MARY THE MOTHER OF GOD ... WHY IS THIS TITLE AT ALL CONTROVERSIAL???

[Nanny1935]

Parvity of matter speaks only to the act itself, and not to any subjective dispositions. If it was in legitimate self-defense, with proportionate force, there would be no sin whatsoever. I am assuming you hit her with the pool cue and not with something else (such as your hand). Keep in mind too that it all happened very fast, and that you were a child. The best thing to do, would be just to confess it and be done with it. A pool cue, hard to say, but if it had been a chopstick or a pencil, even if done with full deliberation, probably not grave matter. Moral theology manuals are very useful in determining parvity of matter, and separating mortal sin from venial sin.

A sin such as deliberately sought and premeditated contraception is always by its very nature grave matter, and intrinsically evil on top of that. It is hard to imagine how it could not be committed with sufficient reflection (unless the person was in true ignorance about the gravity of the matter, or whether it was sinful at all), and most of all, full consent of the will. It takes considerable premeditation to go to the pharmacy or to the doctor's office.

Thank you for taking the time. It is a most difficult and sensitive aspect of pastoral work.
BTW- I did not feel guilty about the incident itself, as I neither instigated the fight nor reacted beyond defending myself. It was the realization of anger- the physical strength coming from the rage is what shook me. I became aware of the effect of losing ones temper- I saw it visually in the broken cue (my cousin had no injury-thank God). It was a gift of God to have that sign.
I think that is what you want to accomplish in writing the book - that people will see the sin.

To be honest, i have to be complete: I felt a presence when left alone looking at the broken cue- I interpreted it as my guardian angel- both watching that no harm was done, but also looking sternly at it.
I am sharing because it is contained in our main prayer- "Our Father" - "deliver us from evil"
It is the realization that despite our best efforts and understanding, we will success with the help of God.
Pastoral work is ultimately that- having that moment with the parishioner in which the Divine presence will be felt. When all fails, open your heart to God and let him show you the way.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Thank you for taking the time. It is a most difficult and sensitive aspect of pastoral work.
BTW- I did not feel guilty about the incident itself, as I neither instigated the fight nor reacted beyond defending myself. It was the realization of anger- the physical strength coming from the rage is what shook me. I became aware of the effect of losing ones temper- I saw it visually in the broken cue (my cousin had no injury-thank God). It was a gift of God to have that sign - i should add, to be honest, I felt a presence at that moment- I interpreted it as my guardian angel- both watching that no harm was done, but also looking sternly at it.
I think that is what you want to accomplish in writing the book - that people will see the sin.
I am sharing- even the whimsical part about the presence I felt- because it is in our main prayer- "Our Father" - "deliver us from evil"
It is the realization that despite our best efforts and understanding, we will do it with the help of God.
Pastoral work is ultimately that- having that moment with the parishioner in which the Divine presence will be felt. When all fails, open your heart to God and let him show you the way.

I would not have made a good priest, as I don't think pastoral work would have been my forte. But I am a layman, and one with lived experience within a (putative) marriage, and a book such as the one I am considering might be more credible coming from a once-(putatively) married person, than from a priest who has lived a life of celibacy.

If the childhood incident transpired the way you described, it is hard to see any sin whatsoever in it. We have a natural-law right to defend ourselves.

 

[Nanny1935]

I would not have made a good priest, as I don't think pastoral work would have been my forte. But I am a layman, and one with lived experience within a (putative) marriage, and a book such as the one I am considering might be more credible coming from a once-(putatively) married person, than from a priest who has lived a life of celibacy.

If the childhood incident transpired the way you described, it is hard to see any sin whatsoever in it. We have a natural-law right to defend ourselves.

You keep insisting about the self-defense. Think laterally. It is about the rage.
It was not righteous anger . My cousin was going through a rough period and I knew at the moment that she did not mean to hurt me (although she might have, uncontrolled as she was). If I had been wiser (or older) I would have reacted better and calmed things down. But I let my fear and anger get the better of me. God showed me and growing up I worked at it, focusing on de-escalation and on managing my fear: living with God is living with courage! C. S. Lewis said:“Courage is not simply one of the virtues but the form of every virtue at the testing point, which means at the point of highest reality. ”

What do you mean by "putative" - that you have a religious annulment?
Your experience can inspire people. In retreats with Fr. Augustine (the Jesuit priest who was my spiritual guide), he urged us to share live experiences in the context of the teaching we were discussing- It was part of letting God show us - learning through life experience.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

You keep insisting about the self-defense. Think laterally. It is about the rage.
It was not righteous anger . My cousin was going through a rough period and I knew at the moment that she did not mean to hurt me (although she might have, uncontrolled as she was). If I had been wiser (or older) I would have reacted better and calmed things down. But I let my fear and anger get the better of me. God showed me and growing up I worked at it, focusing on de-escalation and on managing my fear: living with God is living with courage! C. S. Lewis said:“Courage is not simply one of the virtues but the form of every virtue at the testing point, which means at the point of highest reality. ”

What do you mean by "putative" - that you have a religious annulment?
Your experience can inspire people. In retreats with Fr. Augustine (the Jesuit priest who was my spiritual guide), he urged us to share live experiences in the context of the teaching we were discussing- It was part of letting God show us - learning through life experience.

The rage would be a subjective disposition, unrelated to the act itself. You can defend yourself without rage. I can't address that. If you were a mere child, it is hard for me to think that this could have risen to the level of mortal sin. Beyond that, I cannot know, because I cannot know your mind.

By "putative", that is exactly what I mean, an ecclesiastical annulment. In the eyes of the Church (and thus in the Eyes of God), we were never married for a single minute.

 

[Nanny1935]

The rage would be a subjective disposition, unrelated to the act itself. You can defend yourself without rage. I can't address that. If you were a mere child, it is hard for me to think that this could have risen to the level of mortal sin. Beyond that, I cannot know, because I cannot know your mind.

By "putative", that is exactly what I mean, an ecclesiastical annulment. In the eyes of the Church (and thus in the Eyes of God), we were never married for a single minute.

I wasn't asking - I agree that it is probably not a sin given the age. I was sharing to show that it is not always that easy to recognize it, and that the realization did not come from a definition (I was not of age to have my first confession). I was thinking about your book- that it can inspire people "see" from the shared experience.

 

[Nanny1935]

The rage would be a subjective disposition, unrelated to the act itself. You can defend yourself without rage. I can't address that. If you were a mere child, it is hard for me to think that this could have risen to the level of mortal sin. Beyond that, I cannot know, because I cannot know your mind.

By "putative", that is exactly what I mean, an ecclesiastical annulment. In the eyes of the Church (and thus in the Eyes of God), we were never married for a single minute.

HomeschoolDad I wrote it in the direct message - I think it belongs in the forum
I have said several times- I am not asking for a "decision" on if it was sin. I gave an example to show the importance of discernment (using the definitions of sin as a guidance). Knowing a person's mind is what a priest attempts to do in the sacrament of reconciliation. I gave the example of Padre Pio - in which his charisma was to "read" the mind (according to his biography).
In the forum: Listening is important- asking questions to make sure we understand properly- I feel you still did not get the gist of my comment.

Here is why: in the direct message you equal "observable" with objective. This is incorrect. There are many facts that are not directly observable, but there are objective ways to estimate them. That is what Data Analysts do. That is what behavioral scientists do.
And Physicists as well. Einsteins famous quip "God does not play with dice"in quantum mechanics shows the challenge.
Until then, replication of an experiment would yield the same observation by all people in attendance or the same result in different replications. A theory in science was valid because of that type of objectivity- perfect replication.
Quantum mechanics took us to a probabilistic reality, but not a less objective one- there is a regularity to allows to apply an objective method- and repetitions of the experiment (or numerous measurements by different attendants) yield results within a confidence interval
Second example: Cosmology is also not directly observable, yet we study it and theories of the development of the universe have gain mainstream acceptance (like the Big Bang)
I am not attempting to switch the subject to physics- just giving foundation for differentiating "observable" from "objective" that might be in line with your thinking in the direct message.

But most important: It is in the NT, Matthew 13: 24-43, the parable of the weeds. Even if some parts are observable (the broken cue, how sturdy it is; the relative sizes of the children, etc in the example I gave), not all of the relevant facts are. The final judgement belongs to God who knows the truth, we can only approximate it, and the more options (scenarios) we consider, the better of an approximation we will make
(think about having more people in the room finding the particles of light in the basic double-slit experiment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment#:~:text=An important version of this,(see the image below).

Niels Bohr responded to Einstein: "Albert, stop telling God what to do"

It is a measure of true compassion how good we are in our approximations. Compassion is at the root of discernment, Padre Pio was a true Saint.

 

[Nanny1935]

I wasn't asking - I agree that it is probably not a sin given the age. I was sharing to show that it is not always that easy to recognize it, and that the realization did not come from a definition (I was not of age to have my first confession). I was thinking about your book- that it can inspire people "see" from the shared experience.

Separately, I want to address the other side of observable- some time ago I posted about facts and spurious correlation.
We can have the temptation to claim an observable fact as an objective one. Even if data is correct, it is not enough. The website https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations - is devoted to giving examples that show correlation is not causation.
Without the proper discipline, our minds race to make connections.
The proper way to establish causation means to dwell in the unobservable factors to design the proper experiment to test. Only when we control for all factors, observabable or not, we can proof causality. Even more, can test causality of unobservable factors and they might be more relevant in understanding reality than the observed ones.
Again, the answer is in compassion- looking at data with compassion is informative in designing the tests.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I think this thread has run its course, there have been many good contributions that have helped to clarify the matter, but there's really nothing more that can be said, and add to this, the thread has departed significantly from the original topic.

I welcome good discussion, and I invite all comers to open threads on subjects of their own choosing.