Would there be any Martyrs today?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Iotaunum
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, I don’t know what to make of your post. Not knowing you personally, I don’t know whether you are annoyed by my comments, or otherwise. Giving you the benefit of the doubt however, I will assume you are light hearted. This being the case: I do speak out and I hope I have spoken only the Truths of the Catholic Faith and clearly. In my personal life, I make clear these truths in discussions with non-catholics as well as Catholic Priests and Bishops whom I have spoken with recently. This is the faith I inherited and I was brought up to think this way - especially by an elderly priest. However in reference to the Martyrdom part - I do hope that if I was in the same sitution that the Canonised Martyrs found themselves in, that I would do what they done. However, no one knows how faithful we sould be in their situation until we are in it ourselves. I would hope I would do the right thing. As for the "If you feel that we are all failing at this, show us how its done." part - I hope you don’t think I was addressing you personally, or anyone else on this forum.
Iotaunum, I was brought up around drugs and alcohol, I thus defended that view, and so did many bishops ( metaphorically speaking, not actual catholic bishops ) of the drug scene teach me that it was truth, does that mean it was truth?

as for the elderly priest. The philokalia teaches that just because someone is old and grey in the head does not mean they know everything about the Christ and give good teaching.

Have recourse to Christ my friend. Be open to the truth.

anyway I’m glad you love Christ and his church and have a desire to know him. You are certainly more holy than I could ever be and would be an interesting man to sit down and have chat with over a pint of guinness and a packet of peanuts.

Please keep in touch always and pm me if you wish.

Pax
Stephen
 
I am showing you that the church, although retains the infallible teaching of nulla salus does not know the mind of God. for he alone is judge and transcends their understanding of him.
I don’t want to sound argumentative, but why exactly are you showing me this when I have stated many times that I understand the Church dogmas? Also the Church not knowing the mind of God is superflous to the Dogmas which have been defined infallibly by the Church. In these we understand the mind of God very clearly in these particular matters of divine faith; precisely because God has revealed them. They would not be dogmatically defined otherwise.
my own theological outlook is that if Christ can offer salutery repentance for those who commit suicide he can do so for those who are visibly outside the communion of the faith.
This is not traditional Catholic Theology. Where do you get the teaching that Christ offers salutery repentance for those who commit suicide? This teaching is indeed novel, and unkown to the Church who refused ecclesiastical burial to those who commited Suicide. Also, it conflicts with the Moral theology held by the Church.
lets face it, if people knew the truth how many would refuse Christ? therefore the visible church down here transcends the material and when a soul leaves the body it meets Christ ( who refuses noone ) and offers them a chance for salutery repentance. Lets face it, if you as a buddist met Jesus when your soul departed from your body you would certainly believe and thus enter the kingdom.
The soul is judged at the moment of death in what is called the particular judgement. It is a dogma of the faith that all who die in mortal sin go strait to hell. Are you questioning this dogma? There is no second chance, as though those who die get told by God that the Catholic religion is true and if they accept it and repent they will go to heaven! Who then would choose Hell? This is universal salvation, and not Catholic doctrine. remember, Christ Himself said that the road to Heaven is NARROW and few there are who find it. What you imply is a second chance/chance to repent at the moment of death. If this is so, then it has been condemned by the Church many times. You should clarify.
Take a look at the theif on the cross. Christ offered him a place in the kingdom. he was not even baptised, but through his last minute BELIEF was welcomed into paradise.

Pax
Stephen
Ah, but it was not his faith alone which saved him, as the protestants would have - nor was it baptism of desire, since the obligation of Baptism did not begin until after the ressurrection. This is Church teaching on the matter. The documents can be provided.
 
“…just because someone is old and grey in the head does not mean they know everything about the Christ and give good teaching.”

So true. Wisdom doesn’t necessary come with age.
 
Iotaunum, I was brought up around drugs and alcohol, I thus defended that view, and so did many bishops ( metaphorically speaking, not actual catholic bishops ) of the drug scene teach me that it was truth, does that mean it was truth?

as for the elderly priest. The philokalia teaches that just because someone is old and grey in the head does not mean they know everything about the Christ and give good teaching.

Have recourse to Christ my friend. Be open to the truth.

anyway I’m glad you love Christ and his church and have a desire to know him. You are certainly more holy than I could ever be and would be an interesting man to sit down and have chat with over a pint of guinness and a packet of peanuts.

Please keep in touch always and pm me if you wish.

Pax
Stephen
You most certainly do have a different theological outlook than me. I don’t mean to attack you personally, I wouldn’t do that, but I will not change my theology if that is what you mean by "Be open to the truth". As for the elderly priest, I am not clinging to his position for the sake of it, or out of setntimentality. I hold the theology which is conistant with that which has always been held, and particularly what has been defined inafallible by the universal magisterium. I have read alot of older theology manuals both latin and english and they are consistant. I have no time for theological novelties.

As for the “more holy than I” part- I wouldn’t say that, and you could have no basis for saying so either. Lets just both agree to try and become holier.
 
Iotunum your an absolute cracker the more you post the more I love you.

I dont expect you to accept what I say but you seem to have it all wrong.

open your catechism, the church teaches that Christ can offer salutary repentance for those who commit suicide which is a mortal sin and should normally send us to hell.

you can check out my blog for the paragraph of the catechism in which teaches this under the categorie of apologetics. www.loyaltothemagisterium.wordpress.com

I know the church has infallibly proclaimed dogmas, but the church admits ( as Pius IX did ) that they do not know the mind of God and that their interpretation of Church dogma with regards to nulla salus is limited.

God alone is judge and when people meet him its not up to us to decide what he says and what he does. We are not peoples judge and Pius IX admits this.

of course Johns quotation of Pius IX in which I provided he trys to bend it to cling to a traditional view and reject ecumenism but you can not bend the truth, only accept it.

Have you ever heard this story? a man who was excommunicated took his woes to God, ‘‘God’’ he says ‘‘they excommunicated me for being a sinner, what are you going to do about it?’’ in reply God says ‘‘what are you complaining about my child? they wont let me in either’’

''Lament of a bishop: ''every where Jesus went there was a revolution, every where I go people serve tea."

Pax
Stephen
 
“…just because someone is old and grey in the head does not mean they know everything about the Christ and give good teaching.”

So true. Wisdom doesn’t necessary come with age.
It rarely comes without experience though. For most of us that comes with age. If I could have known in my misspent youth what I know today…
 
It rarely comes without experience though. For most of us that comes with age. If I could have known in my misspent youth what I know today…
experience does not come with age. We are all called to become like children to enter the kingdom of God. St.John of the Cross wrote most of his great works in his ‘‘young age’’ when he was only 25 years old.

experience is experience, there are children I’ve met at the age of 5 or 7 that or more experienced than the 80 year old doctor of the church.

also there are doctors of theology out there in recent times who have studied died and have never been remembered. The true doctor of the faiths are saints, such as St.John of the cross for example.

Pax
Stephen
 
Catholics in Iraq are Martyrs for the faith. Catholics in Iran are Martyrs for the faith. In recent years, Catholics in Russia (the Soviet Union before that) and in China have been Martyrs for the faith.

Martyrs have been, and still do, occur all over the world. Most don’t get a lot of publicity, but that does not lessen the Martyrdom that they suffer.
 
I dont expect you to accept what I say but you seem to have it all wrong.

open your catechism, the church teaches that Christ can offer salutary repentance for those who commit suicide which is a mortal sin and should normally send us to hell.
This is exactly the sort of thing I was referring to. I would like you to quote where I “have it all wrong” for you havent made yourself clear. Regarding the “Christ can offer salutary repentance for those who commit suicide which is a mortal sin” - this is not Church teaching - period. The Church has defined dogmatically that those who die in mortal sin go straight to Hell. This cannot be questioned. What you seem to be suggesting is that God can/does offer second chances to those who die in mortal sin to repent. If this were the case, then no one who died would refuse to repent. This is heretical and has been condemned by the Church. Dogmas cannot change nor be retracted. They are Truths revealed by Christ Himself. This whole notion of “salutary repentance” after death for those who die in mortal sin is a novel doctrine, unheard of before Vatican II

The Church practice for almost its entire history of refusing ecclesiastical burial for those who commit suicide says alot about its teachings on the matter. I suppose you are one of those people who now “understand better” that the Church ever did that Limbo does not actually exist anymore, and that all the unborn children go strait to heaven?
you can check out my blog for the paragraph of the catechism in which teaches this under the categorie of apologetics. www.loyaltothemagisterium.wordpress.com
If you want to discuss the theological weight given to a particular catechism or statement in it that is a whole other issue.
I know the church has infallibly proclaimed dogmas, but the church admits ( as Pius IX did ) that they do not know the mind of God and that their interpretation of Church dogma with regards to nulla salus is limited.
The point is that when the Church dogmatically defines something, it does so clearly. The interpretation is not to be any other than that explained when the Church defined it. The interpretation cannot change - nor be understood contrary to what has been clearly defined. I dont know why you persist in this matter -have I ever interpreted the dogma you mention (Extra ecclesia nulla salus) in any way that you take issue with?
God alone is judge and when people meet him its not up to us to decide what he says and what he does. We are not peoples judge and Pius IX admits this.
I never claimed otherwise. However, Pius IX does not admit of your position at all. We know infallible what leads to Hell, and that those who die in Mortal sin go straight to Hell. This is not judging privately, but God has revealed that people who do certain things cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. What we cannot do however, is read the Soul, and we cannot tell whether someone has repented and confessed their sins. Thus we are not to judge the Soul, but when people do things which the Church infallibly teaches will lead to Hell, we can rebuke them for it, in charity of course.
of course Johns quotation of Pius IX in which I provided he trys to bend it to cling to a traditional view and reject ecumenism but you can not bend the truth, only accept it.
Pax
Stephen
What truth would that be? If you mean ecumenism, the i’m not even going to get started in that discussion!
 
Martyerdom in the First World is pretty rare these days. Most of it happens in places outside the U.S and Europe, which is why you don’t hear much about it. Personally, I’m glad I live in a place where you don’t lose your life for expressing your faith.
 
Martyerdom in the First World is pretty rare these days. Most of it happens in places outside the U.S and Europe, which is why you don’t hear much about it. Personally, I’m glad I live in a place where you don’t lose your life for expressing your faith.
Martyrdom may not be, but persecution is. Many are persecuted for holding on to Catholic beliefs, especially those who fight for life.
 
58 new Catholic martyrs were just created this month. Where have you been?

nytimes.com/2010/11/02/world/middleeast/02iraq.html
Thank you – as soon as I started reading the Original Post I thought of the recent martyrs…and I know many people who would joyfully give their life for Christ…maybe the OP should find some more dedicated Christians to spend time with?

But on the other hand, it does get discouraging sometimes. I work in a room with four other Catholics…and they are less than lukewarm…they are cafeteria style and lead horibbly sinful lives that they brag about…and they think I’m taking the Church “too seriously”…but oh well…oh welll…

But then I get to either my parish, or my Monday night Bible Timeline study at another parish, and I’m around people who love Our Lord so much. They are hard working in the Church, they evangelize, teach, sing, provide assistance to all of the parish and its programs…and with no thought of reward or needing attention for their labors…they Love Our Lord so much…and you see it in their eyes, and I know they would not deny Our Lord, I know they would lay down their lives for Him if asked, if requried.

So…OP…God’s grace and blessing be with you, I hope you find some people to serve with that bring you joy and comfort in this world.
 
Martyrdom may not be, but persecution is. Many are persecuted for holding on to Catholic beliefs, especially those who fight for life.
For our litigious society, it ususally means you get fired or sued.

I’m not sure of the history of martyrs in the U.S. , knew there were some early ones(1600’s/1700’s) amongst those Priests/Brothers who were ‘witnessing’ to the Indians. Beyond that anything done by the KKK towards Catholics and others can probably be more termed hate crimes. Dont think any Martyrs came of that.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martyr
newadvent.org/cathen/09736b.htm

In addition, the poor Catholics killed in a Catholic church in Iraq are certainly 'm’artyrs (lower case), they may not fit the Catholic church definition or even the primary definiton given by the Meriam-Webster anymore than Catholics killed by the KKK and other similar instances involving cultural and religious bigotry.
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/martyr
Martyrdom(upper case) is pretty special and usually bears fruit.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_martyr
 
This is exactly the sort of thing I was referring to. I would like you to quote where I “have it all wrong” for you havent made yourself clear. Regarding the “Christ can offer salutary repentance for those who commit suicide which is a mortal sin” - this is not Church teaching - period. The Church has defined dogmatically that those who die in mortal sin go straight to Hell. This cannot be questioned. What you seem to be suggesting is that God can/does offer second chances to those who die in mortal sin to repent. If this were the case, then no one who died would refuse to repent. This is heretical and has been condemned by the Church. Dogmas cannot change nor be retracted. They are Truths revealed by Christ Himself. This whole notion of “salutary repentance” after death for those who die in mortal sin is a novel doctrine, unheard of before Vatican II

The Church practice for almost its entire history of refusing ecclesiastical burial for those who commit suicide says alot about its teachings on the matter. I suppose you are one of those people who now “understand better” that the Church ever did that Limbo does not actually exist anymore, and that all the unborn children go strait to heaven?

If you want to discuss the theological weight given to a particular catechism or statement in it that is a whole other issue.

The point is that when the Church dogmatically defines something, it does so clearly. The interpretation is not to be any other than that explained when the Church defined it. The interpretation cannot change - nor be understood contrary to what has been clearly defined. I dont know why you persist in this matter -have I ever interpreted the dogma you mention (Extra ecclesia nulla salus) in any way that you take issue with?

I never claimed otherwise. However, Pius IX does not admit of your position at all. We know infallible what leads to Hell, and that those who die in Mortal sin go straight to Hell. This is not judging privately, but God has revealed that people who do certain things cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. What we cannot do however, is read the Soul, and we cannot tell whether someone has repented and confessed their sins. Thus we are not to judge the Soul, but when people do things which the Church infallibly teaches will lead to Hell, we can rebuke them for it, in charity of course.

What truth would that be? If you mean ecumenism, the i’m not even going to get started in that discussion!
Ah yes of course, for the traditionalist it is a matter of: who cares what the church or catechism says? who cares what the popes say? just throw anything that we dont agree with out the window so we can hold on to our private interpretation what the church teaches.

Protestantism ring any bells? :yukonjoe:
 
Ah yes. Another thread with somebody crowing about “Extra ecclesia nola solus,” which is invariably addressed as a soteriological rather than ecclesiolgical question. I can say with confidence that there is no salvation outside the Church, but I can also say with confidence that the Church, that is, the People of God, is much more than the institutional Church. To say that the Church is only visible, and that it has no invisible aspect is exactly the same as saying that the Church has only a human dimension, and there is no spiritual dimension whatsoever. The Church is visible and invisible; it is both human and divine. It is utterly beyond our capabilities to damn anyone to hell based on the sign on the dooor where they worship.
 
That is not exactly what I was thinking of. However, it is sad to hear about these horrible deaths and we must continue to pray that the persecution of the Church in this area stops.

What I mean is Martyrs in the traditional sense or the word. I dont’t really know much about this particular incident, and perhaps some of these would fit the term. However, A Martyr is traditionally one who knowingly accepts death rather than renounce his/her faith when the option is given. Perhaps some, or even all of these victims fit that category (I havent read much about it yet) but risking your life to practice your religion or having no choice in the matter is not considered martyrdom, as the Church as considered it traditionally.
Have you ever heard of St. Maximilian Kolbe. He was canonized “The Martyr for the 20th Century”. He did not die defending the faith. He died because of his faith.

You have a very limited vision of martyrdom. It is true that those who chose death rather than renounce their faith are mayrtyrs. However, that’s only one form of martyrdom. Look at another great Franciscan, St. Thomas More. He did not die to avoid renouncing his faith. He died because he would not comply with a state that challenged Church teaching.

Then there are the Five Franciscan Martyrs of Florida. They did not die rather than deny their faith. They were missionaries who were killed because they were preaching the faith.

Then there are several Jesuit martyrs in North America, led by St. Isaac Jogues. None died for the reason that you stated. Again, they died because of their faith. Bl. Kateri is also a martyr who died because she chose to be Catholic.

Don’t forget St. Peter Miki and companions. None of them were asked to renounce their faith. They were hated because of their faith.

If you’re looking for the “traditional” martyr, you may have to do more research. More men and women have been canonized martyrs who died because they were Catholic, than those who died rather than renounce the faith. Traditionally, the Church has canonized and venerated as martyrs those who are killed because of their faith, even if they did not die defending it. I’m having problems understanding your definition of “traditional martyr”.

Just an aside, but an interesting note, the night before the canonization of Br. Maximilian Maria Kolbe (we never call him Father), Pope John Paul had a dream. The plan was to canonize Max as confessor and religious. In his dream he said that he saw St. Francis of Assisi, the Virgin Mary crowining Max. Max was wearing a crown of white and red. In his early years, Max had a vision where Our Lady showed him two crowns: a white and a red. He asked what they were and she said, “The crown of purity and the crown of martyrdome. Which do you want?” He answered, “I choose both.” In the dream, St. Francis said to John Paul, “It is Jesus’ will that my son be venerated as a martyr.”

Upon awaking, the Holy Father sent word to change the colors of the mass, from white to red. When everyone arrived for the mass of canonization, they were surprised to see the red. Later, when asked, Pope John Paul told the story. He not only canonized him as a martyr, but gave him the title of “Martyr for the 20th Century”.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
This is exactly the sort of thing I was referring to. I would like you to quote where I “have it all wrong” for you havent made yourself clear. Regarding the “Christ can offer salutary repentance for those who commit suicide which is a mortal sin” - this is not Church teaching - period. The Church has defined dogmatically that those who die in mortal sin go straight to Hell. This cannot be questioned. What you seem to be suggesting is that God can/does offer second chances to those who die in mortal sin to repent. If this were the case, then no one who died would refuse to repent. This is heretical and has been condemned by the Church. Dogmas cannot change nor be retracted. They are Truths revealed by Christ Himself. This whole notion of “salutary repentance” after death for those who die in mortal sin is a novel doctrine, unheard of before Vatican II

The Church practice for almost its entire history of refusing ecclesiastical burial for those who commit suicide says alot about its teachings on the matter. I suppose you are one of those people who now “understand better” that the Church ever did that Limbo does not actually exist anymore, and that all the unborn children go strait to heaven?
I believe that you’re confusing teaching with dogma. The Church has never dogmatically declared that anyone goes to hell, period. She’s not in the business of judging who goes to hell. The Church has always taught that those who die in a state of mortal sin go to hell. It’s an objective statement. It’s not a subjective statement. She does not point to John Doe and says that he went to hell because he committed suicide. The Church admits that we have no way of knowing the state of mind of a person who commits suicide. Therefore, we commend their souls to the mercy of God. We know that most people who commit suicide as very distressed. There is a question about the freedom involved in these cases. There is also a question about how rational their thinking can be. The dimunision of freedom and reason also diminish culpability, even when the matter is grave.

As to limbo, the Church never dogmatically taught Limbo. Limbo has been a philsophical debate for centuries and never defined as doctrine. It was considered worthy of belief. That’s as far as the Church teaches.

Look very carefully at what the Church teahes about children who are aborted. She believes that they can be saved and she encourages the faithful to trust in the mercy of God. God wants to save. You want to hand-cuff him to rules that in your mind are absolute and domas. The Church does not make it her job to hand-cuff God.

That is why in her moral teachings, the Church is always very careful to use such words as “objectively”. There are some actions that are always objectively grave sins. The sin remains, but the person may or may not be culpable. Culpability is on a continuum based on: the gravity of the matter, the freedom that the person has, and the knowledge or understanding that the person has. God is not so cruel as to condemn someone who does not have the understanind, even though he may have the information.

Did you ever study advanced mathematics? I remember teaching math and having students who knew the formulas. They could apply them, but they did not have clue what they were doing. They did not understand the concept. This also happens with matters of faith. People of other faiths may know what we believe, but not have a clue. They simply do not understand the concept. To put it plain English, they cabn’t wrap their minds around it through no fault of their own, anymore than some students cannot wrap their mind around the quadratic equation, even though they can spit it out.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Our “quasi-martyrs” are those Christians who actively reject same sex marriage and the homosexual agenda. Those who, in return are called homophobes & haters by society.

They also are those Christians who actively work against the governmental forces who want to destroy all protections on human life.
I was also going to mention this as well - I believe Pope Benedict XVI referred to it as the “soft-martyrdom of Cardinal Neumann” when he chose a lowered social class in erturn for the truth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top