Author Topic: "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet  (Read 1423 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Dulcamara

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1067
  • Reputation: +38/-0
  • Gender: Female
"Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
« on: June 19, 2009, 02:29:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I renounce any and all of my former views against what the Church through Pope Leo XIII said, "This, then, is the teaching of the Catholic Church ...no one of the several forms of government is in itself condemned, inasmuch as none of them contains anythi

    Offline Dulcamara

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1067
    • Reputation: +38/-0
    • Gender: Female
    "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
    « Reply #1 on: June 19, 2009, 03:02:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I think this brings up some very important issues for all of us as Catholics on the internet. Among them some things I have long thought about.

    1) That you have everyone on the internet speaking with authority as though they are the pope (and in some cases probably claiming to be), when really, the average Catholic has got no business at all preaching or spreading opinions, or even POSSIBLY false statements as though they are the truth. And the fact of the matter is, I'm betting very few Catholics really stop themselves if they aren't sure, and go look it up in a reliable source.

    2) That we are subjecting ourselves in public sites to countless errors, blasphemies, calumnies, hatred, and downright lies... and that this is easily dangerous for all of us, both because we may imbibe errors ourselves, and because we can also imbibe the spirit of that hatred and calumnies going around, if not spread them ourselves.

    3) that sites that permit these errors are not good, and we should not be on them


    and finally,

    4) if we should not be on sites with errors, then is it or is it not true to say, that Catholic sites are bound, then, not to permit them to be spoken to begin with?

    The minute ANYONE brings up questions of "control" or "censorship" there are instant flames. Instant outrage. Because precisely everyone thinks that HE is right, and everyone else is wrong. So how dare ANYONE censor them, or keep them off of a site, or keep them from spouting what they think or believe anywhere they want to. What we forget is this...

    When we go to, say... a novus ordo site... and we are censored from saying anything about their being an objective truth, or anything about not departing from the teachings of Christ, eg, from tradition... you are talking about censorship. But here you are dealing with censorship of things that really ARE true and good. People SHOULD be allowed to say, for example, that clown masses are not good, because they really aren't good. It's true. But if someone comes along and says, for example, that we shouldn't venerate Mary, because she was only human... that's an error.

    We have forgotten, it seems, that errors are evil. And we may not do evil, whether by action OR omission, or even subject ourselves to evil. Therefore errors SHOULD be censored, and I think must be censored by Catholic websites. Yes, that puts the webmaster in the position of being responsible for what they do or do not permit on their site, to be read by Catholics why, perhaps being more ignorant, may read errors and believe them. But clearly, the line should be drawn at the truth... not before it, and not after it.

    It's true that no Catholic website can examine it's visitors or contributors to see, point by point, if they are right about everything they think. But if someone is saying something that is clearly wrong according to dogma, Catholic doctrine, etc... the first person responsible for someone being led astray, is going to be the guy who let the liar (so to speak) in the door.

    And it's not just the webmasters, then, that have a responsibility, but also the posters or contributors. We, too, have the obligation to make sure that anything we say on matters of Catholic faith or morals, are absolutely, positively, exactly correct, before we say them as if we ARE absolutely certain, because someone else will read it, and if we're wrong, may be led astray. Do we take that obligation seriously?

    Personally, my policy is this (in posting). If it's a matter of the catechism or dogma or what not, and I am not absolutely certain that I have got it right, I will look it up. I try to go get the book I know I can find it in, be it St. Thomas or the catechism or what not, and read it and make sure I understood it, before I risk spreading something that is false. Or I will trust a holy Catholic priest to tell me the answer, because he's had years of theology, and I haven't.

    But I think that ultimately, this topic is something taken way too lightly, whether by site owners (some of whom will allow anything, as long as it's not tradition, and others who will allow people to say just about anything short of complete blasphemy), or by site visitors. If I own a stage with a mic standing on it, I am responsible for what is said on it. If someone gets up there and gets a lot of people to renounce the truth, that will be my fault. So, too, if I grab the mic, and start spouting errors... that, too, would be my fault.

    Leading others into sin by action or omission, is a sin. Visiting places which we know are dangerous to our faith and morals, is a sin (purposely putting one's self in the occasion of sin). Reading things contradictory to our faith or the truth about our Faith is sinful, because however sure we are that we won't fall, we are capable of being poisoned that way. We are responsible for what we say.

    Here's hoping that both webmasters and the people who visit them, will one day start taking the matter as seriously as it deserves to be taken.

    For my part... I wonder what His Excellency would have to say even about this place. Since hearing the words of that interview, I myself have begun to wonder whether I should allow myself to be exposed to a LOT of what goes on here.

    A lot of people who knew the truth and were firm in it at one time, have their firm foundations rotted by such. We're all only human, and pride (Oh, _I_ would never loose my faith!) goeth before the fall.

    :sheep: :  :sad:
    I renounce any and all of my former views against what the Church through Pope Leo XIII said, "This, then, is the teaching of the Catholic Church ...no one of the several forms of government is in itself condemned, inasmuch as none of them contains anythi


    Offline Raoul76

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4814
    • Reputation: +2007/-4
    • Gender: Male
    "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
    « Reply #2 on: June 19, 2009, 04:12:01 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • As I was a new convert when posting here, my posts are often full of error, even unwitting heresy and rash judgment, all of which I renounce, and all my writings are best avoided -- MDLS

    Offline Dawn

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2439
    • Reputation: +44/-0
    • Gender: Female
      • h
    "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
    « Reply #3 on: June 19, 2009, 04:36:44 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Your words are true. And, it is good as well to point out that God is Perfect Justice. And, we shall be surprised when we find out just what offends him, including meat pizza on Friday.
    And, yes we must try to help others see the truths of our current time. Wehave been told over and over again that the final times will be unlike any other period in the Churches History. We have been told by the Mother of God that Rome will loose the faith and become the seat of the anti-Christ.
         How cult like indeed, if anyone says that Fellay is doing anything wrong in courting Benedict and his New Church (He is infact condemed from the grave by the very words of Archbishop Lefebvre himself) he is in Mortal Sin.
        It was Bishop Williamson who once said to the then called Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger that they were not of the same faith. I have read the words of Lefebvre and the words of Ratzinger and I would say that they are teaching about two very different Faiths indeed.

    Offline trent13

    • Jr. Member
    • **
    • Posts: 280
    • Reputation: +18/-2
    "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
    « Reply #4 on: June 19, 2009, 07:05:20 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • And I would just like to point out that the SSPX is not the Church and who are they to say that Catholics should avoid sites that may expose them to (oh no!) sedevacantism?  They act the same as the Novus Ordo would about the SSPX - make sure you avoid exposure to the SSPX b/c that is sinful, definitely mortal sin there....

    Another thing is that for every traditional priest SSPX or not it seems you will get a different opinion on the crisis in the Church, so who can say that these are ones to avoid and these are not?  If we were not in a position where the laity are unable to trust their dioscesan "priests and bishops," where we didn't have to find tradition on our own, and find out the truth on our own, I would agree with the general point of the article.  The SSPX cannot go around saying that it is sinful given that an awful lot of people wouldn't even know where to look or what to look for if it weren't for running across things that other people said on the internet.  And like I said, the SSPX is not the Church, so I don't think anyone can be saying, well, all they have to do is go the SSPX website to get all the information they need....


    Offline Telesphorus

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 12714
    • Reputation: +7/-12
    • Gender: Male
    "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
    « Reply #5 on: June 19, 2009, 07:09:00 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: trent13
    And I would just like to point out that the SSPX is not the Church and who are they to say that Catholics should avoid sites that may expose them to (oh no!) sedevacantism?  They act the same as the Novus Ordo would about the SSPX - make sure you avoid exposure to the SSPX b/c that is sinful, definitely mortal sin there....

    Another thing is that for every traditional priest SSPX or not it seems you will get a different opinion on the crisis in the Church, so who can say that these are ones to avoid and these are not?  If we were not in a position where the laity are unable to trust their dioscesan "priests and bishops," where we didn't have to find tradition on our own, and find out the truth on our own, I would agree with the general point of the article.  The SSPX cannot go around saying that it is sinful given that an awful lot of people wouldn't even know where to look or what to look for if it weren't for running across things that other people said on the internet.  And like I said, the SSPX is not the Church, so I don't think anyone can be saying, well, all they have to do is go the SSPX website to get all the information they need....


    I think Bishop Fellay is advising caution, and to avoid scandal-mongering and the sort of attacks on motivations and character that one sees on a site like Traditio.

    Offline spouse of Jesus

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1903
    • Reputation: +336/-1
    • Gender: Female
    "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
    « Reply #6 on: June 20, 2009, 03:40:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Some trad website forget the whole history of catholic self-renunciation. they believe that simplicity in dress and decoration, avoiding adornments and useless science, preferring silence to music and seriousness to laughter is puritanic, jansnistic, or calvinistic.

    Look here:

    http://www.angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23663&highlight=

    http://www.angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23721&highlight=


    http://www.angelqueen.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23545&highlight=


    Offline gladius_veritatis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6172
    • Reputation: +1234/-0
    • Gender: Male
    "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
    « Reply #7 on: June 20, 2009, 04:52:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Considering Abp. Lefebvre himself said that it might become necessary one day to proclaim (SANS legal declaration, btw) that the See of Peter is vacant, we may presume Bp. Fellay has no problem with the crisis being discussed openly and honestly.  God speed.

    Btw 2, Bp. Fellay has no 'canonical mission' from the present "Pontiff" - nor has the SSPX for 30+ years.
    + Vincit veritas +


    Offline gladius_veritatis

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6172
    • Reputation: +1234/-0
    • Gender: Male
    "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
    « Reply #8 on: June 20, 2009, 04:58:56 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Just a reminder for Bp. Fellay:

    "There's no business like SHO-AH business..." :dancing:
    + Vincit veritas +

    Offline clare

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2269
    • Reputation: +887/-34
    • Gender: Female
      • h
    "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
    « Reply #9 on: June 20, 2009, 06:11:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: spouse of Jesus
    Some trad website forget the whole history of catholic self-renunciation. they believe that simplicity in dress and decoration, avoiding adornments and useless science, preferring silence to music and seriousness to laughter is puritanic, jansnistic, or calvinistic.
    ...


    Preferring those things is not Jansenistic.

    Insisting that everyone else must prefer those things, or they aren't proper Catholics, is.

    Offline Caminus

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 3015
    • Reputation: +1/-0
    • Gender: Male
    "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
    « Reply #10 on: June 20, 2009, 12:45:15 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote
    Nice try, Bp. Fellay!  I like how everything comes around to his job security.
     

    Flippant fool, you just proved his point.

    Quote
    Therefore, using the Internet is a mortal sin when you attack SSPX.


    It never ceases to amaze me how "sedevacantists" cannot comprehend even the most basic distinctions and even distort the words of a man in the very next breath.  

    Quote
    This is the first I've ever heard of criticizing a third-order full of bishops excommunicated by non-Popes being a mortal sin.  Not just any sin, mind you, but MORTAL sin!


    They are Roman Catholic priests and Bishops.  Do you think you have been exonerated from the exigencies of the moral law when speaking about others?  

    Quote
    I feel that God is


    Quote
    I don't feel that way when I speak against


    Quote
    I have felt a sinfu


    Quote
    I have a hunch I am right


    Quote
    it keeps them from being sedevacantist and robs the true Church in our time of numbers, power and money.
     

    Quote
    but I think it's displeasing to God


    Quote
    ( a ) If he is the Pope, then those in SSPX are disobeying the Vicar of Christ
     
    ( b ) If he is a heretic and Anti-Christ they are in collusion with him.
     

    There's a third option, but that's way too inconvenient for you to consider.

    Quote
    I feel I've even worked off some of my guilt
     

    Quote
    Sometimes I feel


    Quote
    I feel I need to speak out.
     

    Quote
    That I have a certain ability


    Quote
    People used to talk about how the recent "Popes" are vague and possibly close to heretical but they aren't using the Extraordinary Magisterium.  Yet Lumen Gentium does use it.
     

    For as easy and perspicuous as you claim, you sure were awfully silent in the face of an examination of your opinion.  I'm sure that you realize that lying is a sin, even if you're "on the right side."  You remind me of a Calvinist who tells people that Predestination is an easy topic to learn.      



    Offline CM

    • Sr. Member
    • ****
    • Posts: 2726
    • Reputation: +0/-0
    "Infallible" Catholics and the Internet
    « Reply #11 on: June 20, 2009, 11:41:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote from: gladius_veritatis
    Just a reminder for Bp. Fellay:

    "There's no business like SHO-AH business..." :dancing:


    Hahahaha!

    Please go read my response to Raoul76 on BoD, GV.

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16