Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
The Alps / Re: Is this Portuguese?
« Last post by Fleur-de-Lys on Today at 11:10:32 AM »
No, that is Spanish.  :lol:
2
Could you imagine 1 month of no money coming in.....that would be enough to make them sit up and actually do something.

3

There is no obligation to support bad clerics in their wickedness. Make your tithes to Traditional Priests, or at least to orthodox N.O. ones who are striving after holiness. Convents are good as well.

I've been to (traditional) pre-seminary for a few days. Life there was one of prayer, sacrifice, study, reading, assisting at Holy Mass as Altar Servers, chanting the Breviary/Divine Office with our Priests; little time spent for recreation and sports, and much time for work in the priory garden, and other work around the plot; a quiet, simple life of prayer and solitude, training the Priests of tomorrow for their mission. That's what seminaries were and should be. Am happy to say the Priests I've known like Fr. Stehlin are very holy and mainly interested in pursuing holiness and saving souls, which is the primary responsibility of good Priests. There are Priests who labor through the night with very little sleep. Who can describe all those struggles and sacrifices of good Priests which very few know of from the outside? I only wish all these unseen things would be taken into account before passing unjust judgment on all Priests.

Let's condemn the guilty but let's not condemn the innocent with the guilty. That's what God says in the Old Testament also.

There can be bad people anywhere and they should be found out, removed and punished. If perverts and freaks know they will be laicized and punished immediately upon commiting the sin of sodomy and/or the crime of child abuse, many of them may not bother coming to seminary in the first place. If they keep coming, keep driving them out.

I can't speak for mainstream seminaries. Some of them are bad. Some are still good. The important thing is to discover the evil quickly and expel those involved in it as soon as possible. The same in traditional seminaries when unknown people come also. Major correctives are still needed in some places. Its good this has come to light. Wuerl etc should be removed and the filth expunged.

St. Peter Damian's teaching mentioned earlier for dealing with these perversities are excellent. If followed strictly, this will not recur.

There were traditionalists implicated in this report and both the fraternity and society's responses have been inadequate. Sorry, no money for priests for at least this year

I am sure though that the Sisters will appreciate my contributions.

"Father" Urrigoty was removed from the SSPX seminary  pretty quickly. It's a shame that he was even admitted but once it was discovered where his interests lie, he was gotten rid of *and* Bp Fellay warned in writing Bp Timlin.
4
Quote
There were traditionalists implicated in this report

SSPX or FSSP Priests? Can you mention them? If not, what precisely do you expect the Fraternity or the Society to do to stop these crimes?

Quote
and both the fraternity and society's responses have been inadequate.

Are in they charge of mainstream seminaries, parishes or dioceses? What do you expect them to say? Their job is to keep perverts out of our traditional seminaries, chapels, or parishes. I expect child abusers in a traditional environment to be punished severely. I don't expect traditional Priests, many of whom would be journeying to administer the Sacraments as we speak, and will keep doing so, to be able to do anything about most of these perverts in Pennsylvania.

Quote
Sorry, no money for priests for at least this year

Your choice. Join the anti-clerical mob if you will. Priests I know don't care too much about money anyway. They just bring the Sacraments to all day in and day out even if stretched thin on resources and time. They do this without any conditions or expectations, they are there just to help us all to save our souls. Most of them are not going to say "No Sacraments for some at least for this year" either no matter what; neither our money nor our bread means anything in the long run. The Bread of Life that God provides through them, and the treasures of eternity unlocked by their hands in the Sacraments, mean everything. Don't condemn the good with the bad.

It's reasonable and necessary to be angry at the bad Priests and to ask for them to be punished; we want to protect our children and we can't accept abusers in the Priesthood. It's not reasonable to generalize to all Priests based on what these perverts have done; that is what some are doing.

You are putting those who have ministered as Angels on par with those who are worse than devils. Even if the whole forum or the entire world does that, it will be wrong. I make my stand with God, and with His Good Priests, against the wicked perverts who deserve punishment.

Quote
I am sure though that the Sisters will appreciate my contributions.

Great. Sisters always deserve our support as well.
5
General Catholic Discussion / Re: Cdl McCarrick resigned.
« Last post by carmina laetitiae on Today at 10:50:56 AM »
A Carmelite Convent in Ontario, Canada, is taking support of transgenders a step further. It has accepted a man who calls himself a woman into the community.

That is insane. I could've sworn you had to be free of major mental health and/or physical issues to become a nun. I'm guessing donations to the convent will be used to pay for his continued hormone treatments.
6
The Geek Forum / Re: What is a 'full stack'?
« Last post by Lynne on Today at 10:48:09 AM »
It's a loaded term, similar to DevOps, that can mean different things depending on the person/company using it. In general, it is a dev who can code/dev throughout the full stack of layers in the process. This is opposed to a dev who focuses only on one aspect of software dev. They do both front and back end work.

Not exactly something one just walks into.

It's also something companies use to attempt saving money and drastically underpaying developers.

"Here, take on these 5-10 jobs for the low end salary of one job!"

"Um... I have 15 years experience"

"Yeah, but only 1 year working with Java 9, and that's a big part of the job"

"Java 9 was only released in September 2017 you moronic piece of HR trash"

"So, we can offer $1k more than the original offer"

"**** off"

hahaha
7
The Sacred Sciences / Re: Only one prime mover?
« Last post by Daniel on Today at 10:40:57 AM »
I guess what I'm confused about is this:
Quote from: Xavier
1: Nothing capable of motion (say X) can actually be moving unless it is moved from potentiality to actuality by some other being.
Quote from: St. Thomas
It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself.
I thought that humans and animals were self-actualizing, at least in regard to locomotion? (e.g. The squirrel has the potential to be moved towards the nut. The squirrel, then, by its own natural powers, moves itself, and is then actually moving towards the nut. No efficient cause outside the squirrel moved the squirrel, so the chain ends with the squirrel.)

edit - Or does this have something to do with the distinction between first potency and second potency?
8
The Geek Forum / Re: What is a 'full stack'?
« Last post by Daniel on Today at 10:34:57 AM »
lol, I see
9
The Sacred Sciences / Re: Only one prime mover?
« Last post by Xavier on Today at 10:29:10 AM »
I think you are misunderstanding what a Prime Mover is. A Prime Mover is a Being that Moves all other Beings from potentiality to actuality, but is itself unmoved, and is Eternally Pure Actuality. A squirrel or a human being etc can be moved or movers, but they are not prime movers i.e. they are not themselves unmoved, and they have both actuality and potentiality, and thus are not Actus Purus.

The Angelic Doctor begins with the observation that several things are manifestly in motion, i.e. they are not only capable of movement, but are actually moving. From this, St. Thomas proves God is Prime Mover and Actus Purus.

A simple and very brief form of the First Demonstration of God's Existence can be stated thus:

1: Nothing capable of motion (say X) can actually be moving unless it is moved from potentiality to actuality by some other being.
2: But that (say X1) which sets other beings in motion must itself either be potentially in motion, or be actually the source of all movement
3: If the latter, we have arrived at the first mover. If the former, then this X1 must itself be set in motion by X2 to which the same applies.
4: Finally, at some stage, we must arrive at an unmoved mover, or the series will not terminate, and nothing would have been set in motion.

For an analogy of what St. Thomas is speaking, supposing you see a series of balls, say, B1, B2 ... B100, in a line. You see each of the ball moves when it is hit by another, but you cannot see what put the first ball in motion. You can deduce the balls could not have been set in motion by themselves, because then the series of balls will go on to infinity, but someone or something must have put the first ball in motion, which sequentially sets in motion the rest. That which set the balls in motion would be different than a ball, and would be a mover of some sort (e.g. a human being) who is capable of moving from potentiality to actuality (e.g. by throwing a ball) unlike the ball itself, which is not capable of such a thing. Is the analogy clear? Does my limited explanation make sense?

St. Thomas states it much better than I can: "The first and more manifest way is the argument from motion. It is certain, and evident to our senses, that in the world some things are in motion. Now whatever is in motion is put in motion by another, for nothing can be in motion except it is in potentiality to that towards which it is in motion; whereas a thing moves inasmuch as it is in act. For motion is nothing else than the reduction of something from potentiality to actuality. But nothing can be reduced from potentiality to actuality, except by something in a state of actuality. Thus that which is actually hot, as fire, makes wood, which is potentially hot, to be actually hot, and thereby moves and changes it. Now it is not possible that the same thing should be at once in actuality and potentiality in the same respect, but only in different respects. For what is actually hot cannot simultaneously be potentially hot; but it is simultaneously potentially cold. It is therefore impossible that in the same respect and in the same way a thing should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself. Therefore, whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another. If that by which it is put in motion be itself put in motion, then this also must needs be put in motion by another, and that by another again. But this cannot go on to infinity, because then there would be no first mover, and, consequently, no other mover; seeing that subsequent movers move only inasmuch as they are put in motion by the first mover; as the staff moves only because it is put in motion by the hand. Therefore it is necessary to arrive at a first mover, put in motion by no other; and this everyone understands to be God."
10
I wonder should there be a mass movement to withdraw donations worldwide until its done.  Money talks bs walks.

I'm game.

There is still an obligation to support the Church financially; however, there are many way to meet this obligation. My plan is to contribute exclusively to a convent.

There is no obligation to support bad clerics in their wickedness. Make your tithes to Traditional Priests, or at least to orthodox N.O. ones who are striving after holiness. Convents are good as well.

I've been to (traditional) pre-seminary for a few days. Life there was one of prayer, sacrifice, study, reading, assisting at Holy Mass as Altar Servers, chanting the Breviary/Divine Office with our Priests; little time spent for recreation and sports, and much time for work in the priory garden, and other work around the plot; a quiet, simple life of prayer and solitude, training the Priests of tomorrow for their mission. That's what seminaries were and should be. Am happy to say the Priests I've known like Fr. Stehlin are very holy and mainly interested in pursuing holiness and saving souls, which is the primary responsibility of good Priests. There are Priests who labor through the night with very little sleep. Who can describe all those struggles and sacrifices of good Priests which very few know of from the outside? I only wish all these unseen things would be taken into account before passing unjust judgment on all Priests.

Let's condemn the guilty but let's not condemn the innocent with the guilty. That's what God says in the Old Testament also.

There can be bad people anywhere and they should be found out, removed and punished. If perverts and freaks know they will be laicized and punished immediately upon commiting the sin of sodomy and/or the crime of child abuse, many of them may not bother coming to seminary in the first place. If they keep coming, keep driving them out.

I can't speak for mainstream seminaries. Some of them are bad. Some are still good. The important thing is to discover the evil quickly and expel those involved in it as soon as possible. The same in traditional seminaries when unknown people come also. Major correctives are still needed in some places. Its good this has come to light. Wuerl etc should be removed and the filth expunged.

St. Peter Damian's teaching mentioned earlier for dealing with these perversities are excellent. If followed strictly, this will not recur.

There were traditionalists implicated in this report and both the fraternity and society's responses have been inadequate. Sorry, no money for priests for at least this year

I am sure though that the Sisters will appreciate my contributions.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10