Taking down a poster a sin?

[Sir_Knight]

Link please to exactly how her apparitions contradicted the authority of the official church?

That will make for an interesting new topic if what you say is true.

 

[latinmasslover]

Link please to exactly how her apparitions contradicted the authority of the official church?

That will make for an interesting new topic if what you say is true.

stjoan-center.com/Trials/

Check out her comments and responses…very interesting.

She never disobeyed official Church teaching, but she did not obey the bishop in everything.

 

[He_Man]

We’re the Catholic Church, not the Ku Klux Klan. We don’t resort to vigilantism.

Again, tell that to the “sinners” who smuggled slaves out of the south. They were the property of the slave owners at the time, legally.

Also, tell that to the sinners who hid the Jews from the Nazis. Law breakers and vigilantes, every one of them.

 

[Sir_Knight]

stjoan-center.com/Trials/

Check out her comments and responses…very interesting.

She never disobeyed official Church teaching, but she did not obey the bishop in everything.

I’m going to need time to read all of that and if I can’t answer it, guess what? I’m going to start another thread here because the on-going belief on this board has been that true heavenly apparitions have never contradicted official church teaching and never disobeyed lawful church authority and a bishop of the region WOULD be lawful church authority.

 

[Sir_Knight]

From what I’m reading …

The first trial had been conducted without reference to the pope; indeed it was carried out in defiance of St. Joan’s appeal to the head of the Church. Now an appellate court constituted by the pope, after long inquiry and examination of witnesses, reversed and annulled the sentence pronounced by a local tribunal under Cauchon’s presidency. The illegality of the former proceedings was made clear.

-- Catholic Encyclopedia .​

… the original trial was invalid and therefore did not represent the OFFICIAL position of the church in the matter.

 

[latinmasslover]

I’m going to need time to read all of that and if I can’t answer it, guess what? I’m going to start another thread here because the on-going belief on this board has been that true heavenly apparitions have never contradicted official church teaching and never disobeyed lawful church authority and a bishop of the region WOULD be lawful church authority.

Take your time, there’s no rush. I really am interested in your opinion on the matter. I’ll read it again and when I come to the specific points (if I get to it first) I’ll pin-point it for you…it’s been a while since I’ve read the entire thing. Let me know when you start the thread.

 

[latinmasslover]

From what I’m reading …

… the original trial was invalid and therefore did not represent the OFFICIAL position of the church in the matter.

Yes, but she still did not obey him in everything, at the counsel of her Voices.

 

[ChangingHeart]

As I recall, correct me if I’m wrong, Judith was not commanded by the Jewish authorities to kill a general of the opposing army while sloshed. Wasn’t God, according to the prophet Samuel, pretty perturbed when King Saul spared the property (cattle) of the enemy?

Judith’s actions were during a just war, in my understanding.

Saul was outright COMMANDED to destroy property (1 Samuel 15:2-3), and thereby outright disobeyed God by not doing so. (See the rest of Chapter 15 of 1 Samuel.)

Again, I am asking you to show where WE(as Catholics) are COMMANDED to destroy other people’s property that is being used in a way that potentially violates the faith, if we are NOT in an officially declared just war against such people.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I never said to beat anybody up. Self defense, and only defense. If it becomes futile, fine, surrender. The point would have been made. Again, too sloppy for me, so I can’t speak for those who might do it. Just my opinion.

As for the police showing up, humbly resign and live to “fight” another day.

I repeat, an aggressor cannot claim self-defense. If you are vandalizing other people’s property, they have a right to stop you – with physical force, if necessary. And you cannot claim self-defense in such a situation.

 

[ChangingHeart]

Are you refering to Romans 5:13? If so, go back to verse 9, and read through verse 13. In context, that is only refering to those who claim to be “brothers,” and in my understanding, strictly to those believers who make no pretense of trying to stop the sin, but instead act wantonly sinful, as if there is nothing wrong with it.
Even then, it is the Church’s decision to excommunicate, and not the decision of the individual laity.

Sorry everyone!!! I meant 1 Corinthians 5:13, NOT Romans 5:13. My apologies to anyone who was confused as to what “before the law there was sin in the world, even though sin is not imputed when there is no law,” had do do with this discussion.

 

[latinmasslover]

Judith’s actions were during a just war, in my understanding.

Judith’s actions were during a just war, true, but she was not commanded by the Lord to kill a man while he was defenseless.

God’s way is the right way, always! I am not refuting that, simply saying that his way isn’t always love and mercy only, but also just. Sometimes the less than nice and peaceful ways are mandatory. Since God doesn’t give audible commands in every instance of life, I cannot say how we as Catholics are commanded to do this. Certainly not every Catholic would have this calling. We have Catholic soldiers, Catholic police, Catholic FBI…and again, “illegal” isn’t always sinful, especially when sin is a guaranteed “right.”

 

[latinmasslover]

I don’t recall reading anywhere that Paul thought that he was above the law. Can you provide the chapter and verse please for those of us that may have missed it?

I recall Paul charging the members of the Church to respect those who have authority over them in 1 Thess. 5:12-13 WITHOUT any qualifying statements that “we owe no fidelity to a law that protects sin”.

I came across that quote from St Paul (?) months ago and didn’t really pay much attention to it. I’ll post it when I find it again.

Surely you’re not saying we should obey a sinful law?

 

[Angela_Tate]

This thread has been cleared of the various side topics which arose. The original question was:

If a public high school put up an “anti-christian” poster, in this case a poster for the movie “Golden Compass”, would it be a sin to take it down and throw it away? Thanks, Tim

You will note that at least one spin-off topic is still alive in this thread. This is because the original poster, TOP, raised it: Here he cites examples of saints who have been known to destroy property in defense of the faith. Since that side issue goes to why he raised the question in the first place - is taking down and throwing away the poster a sin - I have allowed it to continue.

I will leave it up to the OP on whether or not to keep this discussion going since his initial question has been asked/answered. If he wishes to keep the thread open then the discussion becomes - is it a sin for someone to destroy property which does not belong to him/her because it is deemed by that person to be offensive to God (immoral)?

So far the opinions are:

1. Since all things belong to God and no one person literally ‘owns’ anything, property can and should be removed if it is immoral. (rach620)
2. Laws of the land which are immoral vs. God’s laws which are always moral: since the governments should not be making legal things which are immoral in the first place, Catholics are not obliged to respect/abide by those laws. (TOP, He Man, latinmasslover, jmcrae, rach620)
3. Thou shalt not steal seems to be the commandment broken by the act of taking down and throwing away the poster. The Catholic Church has clearly stated that ends cannot justify means. (ChangingHeart, Mirdath, Sir Knight)
4. God’s justice is not only peaceful and merciful as in the new testament, but can be and has been brought about through violence if that is God’s will. (latinmasslover)

DO NOT bring pornography or blowing up abortion clinics into this discussion! Those are two bigger issues which have unique aspects to them. Since this thread began with a poster advertising a PG-13 film let’s keep that level of physical property in mind, not buildings or churches.

Thank you to all who have participated thus far.

 

[joseph_virgen]

No. In truth, you drew the line in the sand. I propose you followed the Nazarene’s example to a tee. Remember the temple, the money changers, the bankers, and the sellers of sacrificial animals. Congrats!

If this irks some people, so be it. The Nazarene irks a lot of people.

 

[Truthstalker]

Isn’t this the same moral issue of lying to an enemy in time of war? Or lying to protect someone you are hiding (say the Nazis come and ask you if you are hiding Jews when you have an attic full)?

 

[Sir_Knight]

Isn’t this the same moral issue of lying to an enemy in time of war? Or lying to protect someone you are hiding (say the Nazis come and ask you if you are hiding Jews when you have an attic full)?

According to the CCC, lying is only sinful if you do not tell the truth to someone that is entitled to the truth and I find it difficult to believe that anybody would think that the enemy during a time of was was entitled to the truth.

Thus the two situations are completely different.

 

[Sir_Knight]

No. In truth, you drew the line in the sand. I propose you followed the Nazarene’s example to a tee. Remember the temple, the money changers, the bankers, and the sellers of sacrificial animals. Congrats!

If this irks some people, so be it. The Nazarene irks a lot of people.

Let him who claims to be Jesus do the same for He was above the law but for the rest of us who are no above the law, let us follow the examples of His apostles who NEVER robbed or destroyed anything even if they felt that it would lead others to sin because they correctly understood that doing so would be sinful in the eyes of God and one does not fight sin with sin.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Judith’s actions were during a just war, true, but she was not commanded by the Lord to kill a man while he was defenseless.

God’s way is the right way, always! I am not refuting that, simply saying that his way isn’t always love and mercy only, but also just. Sometimes the less than nice and peaceful ways are mandatory. Since God doesn’t give audible commands in every instance of life, I cannot say how we as Catholics are commanded to do this. Certainly not every Catholic would have this calling. We have Catholic soldiers, Catholic police, Catholic FBI…and again, “illegal” isn’t always sinful, especially when sin is a guaranteed “right.”

How? By following the teachings of the Bible and the Catholic Church. To do otherwise, is to sin in the eyes of God.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I think we should practice moral pragmatism here, and ask why one should tear down a poster.

Is it to show we Catholics are moral, peaceful, law-abiding people? Is it to show how we respect other people’s rights? Is it to show how rational and wise we are?

Or is it to make ourselves look like irrational, immoral people?

 

[Julian_Peters]

Thank you to all who have participated. This thread is now closed.