Author Topic: Going into 2019, Will Cathinfo offer banned souls a "Week of Mercy" ? (Read 11032 times)

Cantarella · « **Reply #240 on:** January 05, 2019, 09:45:05 PM »

Quote from: Pax Vobis on January 05, 2019, 01:27:55 PM

I would argue that St John’s first sermon is preaching against the practicality of corporal punishment; he does not say it’s immoral.

He says it is shameful. I hope you would agree that any Catholic man worth his name would refrain from engaging in all shameful or dishonorable conduct which would disgrace himself.

He also says that "it is the part of men that are strong, to bear the weak" and that being abusive is actually womanly, an inferiority, a disease of the soul. This means that a man who behaves in such a way is in reality, and perhaps unknowingly, displaying an effeminate behavior. We all know that women are physically (and in other forms) weaker than men.

Pax Vobis · « **Reply #241 on:** January 05, 2019, 10:28:11 PM »

Quote

He says it is shameful.

It could be shameful, it could be weak, it could be effiminate but that doesn't mean it's sinful, per se.

If the answer was simply "A man who hits his wife commits a sin" then St John's 1st sermon (as posted in this thread) wouldn't have been very long. On the contrary, he was preaching quite persuasively and making an argument BASED ON PRACTICALITY AND RESULTS. He was NOT making a moral argument, which would've been quite short and had quotes from Scripture and other saints. The fact that his sermon was rather lengthy, shows that his argument was not clear, not simple and not easily made.

Incredulous · « **Reply #242 on:** January 05, 2019, 11:30:31 PM »

Quote from: Incredulous on January 05, 2019, 01:15:26 PM

Thank you Cantarella for the Summa clarification on "blows". That would be with a closed hand, as a punch.

So we see, a little open handed slap or "bitch-slap" as they call it nowadays is okay

After all, even Bp. Williamson has endorsed it in one of his recorded lectures, as a means to correct a wife after she "get's out of line".

How positively different our lives would be if.... Father Adam would have firmly slapped Mother Eve for hanging-out near the Tree of Knowledge?

Cantarella · « **Reply #243 on:** January 06, 2019, 10:07:08 AM »

Quote from: Jaynek on January 05, 2019, 01:52:05 PM

The husband is the head of the wife. She must be subject to her husband and obey him. He commands; she obeys.

She obeys and he loves. Such are the explicit commands of the Church. A master does not love his slave, nor does he honor her, but a husband is commanded by God to love and honor his wife . This is an extremely important distinction between such relationships. There is no reason to suspect that one command is more important than the other. If a wife disobeys her husband, she does something against God’s will. If a husband does not love his wife, he does something against God’s will. The actions of husbands who love and honor their wives as their own flesh are usually unequivocal. They are easily distinguished from the husbands who do not.

Man is the head and woman is the body (this second part was omitted in your post), just as Christ is the Head, and the Church, the body. That is the definition of a true Catholic Marriage. Any other distortion either comes from man or the Devil. The head should not despise the body, just as Christ does not despise the Church.

St. Chrysostom in his homily 20 on Ephesians explains the mechanics of this relationship:

Quote

However not for the husband's sake alone it is thus said, but for the wife's sake also, that he cherish her as his own flesh, as Christ also the Church, and, that the wife fear her husband. He is no longer setting down the duties of love only, but what? That she fear her husband. The wife is a second authority; let not her then demand equality, for she is under the head; nor let him despise her as being in subjection, for she is the body; and if the head despise the body, it will itself also perish. But let him bring in love on his part as a counterpoise to obedience on her part. For example, let the hands and the feet, and all the rest of the members be given up for service to the head, but let the head provide for the body, seeing it contains every sense in itself. Nothing can be better than this union.

Quid Retribuam Domino · « **Reply #244 on:** January 06, 2019, 10:11:16 AM »

Quote from: Incredulous on January 05, 2019, 11:30:31 PM

How positively different our lives would be if.... Father Adam would have firmly slapped Mother Eve for hanging-out near the Tree of Knowledge?

Right here ^ , baby.

Cantarella · « **Reply #245 on:** January 06, 2019, 10:17:16 AM »

Quote from: Jaynek on January 05, 2019, 01:52:05 PM

Many Catholics throughout history believed that, since it was a superior-subordinate relationship, corporal punishment was permissible.

The domestic Catholic society has been established as an "order of love" as St. Augustine calls it. It is not a superior-subordinate relationship in the sense that you are thinking. The head cannot live without the body, just as the body cannot live without the head. In a true Catholic marriage, the man and the woman truly become one flesh in Christ. Wife is commanded to be subject to her husband. Husband is commanded to love his wife as Christ loves the Church, even laying his very life for her. Any other alteration to this doctrine does not come from the Church, but from twisted protestantized minds.

Pope Pius IX, Casti Connubii:

Quote

26. Domestic society being confirmed, therefore, by this bond of love, there should flourish in it that "order of love," as St. Augustine calls it. This order includes both the primacy of the husband with regard to the wife and children, the ready subjection of the wife and her willing obedience, which the Apostle commends in these words: "Let women be subject to their husbands as to the Lord, because the husband is the head of the wife, and Christ is the head of the Church."[29]

27. This subjection, however, does not deny or take away the liberty which fully belongs to the woman both in view of her dignity as a human person, and in view of her most noble office as wife and mother and companion; nor does it bid her obey her husband's every request if not in harmony with right reason or with the dignity due to wife; nor, in fine, does it imply that the wife should be put on a level with those persons who in law are called minors, to whom it is not customary to allow free exercise of their rights on account of their lack of mature judgment, or of their ignorance of human affairs. But it forbids that exaggerated liberty which cares not for the good of the family; it forbids that in this body which is the family, the heart be separated from the head to the great detriment of the whole body and the proximate danger of ruin. For if the man is the head, the woman is the heart, and as he occupies the chief place in ruling, so she may and ought to claim for herself the chief place in love.

28. Again, this subjection of wife to husband in its degree and manner may vary according to the different conditions of persons, place and time. In fact, if the husband neglect his duty, it falls to the wife to take his place in directing the family. But the structure of the family and its fundamental law, established and confirmed by God, must always and everywhere be maintained intact .

Jaynek · « **Reply #246 on:** January 06, 2019, 04:27:56 PM »

Quote from: Cantarella on January 06, 2019, 10:07:08 AM

She obeys and he loves. Such are the explicit commands of the Church.

You obviously ignore whatever does not fit your opinion. I just showed you a passage from Arcanum Divinae that contained the phrase "let there always be, both in him who commands and in her who obeys, a heaven-born love guiding both in their respective duties." The Church says the husband commands and the wife obeys. There is nothing wrong with describing marriage that way.

It is too frustrating discussing this with you. I need to stop.

Incredulous · « **Reply #247 on:** January 09, 2019, 12:12:32 AM »

Quote from: Quid Retribuam Domino on January 06, 2019, 10:11:16 AM

Right here ^ , baby.

No, I was thinking more about this.
What should Adam have actually said?

"Eve, drop the apple, raise your hands and get back from the tree!"
"After I beat the crap out of that snake with this stick, you're not going to be able to sit-down for a week"

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #248 on:** January 09, 2019, 04:34:39 AM »

Quote from: Incredulous on January 09, 2019, 12:12:32 AM

No, I was thinking more about this.
What should Adam have actually said?

"Eve, drop the apple, raise your hands and get back from the tree!"
"After I beat the crap out of that snake with this stick, you're not going to be able to sit-down for a week"

.
That sounds like a scene from an opera.

Matthew · « **Reply #249 on:** January 09, 2019, 03:01:11 PM »

I have seldom ever seen a thread so thoroughly derailed.

From "CathInfo granting mercy to banned users in 2019", to "Corporal punishment on wives within marriage"

Could the topics have anything less to do with each other?

Maria Regina · « **Reply #250 on:** January 09, 2019, 03:18:27 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on January 09, 2019, 03:01:11 PM

I have seldom ever seen a thread so thoroughly derailed.

From "CathInfo granting mercy to banned users in 2019", to "Corporal punishment on wives within marriage"

Could the topics have anything less to do with each other?

Some people have a one-track mind, which is focused on the corporal.
Would that we all would learn to engage in unceasing prayer, then there would not be so much focus on the physical.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #251 on:** January 09, 2019, 04:10:34 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on January 09, 2019, 03:01:11 PM

.
I have seldom ever seen a thread so thoroughly derailed.

From "CathInfo granting mercy to banned users in 2019", to "Corporal punishment on wives within marriage"

Could the topics have anything less to do with each other?

.
I've been on forums where anyone who dares to step over the narrow limit lines of what constitutes "THE CURRENT TOPIC" gets punished with demerits or points, which they keep track of, and after a member gets too many zingers he's automatically put into quarantine (read-only mode), for a time, shorter or longer, or perhaps permanently.
.
Mercy to banned users and how Adam could have dealt with Eve might be related through the mystery of how the saints of heaven will interact with Adam in paradise. Adam not only became a "banned user" of the Garden of Eden, he took the entire human race out of that perfect world along with him. Msgr. Perez said in his last sermon that "there must be a line going around the block in heaven -- all the people who are waiting to have a word with him" for having committed Original Sin. Surely Adam and Eve didn't have a wedding, nor was there a priest to officiate the sacrament, nor did they have ANY sacraments in the old dispensation; but Eve was Adam's wife, nonetheless. And if there has ever been a wife who was deserving of corporal punishment, certainly Eve takes the cake.

.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #252 on:** January 09, 2019, 04:57:19 PM »

Quote from: Matthew on January 09, 2019, 03:01:11 PM

I have seldom ever seen a thread so thoroughly derailed.

From "CathInfo granting mercy to banned users in 2019", to "Corporal punishment on wives within marriage"

Could the topics have anything less to do with each other?

Ah, it happens all the time here. And this is less of a stretch than many. Discussion quickly turned to individual users who had been banned, with notable mention of Croix, since Croix had effectively unbanned himself anyway by creating a new account. I think that it was I who made the comment along the lines of "What difference does mercy make when these guys just come back anyway either as Anonymous or by creating new accounts?" Now, then, Croix had been banned for various reasons, among which was referring to some ladies in the forum as "cows", which turned to the subject of misogyny.

I've seen threads about completely unrelated topics quickly blow up into 300-page threads about sedevacantism. All it takes is one comment that makes a reference to it to completely derail a thread. Just mention one of a handful of hot-button topics: sedevacantism vs. R&R, EENS and BoD, Flat Earth, corporal punishment of wives ..... and there you go.

hollingsworth · « **Reply #253 on:** January 09, 2019, 05:23:39 PM »

Quote

Matthew: I have seldom ever seen a thread so thoroughly derailed.

From "CathInfo granting mercy to banned users in 2019", to "Corporal punishment on wives within marriage"

I agree. But I have been making similar observations for years concerning numbers of other topics which got off track on CI.
But the resolution to this particular topic could have have been handled 6000 views ago. Matthew has it entirely within his power to to grant "mercy to banned users." But, to my knowledge, he hasn't. So it has meandered along meaninglessly for ages, yet still occupies a top spot on the CI discussion depth chart. Of course, several of these banned individuals have probably re-inserted themselves with new accounts and different user names.
My question is this: Why doesn't Matthew simply kill the topic? Why does he let it go on and on? Only he knows.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #254 on:** January 09, 2019, 05:26:01 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on January 09, 2019, 04:57:19 PM

Ah, it happens all the time here. And this is less of a stretch than many.

I've seen threads about completely unrelated topics quickly blow up into 300-page threads about sedevacantism. All it takes is one comment that makes a reference to it to completely derail a thread. Just mention one of a handful of hot-button topics: sedevacantism vs. R&R, EENS and BoD, Flat Earth, corporal punishment of wives ..... and there you go.

.
So then could be next, we need a subforum for corporal punishment of wives ............ :)

Author Topic: Going into 2019, Will Cathinfo offer banned souls a "Week of Mercy" ? (Read 11032 times)

Cantarella

Re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage

Pax Vobis

Re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage

Incredulous

Re: Going into 2019, Will Cathinfo offer banned souls a "Week of Mercy" ?

Cantarella

Re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage

Quid Retribuam Domino

Re: Going into 2019, Will Cathinfo offer banned souls a "Week of Mercy" ?

Cantarella

re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage

Jaynek

re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage

Incredulous

re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage

Neil Obstat

Re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage

Matthew

Re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage

Maria Regina

Re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage

Neil Obstat

Re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage

Ladislaus

Re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage

hollingsworth

Re: Going into 2019, Will Cathinfo offer banned souls a "Week of Mercy" ?

Neil Obstat

Re: Corporal punishment on wives within marriage