not some fuzzy form of “judgment.” (Likewise to reject it is to reject Jesus and Christianity.)
Click to expand...
He did and it’s a good thing you got the message. The question is how do we deliver that message today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top