Author Topic: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching? (Read 337704 times)

Freind · « **Reply #75 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:00:51 PM »

Quote from: SkidRowCatholic on December 20, 2025, 03:13:46 PM

A problem with using AI is that you should always ask it to give you quotes from approved Catholic sources (before 1930) to support what it is saying.

I say "before 1930" because that is about when copyrights expired on books. It just makes it easier.

SkidRowCatholic · « **Reply #76 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:06:05 PM »

Quote from: Freind on December 20, 2025, 04:00:51 PM

A problem with using AI is that you should always ask it to give you quotes from approved Catholic sources (before 1930) to support what it is saying.

I say "before 1930" because that is about when copyrights expired on books. It just makes it easier.

It is just a tool.

People should still do their homework.

But, I agree we need a better truly Catholic AI and I hope Matthew makes one someday.

Nonetheless, even with the limited functions of the AI, we can see that it doesn't spit illogic so often, even though it does have many other flaws (limited sources being one of them).

Now, what specifically from the above do you want a source for - if I can find it for you I will.

Freind · « **Reply #77 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:08:36 PM »

Quote from: SkidRowCatholic on December 20, 2025, 04:06:05 PM

It is just a tool.

People should still do their homework.

But, I agree we need a better truly Catholic AI and I hope Matthew makes one someday.

Nonetheless, even with the limited functions of the AI, we can see that it doesn't spit illogic so often, even though it does have many other flaws (limited sources being one of them).

Now, what specifically from the above do you want a source for - if I can find it for you I will.

Asking for quotes to support everything simply fixes the tool to be Catholic. We should not rely solely on AI learning and reasoning.

SkidRowCatholic · « **Reply #78 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:09:53 PM »

Quote from: Freind on December 20, 2025, 04:08:36 PM

Asking for quotes to support everything simply fixes the tool to be Catholic. We should not rely solely on AI learning and reasoning.

Not "quotes" but, "sources".

So one can go read it themselves - that is what we all want.

You were told the same thing as your bolded statement by someone else already today on a different thread, so why are you telling this to me?

Some people don't think like you or I.

Some people are more visual type learners.

Some people will pay better attention if things are laid out clear and concise.

That is where AI can help sometimes - it can arrange and format information into a more digestible form in general.

Freind · « **Reply #79 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:13:11 PM »

Quote from: SkidRowCatholic on December 20, 2025, 04:09:53 PM

NO.

Not "quotes" but, "sources"

So one can go read it themselves - that is what we all want.

If anyone spends the time on AI to afterward present proof, they might as well get Catholic quotes to support it. It's just one more quick step in asking AI. That's what the tool should be used for.

SkidRowCatholic · « **Reply #80 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:15:45 PM »

Quote from: Freind on December 20, 2025, 04:13:11 PM

If anyone spends the time on AI to afterward present proof, they might as well get Catholic quotes to support it. It's just one more quick step in asking AI. That's what the tool should be used for.

No, your saying that is the WAY the tool should be used according to YOUR opinion.

The AI cannot produce sources for every logical connection - that would get redundant and be pointless.

Everyone here can simply cut n paste whatever they want to look up and go do that on their own - if they want the truth - they will make at least SOME effort.

SkidRowCatholic · « **Reply #81 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:20:42 PM »

Do you agree with the syllogism?

Freind · « **Reply #82 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:22:19 PM »

Quote from: SkidRowCatholic on December 20, 2025, 04:15:45 PM

No, your saying that is the WAY the tool should be used according to YOUR opinion.

The AI cannot produce sources for every logical connection - that would get redundant and be pointless.

Everyone here can simply cut n paste whatever they want to look up and go do that on their own - if they want the truth - they will make at least SOME effort.

My opinion is the best. People tend to be lazy, and/or not capable enough to ask the right questions in the right way (of even know access to AI). If you are already there in AI, just ask for Catholic quotes to support the conclusion. Nobody is saying every logical step needs a quote, just the conclusion. I do it all the time. When you leave it with AI-only proof, it unnecessarily brings on objections and confusions. JUST GET TO THE POINT AS FINAL AS POSSIBLE.

SkidRowCatholic · « **Reply #83 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:23:44 PM »

Quote from: Freind on December 20, 2025, 04:22:19 PM

My opinion is the best. People tend to be lazy, and/or not capable enough to ask the right questions in the right way (of even know access to AI). If you are already there in AI, just ask for Catholic quotes to support the conclusion. Nobody is saying every logical step needs a quote, just the conclusion. I do it all the time. When you leave it with AI-only proof, it unnecessarily brings on objections and confusions. JUST GET TO THE POINT AS FINAL AS POSSIBLE.

What conclusion do you want a source for?

Freind · « **Reply #84 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:24:39 PM »

Quote from: SkidRowCatholic on December 20, 2025, 04:23:44 PM

What conclusion do you want a source for?

I am talking as a general principle for anything.

SkidRowCatholic · « **Reply #85 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:26:29 PM »

Quote from: Freind on December 20, 2025, 04:24:39 PM

I am talking as a general principle for anything.

Well, go start a thread about that - maybe someone will find it interesting.

Do you agree with the syllogism?
Here:

On the Moral Impossibility of Naming a Manifest Heretic in the Canon

I. Major Premise (from the nature of the Eucharist)
The Eucharist is the sacrament of ecclesial unity; therefore, its liturgical acts must express only true communion in the faith.
This is the perennial Catholic principle:

The Eucharist is the sign and cause of unity.
Liturgical commemoration is a public profession of communion.
One cannot signify unity where unity does not exist.

Thus:
To profess communion with one who is not in the faith is to signify a falsehood in the sacrament.
unity in faith as the basis of liturgical communion

II. Minor Premise (from the fact of manifest heresy)
A cleric who publicly, notoriously, and obstinately teaches heresy has, by that fact, severed himself from the unity of the faith.
This is the teaching of:

St. Thomas (II–II q. 39, a. 1; q. 11, a. 2)
St. Robert Bellarmine
Suarez
Cajetan
The Fathers in the Nestorius case

Such a person:

is not in the unity of faith,
cannot be professed as being in communion,
and cannot be named in the liturgy without contradiction.

Thus:
To name such a person is to profess communion where communion does not exist.
public heresy as rupture of communion

III. Conclusion
Therefore, if one is morally certain that a cleric is a public, manifest heretic, it is morally impossible to name him in the Canon or to assist at a Mass where such false communion is professed.
This follows necessarily because:

The sacrament cannot signify falsehood.
The faithful cannot lie in the most sacred act of worship.
Moral certainty suffices for moral action (ST I–II q. 19, a. 5).
The Nestorius precedent confirms that refusal of liturgical communion is praiseworthy even before juridical judgment.

Thus:
The obligation to avoid professing false communion precedes and is independent of any formal condemnation.
moral impossibility of professing false communion

Respondeo
The signification of the sacrament must correspond to reality.
If the sign (naming in the Canon) contradicts the reality (rupture of faith), the act becomes:

false,
scandalous,
sacrilegious,
and morally impossible.

This is why the clergy of Constantinople acted as they did. This is why Celestine praised them. This is why the principle is perennial.
the sacrament cannot signify what is not real

Objection 1:
“But the liturgy requires naming the bishop without exception.”
Reply: The liturgy presupposes communion; it does not create it. Where communion is objectively broken, the rubric cannot bind one to profess a falsehood.
liturgical law presupposes doctrinal unity.

Objection 2:
“But only the Church can judge heresy.”
Reply: A juridical judgment belongs to the Church. But a moral judgment belongs to conscience, and conscience cannot profess communion with manifest heresy.
jurisdiction vs. conscience

Objection 3:
“But refusing to name him is an act of jurisdiction.”
Reply: No. It is an act of refusing to lie in the sacrament. The clergy of Constantinople did not depose Nestorius; they refused false communion.

SOURCES:

resistance without usurping authority.

Freind · « **Reply #86 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:32:41 PM »

Quote from: SkidRowCatholic on December 20, 2025, 04:26:29 PM

Well, go start a thread about that - I am sure someone will find it interesting.

Are you going to answer my question: Do you agree with syllogism on the last page?

No thread needed. I covered it here already.

I don't know what syllogism you are referring to, perhaps because I didn't really read all you cut-and-pasted from AI.

Not really interested until there is a quote from a Catholic source, as you can guess.

SkidRowCatholic · « **Reply #87 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:34:10 PM »

Quote from: Freind on December 20, 2025, 04:32:41 PM

No thread needed. I covered it here already.

I don't know what syllogism you are referring to, perhaps because I didn't really read all you cut-and-pasted from AI.

Not really interested until there is a quote from a Catholic source, as you can guess.

Thanks for stoppin by pardner

Freind · « **Reply #88 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:37:53 PM »

Quote from: SkidRowCatholic on December 20, 2025, 04:34:10 PM

Thanks for stoppin by pardner

Glad to stop by.

SkidRowCatholic · « **Reply #89 on:** December 20, 2025, 04:56:23 PM »

✦ Quaestio: Whether it is lawful to name a manifest heretic in the Canon of the Mass

Objection 1.

It seems that one may licitly name a manifest heretic in the Canon, because the Church’s rubrics require the naming of the bishop (and pope) without exception. But positive liturgical law obliges the faithful, and therefore one must obey it even if the cleric appears to be in error. liturgical obligation

Objection 2.

Further, only the Church can judge heresy, as St. Thomas teaches in II–II q.11. But to omit someone’s name from the Canon on the grounds of heresy appears to be a judgment that he is outside the Church. Therefore, a private person may not omit such a name without usurping ecclesiastical authority. judgment of heresy

Objection 3.

Further, refusing to name him seems equivalent to declaring the see vacant, which belongs only to the Church’s jurisdiction. Therefore, refusing to name him in the Canon is an act of jurisdiction and so impermissible. jurisdictional authority

✦ On the contrary,

St. Thomas teaches that the Eucharist is the sacrament of ecclesial unity (III q.73 a.3), and that lying in sacred things is sacrilege (II–II q.81 a.5). But to profess communion with one who is not in the unity of faith is to lie in the sacrament. Therefore, it is not lawful to name a manifest heretic in the Canon. sacramental truth

✦ I answer that,

The Eucharist, as the sacrament of unity, must signify true ecclesial communion. Thus, all liturgical acts surrounding it — especially the commemoration of the bishop and pope — are ordered to express real unity in faith.

This is established by:

St. Thomas Aquinas: Eucharist as sign and cause of unity (III q.73 a.3; III q.82 a.9).
St. Augustine: unity of the Body in receiving the Eucharist (Sermon 272).
St. Cyprian: unity of faith and sacrament (De Unitate Ecclesiae).
Council of Trent: Eucharist as sign of unity (Session XIII). unity of the Church

Now, a cleric who publicly, notoriously, and obstinately teaches heresy has, by that fact, severed himself from the unity of the faith, as taught by:

St. Thomas: heretics separate themselves (II–II q.11 a.2).

St. Jerome: heretics “cut themselves off.”
St. Augustine: heretics are “outside.”
Bellarmine: manifest heretic is outside the Church ipso facto (De Romano Pontifice II.30).
Suarez: public heresy breaks unity (De Fide).
Cajetan: public heresy ruptures communion (Commentary on II–II q.11). rupture of communion

Therefore, to name such a person in the Canon is to signify communion where communion does not exist, which is:

false,
scandalous,
sacrilegious,
and morally impossible.

This is confirmed by the Nestorius precedent, where:

the clergy removed his name before condemnation,
Pope Celestine I praised them,
and the Council of Ephesus ratified that he had already separated himself. Nestorius precedent

Since moral certainty suffices for moral action (ST I–II q.19 a.5), one who is morally certain of manifest heresy must not profess false communion in the liturgy.

Thus:

It is morally impossible to name a manifest heretic in the Canon or to assist at a Mass where such false communion is professed.

The obligation arises from the nature of the sacrament and the virtue of religion, not from ecclesiastical jurisdiction.

✦ Replies to Objections

Reply to Objection 1.

Liturgical law presupposes communion; it does not create it. St. Thomas teaches that human law cannot bind against divine truth (I–II q.96 a.4; II–II q.104 a.5). Where communion is objectively broken, the rubric cannot oblige one to profess a falsehood. limits of human law

Reply to Objection 2.

A juridical judgment of heresy belongs to the Church. But a moral judgment belongs to conscience, which must never lie, especially in sacred things (I–II q.19 a.5). To refrain from naming a manifest heretic is not to issue a canonical sentence, but to refuse to profess a communion one judges false. conscience and truth

Reply to Objection 3.

Refusing to name him is not an act of jurisdiction but an act of refusing to lie in the sacrament. The clergy of Constantinople did not depose Nestorius; they simply refused false communion — and were praised by the pope. resistance without usurpa

SOURCES:

I. St. Thomas Aquinas — Primary Thomistic Sources
Eucharist & Unity Summa Theologiae III q.73 a.3 — Eucharist as sacrament of unity Summa III q.82 a.9 — priest acts in persona Ecclesiae Summa III q.83 a.4 — Canon expresses ecclesial unity Summa III q.60 a.6 — sacramental signs must correspond to reality
Heresy & Separation Summa II–II q.11 a.2 — heretics separate themselves from the Church Summa II–II q.39 a.1 — schismatics withdraw from unity
Virtue of Religion & Lying in Sacred Things Summa II–II q.81 a.1 — truth required in worship Summa II–II q.81 a.5 — lying in sacred matters is sacrilege
Moral Certainty Summa I–II q.19 a.5 — moral certainty suffices for moral action
Limits of Human Law Summa I–II q.96 a.4 — human law cannot bind against higher goods Summa II–II q.104 a.5 — obedience does not extend to sin
Fraternal Resistance Summa II–II q.33 a.4 — correction/resistance without usurping jurisdiction

II. Church Fathers & Patristic Sources
Unity of the Church St. Augustine, Sermon 272 — unity of the Body in the Eucharist St. Cyprian, De Unitate Ecclesiae — unity of faith and sacrament
Heresy as Self‑Separation St. Jerome, Commentary on Titus — heretics “cut themselves off” St. Augustine, Contra Epistulam Fundamenti — heretics are “outside”
Truth in Sacred Things St. Augustine, Contra Mendacium — lying in sacred matters is gravely sinful St. Leo the Great, Sermon 91 — sacramental signs must reflect true faith

III. Magisterial Sources
Eucharistic Doctrine Council of Trent, Session XIII, ch. 2 — Eucharist as sign and cause of unity
Nestorius Case Letters of Pope Celestine I — praise for clergy removing Nestorius’ name Acts of the Council of Ephesus (431) — confirmation that Nestorius had separated himself

IV. Classical Theologians
Manifest Heresy & Loss of Communion St. Robert Bellarmine, De Romano Pontifice II.30 — manifest heretic outside the Church ipso facto Francisco Suarez, De Fide, disp. 10 sect. 6 — public heresy breaks ecclesial unity Cajetan, Commentary on II–II q.11 — public heresy ruptures communion

V. Liturgical Theologians
Canon & Communion Dom Prosper Guéranger, The Holy Mass — Canon includes only those in true communion Fr. Nicholas Gihr, Holy Sacrifice of the Mass — naming signifies unity in faith J.B. O’Connell, The Celebration of Mass — liturgical commemoration expresses ecclesial unity

VI. Historical Precedent — Nestorius
Primary Historical Witnesses Pope Celestine I’s letters to the clergy of Constantinople St. Cyril of Alexandria’s correspondence Acts of the Council of Ephesus

Author Topic: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching? (Read 337704 times)

Freind

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

SkidRowCatholic

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

Freind

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

SkidRowCatholic

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

Freind

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

SkidRowCatholic

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

SkidRowCatholic

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

Freind

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

SkidRowCatholic

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

Freind

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

SkidRowCatholic

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

Freind

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

SkidRowCatholic

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

Freind

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?

SkidRowCatholic

Re: Una cuм Question: An AI Bug, or Catholic Teaching?