Civil Religious Discussions : all things Christianity II

[2A_Tom]

I believe they are Messianic Jews.

A little too rocky I'll admit. The eastern tinge offsets that a bit though.

 

[foszoe]

Don't worry you won't miss it. Even if you miss it, you still won't be able to miss it.

Somehow I missed the second coming by a few days (not surprised, in my current state).

 

[JettaKnight]

I believe they are Messianic Jews.

A little too rocky I'll admit. The eastern tinge offsets that a bit though.

I dig it!


Probably won't add it to the Sunday rotation... but then again, if the congregation was as dead as this week, I doubt they'll notice.


I had the drums and bass rockin' but there was nobody to answer the knockin' ... I guess they all partied too late on the 4th.

 

[abnk]

Well, having interacted with Fr. R, and knowing his personal history, this isn't the most difficult time of his life, but a rerun of a previous incident of bad judgement with different causes.

My thoughts were expressed after an examination of conscience. His pride led the way to this destination.



Ah, interesting. A victim of what - this was his own doing?



So, the bishop victimized Fr. R? An "editorial" problem by a parish pastor IS a big deal. This is more than just malapropism. For all his failings, he is VERY articulate. He said exactly what he thought, in the manner he thought it.

Have you interacted with Fr. R or attended his sermons? (Some are available online.) He likes being edgy. Its part of his schtick. There is a place for that - we can all be challenged in our faith. (Hence, this thread.)

But his callous statement of his unvarnished truth was just wrong in scope and language, and calls to question his judgment in shepherding others in faith.



hahaha

No, my friend Nits are there to be picked.

My point is that I think your reflexive defense on this specific matter might be too reflexive. That is, there is more to this narrative than the blog post.

Sorry, I'm having trouble keeping up. What teaching did his message contradict?

 

[T.Lex]

Sorry, I'm having trouble keeping up. What teaching did his message contradict?

Well, the maggots and parasites part seems contrary to "judge not...."

But, let's look at what Bishop Doherty said....
https://d2y1pz2y630308.cloudfront.n...ement regarding the death of George Floyd.jpg

Each of us is called to be a healer and a peacemaker by virtue of our baptism.

Fr. R's blog didn't really do any of that, eh?

But, what can people do? Oh, wait, there's a US Conference of Catholic Bishops list!
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...m/upload/action-steps-to-eradicate-racism.pdf

With the aid of Holy Scripture, Catholic social teaching, and sacred tradition, this is an open invitation to journey toward reconciliation.

I don't see "write an offensively overbroad blog post" among them.

At the end of the day, Fr. R had hatred in his heart for the people protesting against social injustice. He did not love them. He did not love his own parishioners participating in BLM. Or, perhaps worse, the people who avoid St. Elizabeth Seton because of his judgmental views - he certainly didn't love them.

 

[2A_Tom]

I am not a catholic so I have no opinion about you all.

I have disdain in my heart for the actions of the mob.

 

[abnk]

Well, the maggots and parasites part seems contrary to "judge not...."

But, let's look at what Bishop Doherty said....
https://d2y1pz2y630308.cloudfront.n...ement regarding the death of George Floyd.jpg


Fr. R's blog didn't really do any of that, eh?

But, what can people do? Oh, wait, there's a US Conference of Catholic Bishops list!
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...m/upload/action-steps-to-eradicate-racism.pdf



I don't see "write an offensively overbroad blog post" among them.

At the end of the day, Fr. R had hatred in his heart for the people protesting against social injustice. He did not love them. He did not love his own parishioners participating in BLM. Or, perhaps worse, the people who avoid St. Elizabeth Seton because of his judgmental views - he certainly didn't love them.

Thanks. That helps. The "judge not" point is a good one. His choice of words is very similar to what Christ Himself used. Fr. R. used "maggots and parasites." Off the top of my head, Christ used "swine" and "brood of vipers" (and I'm sure there are others). St. Paul gets even more harsh when he tells people to go cut their balls off. Fr. R. is in good company with his choice of words. We do not make judgment on souls, but we make judgments of actions every day. Even you just made a judgment by stating that Fr. R. had hatred in his heart instead of love (you may well be right, but only God knows what's in his heart).

Further, rebuking sinners is a spiritual work of mercy. Our clergy have been generally slacking on this for decades (an act of judgment on my part), which is why Fr. R.'s statement sounds out of place. Out of the norm, yes. Wrong, no. Worthy of suspension, most certainly not.

 

[T.Lex]

Thanks. That helps. The "judge not" point is a good one. His choice of words is very similar to what Christ Himself used. Fr. R. used "maggots and parasites." Off the top of my head, Christ used "swine" and "brood of vipers" (and I'm sure there are others). St. Paul gets even more harsh when he tells people to go cut their balls off. Fr. R. is in good company with his choice of words.

But not in his choice of targets.

If Fr. R is among those seeking social justice, tagging his allies as "snakes in the garden" is wrong.

We do not make judgment on souls, but we make judgments of actions every day. Even you just made a judgment by stating that Fr. R. had hatred in his heart instead of love (you may well be right, but only God knows what's in his heart).

But we can all see what he wrote. Borrowing your point about language, those descriptions were used to reflect hatred, or if not hatred then extreme contempt bordering on hatred.

Further, rebuking sinners is a spiritual work of mercy. Our clergy have been generally slacking on this for decades (an act of judgment on my part), which is why Fr. R.'s statement sounds out of place. Out of the norm, yes. Wrong, no. Worthy of suspension, most certainly not.

Wrong and worthy of suspension in the case of misplaced rebuke. You are defending his rebuke directed at the slim minority of current activists engaged in violence. I'm defending the vast majority of social justice activists that he wrongfully accused.

Our Protestant brethren may not recognize this, but....

Of three things my heart is frightened,
and of a fourth I am in great fear:
Slander in the city, the gathering of a mob,
and false accusation—all these are worse than death.

Ironic how many of those apply to the Fr. R situation (though not just to Fr. R.) Something like that might've helped him focus that blog post.

 

[JettaKnight]

But not in his choice of targets.

If Fr. R is among those seeking social justice, tagging his allies as "snakes in the garden" is wrong.


But we can all see what he wrote. Borrowing your point about language, those descriptions were used to reflect hatred, or if not hatred then extreme contempt bordering on hatred.



Wrong and worthy of suspension in the case of misplaced rebuke. You are defending his rebuke directed at the slim minority of current activists engaged in violence. I'm defending the vast majority of social justice activists that he wrongfully accused.

I'm with you on this - what he said wasn't necessarily wrong, but the broad brush and lack of empathy is where I would say it isn't Christ-like.

Our Protestant brethren may not recognize this, but....

 

[foszoe]

https://orthochristian.com/132522.html

 

[historian]

Hagia Sophia is back to being a mosque.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53366307

 

[JettaKnight]

Hagia Sophia is back to being a mosque.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53366307

So much for a secular Turkey.

 

[abnk]

But not in his choice of targets.

If Fr. R is among those seeking social justice, tagging his allies as "snakes in the garden" is wrong.


But we can all see what he wrote. Borrowing your point about language, those descriptions were used to reflect hatred, or if not hatred then extreme contempt bordering on hatred.



Wrong and worthy of suspension in the case of misplaced rebuke. You are defending his rebuke directed at the slim minority of current activists engaged in violence. I'm defending the vast majority of social justice activists that he wrongfully accused.

Our Protestant brethren may not recognize this, but....


Ironic how many of those apply to the Fr. R situation (though not just to Fr. R.) Something like that might've helped him focus that blog post.

I'm not sure if you're saying that BLM, Antifa, and their nefarious acolytes are his allies or that some who joined the aforementioned entities with good intentions are his allies. Could you clarify?

I'm also not sure if you meant what you vast majority sentence says. You didn't mean that the BLM, Antifa, and their nefarious acolytes comprise the majority of social justice activists, did you?

 

[T.Lex]

My friend, I don't think you're really misreading my post as starkly as it appears.

I'm not sure if you're saying that BLM, Antifa, and their nefarious acolytes are his allies or that some who joined the aforementioned entities with good intentions are his allies. Could you clarify?

I'm also not sure if you meant what you vast majority sentence says. You didn't mean that the BLM, Antifa, and their nefarious acolytes comprise the majority of social justice activists, did you?

Well, if you are lumping "BLM, Antifa, and their nefarious acolytes" together, then you are making the same mistake Fr. Ted does.

 

[PistolBob]

After Mayor Hogsett paints Black Lives Matter in the middle of Indiana Avenue....everything will be right with the world. Mayor Pothole Joe is the worst mayor Indy ever chose twice.

 

[2A_Tom]

Lex, If you are going to be the apologist for "BLM, ANTIFA and their 'NEFARIOUS' acolytes" you must present the case of all of the good they are doing.

The division and destruction is all that most of us can see.

It is pretty difficult to look past the (I would say dark cloud, but you would probably say "That is racist".) bad to see the silver lining. Please enlighten (also racist) us.

 

[JettaKnight]

Lex, If you are going to be the apologist for "BLM, ANTIFA and their 'NEFARIOUS' acolytes" you must present the case of all of the good they are doing.

The division and destruction is all that most of us can see.

It is pretty difficult to look past the (I would say dark cloud, but you would probably say "That is racist".) bad to see the silver lining. Please enlighten (also racist) us.

Come'on, Tom, T.Lex isn't an apologist for them. He know what those organizations are about, but (I'm taking the opportunity to words in his mouth), if you're writing a general message as a man of the cloth, you can't just universally condemn the de facto face of a social justice movement with Christian merit.

I think we can all agree that treating all men equally with love and respect is a Christian value. Furthermore, that consideration wasn't, and still isn't, fully extended to black people on the whole in America.

There's plenty of Christians who now see this as an important issue and would agree with the statement (lower case here) "black lives matter", yet would never embrace the nefarious values that (upper case here) Black Lives Matter actually embraces.



Therefore, if you're going to open condemn BLM in a message, then you need to take a significant amount of time explaining why Black Lives Matter is more than "black lives matter". You must be able to clearly say why BLM is wrong, yet explain why we in the Church need to accept that racism and inequality is still here and an issue we Christians must face.

Fr. Ted didn't do this. Or after re-reading it, I should say he does it poorly.


EDIT: Fr. Ted seems like a guy that would respond to "black lives matter" with "all lives matter."

 

[JettaKnight]

So, this follows on to that post, but is worthy of its own.



What is the (conservative) Christian response to the inequality?


Obviously the mainstream liberals have their thoughts, but I'm not interested in that.
And, if I was in the 1960's with the hindsight I have now, the solution would be quite a bit more obvious.
But now, today? Inequality (note, I'm not using the term racist, as explicit bias is eas(ier) to condemn and deal with) isn't so easy to acknowledge, and there's no clear goal to get to.

Does that make sense?

 

[T.Lex]

So, this follows on to that post, but is worthy of its own.



What is the (conservative) Christian response to the inequality?


Obviously the mainstream liberals have their thoughts, but I'm not interested in that.
And, if I was in the 1960's with the hindsight I have now, the solution would be quite a bit more obvious.
But now, today? Inequality (note, I'm not using the term racist, as explicit bias is eas(ier) to condemn and deal with) isn't so easy to acknowledge, and there's no clear goal to get to.

Does that make sense?

Within our parish, it is a practical response of providing free or low cost food, clothing, temporary shelter for those in need, medical care and educational opportunities.

At a larger scale, it is advocating for those who need advocacy. Advocating to change the policies that are destructive. Generally, an examination of conscience helps with that kind of advocacy, and none are forced to participate.

The Church has many role models who sacrificed earthly rewards to seek change on behalf of those less fortunate.

Is that part of what you're asking?

 

[HoughMade]

My first question would be "what is inequality"?

As a conservative Christian, I will only speak for myself.

I make a concerted effort to treat everyone with respect and kindness. I am in favor of helping the helpless and providing for the destitute with the goal of finding a way for them to eventually provide for themselves. However, I understand that this will never happen for some and my compassion should still extend to these people. I do not want people to have their opportunities limited externally based upon immutable characteristics. However, all people will not always have equal opportunities for a myriad of reasons. I would like to extend help in the form of extending opportunities to people who started life with less of them, but I am not in favor of placing people in positions they have not earned. In sum, I want to treat people well regardless of who they are or their ethnicity or race.

...so I am wondering just what "inequality" means in this context. Inequality in results?