Young Justice

[Maximilian]

Except priests generally have authority to preach and teach.  Unemployed laymen don't.

But the issue under discussion wasn't "authority." It was whether one needs to be a parent in order to discuss issues of parenting. Priests are not parents. Except Marcial Maciel.

[Maximilian]

Did you just compare Jerome, a lay-moral theologian, to one of God's holy prophets?

Yes. I had a vague recollection that it was the prophet Jeremiah in the story of the bears, which would have made the comparison even better, but I was wrong about that.

I'm simply saying that if we follow Jerome's definitions of what things are to be considered examples of scandal or proximate occasions of sin, he would be inadvertently condemn himself out of his own mouth.

Except that's not true.

[Jayne]

Except priests generally have authority to preach and teach.  Unemployed laymen don't.

But the issue under discussion wasn't "authority." It was whether one needs to be a parent in order to discuss issues of parenting. Priests are not parents. Except Marcial Maciel.

Yes the issue was authority.  There is a certain authority that comes from speaking from experience, such as a parent might have about raising children, and there is the authority that comes from position, such as a husband might have in relation to his wife or such as a priest's authority to teach.  A person with neither experience nor position cannot speak authoritatively.

[Maximilian]

But I was not going to accept it from someone without that, especially since he has been told repeatedly by the admin and other posters here that he is not going about fraternal correction the right way.

Jerome's approach to fraternal correction might be lacking in some tact and delicacy. Still, that is a failing that we should be willing to bear with.

Listening to him would have just encouraged Jerome to continue with his mistaken approach.

I'm skeptical of the explanation that your response was intended primarily for Jerome's benefit.

Maximilian, if you were to tell me there was some problem with watching Young Justice, I would take it seriously.  I have gotten a sense of who you are from reading your posts over the years and I respect you. But you wouldn't have done such a bad job of it as Jerome does either. 

Thank you for that lovely compliment which I appreciate very much.

A new person can not just arrive at a group of people and start acting as if he were their spiritual leader.  He sees himself as disciplining us a parent would.  Meanwhile, he does not accept the authority of the admin over him. Even if every single objection Jerome made to this show were correct, he would be at fault for his failure to engage in correction properly.

Yes, it may be true that Jerome is not without fault. But is it true that we have true charity towards him? I'm sure that I committed many faux pas when I first started posting. If I hoped for patience and kindness in my own case while I learned the ropes, then it's only fair to offer the same to other newcomers.

I have already mentioned this quote from Fr. Faber which I think applies in this situation:

"We must bear in mind that there are very few, who, by standing or advancement, are in any way called upon to correct their brethren, fewer still who are competent to do it sweetly and wisely, and none whose holiness is not tried to the uttermost by its perfect discharge. While, on the other hand, those who have rashly assumed to themselves this delicate responsibility have net only sinned themselves by disobedience, disrespect, conceit, bitterness, assumption and exaggeration, but have caused sin in others, and made the things of God an offence to them, and a stumbling-block in their road. Hence, before we attempt fraternal correction, we should be quite sure that we have a vocation to it, and we should have made quite sure of it by the judgment of others as well as our own; and when we are clear of the vocation, we must still preface our correction with prayer and deliberation."

As I recall, you are the one who recommended Growth in Holinessto me, so I expect you recognize it.

Oh yes. I have posted this quote about fraternal correction several times. I try to apply it to myself, however, instead of towards others, and strive to avoid any fraternal correction except when I have a good degree of certainty that it will be willingly received and do some good.

Perhaps Jerome could benefit from contemplating these words of Fr. Faber, but not if we are shoving them in his face, as if we were mutually engaged in a contest of who could offer the least charitable fraternal correction.

[Jayne]

But I was not going to accept it from someone without that, especially since he has been told repeatedly by the admin and other posters here that he is not going about fraternal correction the right way.

Jerome's approach to fraternal correction might be lacking in some tact and delicacy. Still, that is a failing that we should be willing to bear with.

Doing fraternal correction badly can have very serious consequences.  As Fr. Faber says, it can "have caused sin in others, and made the things of God an offence to them, and a stumbling-block in their road."  If Jerome continues as he has been, I am concerned that he will do a lot of spiritual damage.  I think it is better to try to stop him than to encourage him by putting up with it.

Listening to him would have just encouraged Jerome to continue with his mistaken approach.

I'm skeptical of the explanation that your response was intended primarily for Jerome's benefit.

If you were to check my previous interactions with Jerome you would see that most, if not all, of them deal with fraternal correction.  I have been troubled by unwillingness to listen to what people are telling him about this.  So this issue was very much in my mind when I responded to his post and a large part of my motivation was to help him to see how ineffective his approach is.

A new person can not just arrive at a group of people and start acting as if he were their spiritual leader.  He sees himself as disciplining us a parent would.  Meanwhile, he does not accept the authority of the admin over him. Even if every single objection Jerome made to this show were correct, he would be at fault for his failure to engage in correction properly.

Yes, it may be true that Jerome is not without fault. But is it true that we have true charity towards him? I'm sure that I committed many faux pas when I first started posting. If I hoped for patience and kindness in my own case while I learned the ropes, then it's only fair to offer the same to other newcomers.

He has already received much patience and kindness here.  I have seen people give good explanations of what he needs to do differently but he seems completely unable to accept that he is doing anything wrong.  There is no indication that he is learning anything.  I had hoped that my response would teach him something that he very badly needs to learn.  My motives were actually quite charitable.

I have already mentioned this quote from Fr. Faber which I think applies in this situation:

"We must bear in mind that there are very few, who, by standing or advancement, are in any way called upon to correct their brethren, fewer still who are competent to do it sweetly and wisely, and none whose holiness is not tried to the uttermost by its perfect discharge. While, on the other hand, those who have rashly assumed to themselves this delicate responsibility have net only sinned themselves by disobedience, disrespect, conceit, bitterness, assumption and exaggeration, but have caused sin in others, and made the things of God an offence to them, and a stumbling-block in their road. Hence, before we attempt fraternal correction, we should be quite sure that we have a vocation to it, and we should have made quite sure of it by the judgment of others as well as our own; and when we are clear of the vocation, we must still preface our correction with prayer and deliberation."

As I recall, you are the one who recommended Growth in Holinessto me, so I expect you recognize it.

Oh yes. I have posted this quote about fraternal correction several times. I try to apply it to myself, however, instead of towards others, and strive to avoid any fraternal correction except when I have a good degree of certainty that it will be willingly received and do some good.

Perhaps Jerome could benefit from contemplating these words of Fr. Faber, but not if we are shoving them in his face, as if we were mutually engaged in a contest of who could offer the least charitable fraternal correction.

I have not shoved these words in his face.  I gently offered this quote in a couple of threads where it was relevant but he did not seem interested in it.  This is one reason that I am so concerned about his ability to ever properly understand fraternal correction. (You capture one of the most important points in your words I bolded above, but he cannot seem to grasp it.)  It is not simply that he ignores explanations from fellow posters, but he also ignores Fr. Faber.  I was trying to demonstrate to him what he does not understand when it is explained in words.  I was trying to be as kind as possible while showing him his approach is unacceptable and ineffective.

[Chestertonian]

But I was not going to accept it from someone without that, especially since he has been told repeatedly by the admin and other posters here that he is not going about fraternal correction the right way.

Jerome's approach to fraternal correction might be lacking in some tact and delicacy. Still, that is a failing that we should be willing to bear with.

Listening to him would have just encouraged Jerome to continue with his mistaken approach.

I'm skeptical of the explanation that your response was intended primarily for Jerome's benefit.

Maximilian, if you were to tell me there was some problem with watching Young Justice, I would take it seriously.  I have gotten a sense of who you are from reading your posts over the years and I respect you. But you wouldn't have done such a bad job of it as Jerome does either.

Thank you for that lovely compliment which I appreciate very much.

A new person can not just arrive at a group of people and start acting as if he were their spiritual leader.  He sees himself as disciplining us a parent would.  Meanwhile, he does not accept the authority of the admin over him. Even if every single objection Jerome made to this show were correct, he would be at fault for his failure to engage in correction properly.

Yes, it may be true that Jerome is not without fault. But is it true that we have true charity towards him? I'm sure that I committed many faux pas when I first started posting. If I hoped for patience and kindness in my own case while I learned the ropes, then it's only fair to offer the same to other newcomers.

I have already mentioned this quote from Fr. Faber which I think applies in this situation:

"We must bear in mind that there are very few, who, by standing or advancement, are in any way called upon to correct their brethren, fewer still who are competent to do it sweetly and wisely, and none whose holiness is not tried to the uttermost by its perfect discharge. While, on the other hand, those who have rashly assumed to themselves this delicate responsibility have net only sinned themselves by disobedience, disrespect, conceit, bitterness, assumption and exaggeration, but have caused sin in others, and made the things of God an offence to them, and a stumbling-block in their road. Hence, before we attempt fraternal correction, we should be quite sure that we have a vocation to it, and we should have made quite sure of it by the judgment of others as well as our own; and when we are clear of the vocation, we must still preface our correction with prayer and deliberation."

As I recall, you are the one who recommended Growth in Holinessto me, so I expect you recognize it.

Oh yes. I have posted this quote about fraternal correction several times. I try to apply it to myself, however, instead of towards others, and strive to avoid any fraternal correction except when I have a good degree of certainty that it will be willingly received and do some good.

Perhaps Jerome could benefit from contemplating these words of Fr. Faber, but not if we are shoving them in his face, as if we were mutually engaged in a contest of who could offer the least charitable fraternal correction.

So.... Let me get this straight.

jeromes 'failings' at tact and decency are somethingwe shouldputup with but we can't "shove [fr fabers words]in hisface

since this is a traditional catholic forum,i'd hope that i wouldnt assume that everyone here is a complete spiritual n00b who isnt even trying to save his soul.  i think most of us here are at least making some sort of effort to be good catholics.   i think most of us want to shelter our children from the evils of the world.

some of us think that closing yourself off from the world to an extreme degree can create an environment that's ripe for rebellion later in life.  i'd put myself in that category

some people never let their children watch any TV,perhaps they dont even own one.  many of us have homeschooled our kids, or aretrying the best to help our children navigate public school without losing their souls.  some of us engage in socratic dialogue with our children about the media they've been exposed to,whether through watching TV or interacting with peers who watch TV.  at some point, they turn 15, and their friends all have phones, and most likely they'll encounter media of some sort  whether you want them to, or not.  they'll go out and see the newest Brokeback Mountain pile of crap without yourpermission.  if they dont have the skills to critically analyze a youtube video or movie, spot a logical fallacy when they see it, and understand when they're being pandered to and manipulated, they stand a good chance of being lost to the culture.  I know one of these days, my son will be 15, i'll probably be dead, his mom will probably work 16 hours a day, and he's going to have to navigate the sick perverted culture as a catholicso that's what i'm trying to prepare him for right now.  Maybe having a dorky kid brother tagging along will keep him out of trouble, i can only hope.

whilemany of us have dfferent ideas about exactly how to "be in the world,not oftheworld" i think most of us are striving toward that goal and prayerfully discerning what type of protection our children need from us.

i believe that jayners is a least trying to be a good mother and a good catholic woman, so it wouldnt be charitable for me to assume that she has zero awareness of the potential dangers of watching bad media, or putting ourself in the near occsion of sin.  ive never watched this show,but if i were aware of it (or looked it up online) i might say something like "hey, i heard there is a lesbian kiss on one of the episodes, so....you might want to look into that." or i reember at one point,a friend of mine was talking about "Batman: the animated series" thatwasmy favorite show ehen i was a kid,watched it afterschool.  so,i mentionedthat i watched it as an adult recently and the storyline is better than i remembered," but i do wish that they'd put more clothing on the women."

talking to people as if they are on some sort of spiritual special bus to remedial CCD isnt going to win you a lot of friends, that's just the way it is.

jerome is not a p rophet like elijah.  If God were to send us a prophet, do you think His first order of business would be warning us about the dangers of Beauty and the Beast avatars and fast forwarding through sex scenes?

[Maximilian]

jerome is not a p rophet like elijah. 

You could turn out to be wrong about that.

If God were to send us a prophet, do you think His first order of business would be warning us about the dangers of Beauty and the Beast avatars and fast forwarding through sex scenes?

Yes, if that was the most grave danger to souls. We would all agree that the Cure of Ars was a prophet who was sent by God. What was his first order of business? To warn his parishioners about the dangers of popular entertainments like dancing.

[Chestertonian]

jerome is not a p rophet like elijah.

You could turn out to be wrong about that.

ill take my chances

If God were to send us a prophet, do you think His first order of business would be warning us about the dangers of Beauty and the Beast avatars and fast forwarding through sex scenes?

Yes, if that was the most grave danger to souls. We would all agree that the Cure of Ars was a prophet who was sent by God. What was his first order of business? To warn his parishioners about the dangers of popular entertainments like dancing.

umm.... this is the first time i have heard saints being categorized as prophets,with the exception of the biblical Simeon and Anna.  there is no "common of prophets" or feast of saint johnvianney priest and prophet

isuppose with baptism we're all prophets,priests,kings.  so perhaps he is a prophet just like everyone else

youdont see many tradtional catholic priests in our time issuing grave wrnings about dancing and parties.  in fact ive seen many of them in their cassocks at tlm weddings, watching the bride and her father dance to  something cheezy like "wind beneath my wings" and they're not even tsk-tsking and then the groom and the bride dance to "i'm having the time of my life" or "time after time"

you also dont see them preaching sermons on the evils of nail polish, even though st padre pio cautioned ladies against wearing it.  if a man goes on the internet as some self styled nail polish crusader, people are going to think he's a little nuts

[Kaesekopf]

Jerome has been given far wider latitude than he deserves.  123 posts, almost all related exclusively to media. 

He has not shown himself to post here as a member, but a self appointed arbiter of moral media. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk