Author Topic: Fr R on intellectual pride  (Read 1863 times)

Offline John Lamb

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1459
  • Thanked: 1590 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #60 on: February 07, 2019, 11:14:09 AM »
The most nefarious effect of Francis' statements is not the intellectual confusion he creates among laity, nor even his abominable leadership of the clergy.  It is his effect on private prayer of the laity.  (JMO)  I have lost dozens upon dozens of opportunities for indulgences directly because of him.  Since I know that God reads my heart and will not be mocked, I cannot sincerely "pray for the Pope's intentions" because I cannot trust what those intentions are.  And yes, I mean his intentions for the Church because I don't know what those are, and it sometimes frightens me what those intentions are.  It saddens me enormously and discourages me greatly that I have been robbed of these opportunities for indulgences.  Surely I am not alone.

You might want to consult a priest about this Miriam, but I'm quite certain that you shouldn't worry about this and should not be depriving yourself of indulgences; because I might be mistaken, but I think that "praying for the pope's intentions" has a specific legal designation, such that you are praying for a certain set of 3 or 4 default things which the pope intends by virtue of his office (e.g. praying for the success of the missions is I think one of them), intentions which are all fully good and orthodox; and even if the pope has his own private intentions which are contrary to the will of God, you don't have to worry because God will not grant them and He knows that you don't intend to co-operate with such ill intentions whenever you "pray for the pope's intentions."
« Last Edit: February 07, 2019, 11:18:10 AM by John Lamb »
As many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name. (John 1:12)
 
The following users thanked this post: Heinrich, Non Nobis, Miriam_M, Xavier, Josephine87

Offline John Lamb

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 1459
  • Thanked: 1590 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #61 on: February 07, 2019, 11:30:07 AM »
Knowledge as a criterion of mortal sin means knowledge of the act, knowledge of what one is doing. It's why someone who has lost his reason won't sin in what he subsequently does: he doesn't know what he is doing. It is not, as it's now generally spun by the Novus Ordo, a reference to a theory of subjective conscience that subjectivises sin, an "Oh, sorry God! I didn't know that was evil!".

Catechism of St Pius X:

"31 Q. When is there full advertence in sinning?
A. Full advertence in sinning is had when we know perfectly well that we are doing a serious evil."

If there is less than full advertence, then there is no mortal sin.  If the person does not know it is serious sin, there is also no mortal sin, unless he were truly culpably ignorant (hard to guage in practice precisely when full culpability kicks in...).

If that means what you contend it means, then it's moral subjectivism. And you can spin it any which way, it will remain moral subjectivism: an act is only truly morally evil if the actor believes it to be evil. The nature of the act and the motives of the heart be damned.

And this is where intellectualising morality in the pagan tradition of the Greeks, contrary to the morality of the heart of Hebrew scripture, leads us. Where the latter's knowledge is one of the heart and love, and the act is known to be evil by conscious experience of its essential nature as contrary to that of divine charity, in the former this knowledge is changed into knowledge of whether or not it is "wrong" in the sense of being "forbidden", where the usual schtick is to invoke the natural law of reason. And here, too, the moral relativist can step in.

On the one end of this we have hard legalism without love and mercy, and the legal loopholes of Pharisaism; on the other end, we have people knowing what the act is and willing it from their hearts but being guilty of no mortal sin because they didn't "know" it's "evil". This view is incompatible with a belief in the existence of intrinsically evil acts and with every kind of belief in real essences.

However, note the wording of the Catechism: "full advertence in sinning is had when we know perfectly well that we are doing a serious evil"; it does not say "when we know what we are doing is a serious evil". The distinction is significant but easy to miss. In the first the object of our knowledge is our act which is evil; in the second, the object of our knowledge is the moral status of our act as evil. The one excuse is "I didn't know I was committing an evil act", the other "I didn't know I was committing an evil act." One of these fits into the morality taught by Christ; the other potentially excuses women intentionally killing their own babies in the womb.

Kreuz, I think there is a certain degree of subjectivism in morality because it deals necessarily with moral subjects, with minds. What about an ignorant pagan who shows up at Mass and receives Holy Communion with the intentions of "doing as the Christians do & honouring their traditions"? Objectively, he has committed a grave evil (sacrilege) – but subjectively, is he guilty of a mortal sin? In fact, he may subjectively be doing a good thing, assuming he isn't being gravely negligent in neglecting to look up the Church's law.

As I understand it, subjectivism properly speaking is an error or heresy when it goes so far as to say that it's left to the moral subjects themselves to determine what is the moral law; I do not deem it heretical subjectivism to say that our guilt is proportionate to the degree of our knowledge of the laws which we have trespassed. Some might say this leads to absurd consequences like fornication or abortion being guiltless for those who apparently aren't aware of their culpability, but the truth is that most able human beings have an intuitive awareness of the sinfulness of such acts because of the natural law written on their hearts, and they are guilty to the extent that they wilfully suppress this knowledge.
As many as received him, he gave them power to be made the sons of God, to them that believe in his name. (John 1:12)
 

Offline MundaCorMeum

  • Mary Garden
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 4325
  • Thanked: 4076 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #62 on: February 07, 2019, 04:34:17 PM »
The most nefarious effect of Francis' statements is not the intellectual confusion he creates among laity, nor even his abominable leadership of the clergy.  It is his effect on private prayer of the laity.  (JMO)  I have lost dozens upon dozens of opportunities for indulgences directly because of him.  Since I know that God reads my heart and will not be mocked, I cannot sincerely "pray for the Pope's intentions" because I cannot trust what those intentions are.  And yes, I mean his intentions for the Church because I don't know what those are, and it sometimes frightens me what those intentions are.  It saddens me enormously and discourages me greatly that I have been robbed of these opportunities for indulgences.  Surely I am not alone.

You might want to consult a priest about this Miriam, but I'm quite certain that you shouldn't worry about this and should not be depriving yourself of indulgences; because I might be mistaken, but I think that "praying for the pope's intentions" has a specific legal designation, such that you are praying for a certain set of 3 or 4 default things which the pope intends by virtue of his office (e.g. praying for the success of the missions is I think one of them), intentions which are all fully good and orthodox; and even if the pope has his own private intentions which are contrary to the will of God, you don't have to worry because God will not grant them and He knows that you don't intend to co-operate with such ill intentions whenever you "pray for the pope's intentions."

I pray for the pope and his holy intentions. 
 
The following users thanked this post: Lynne, Xavier

Offline Non Nobis

  • Why are you fearful?
  • Mary Garden
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 4354
  • Thanked: 2999 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #63 on: February 07, 2019, 06:49:36 PM »
The most nefarious effect of Francis' statements is not the intellectual confusion he creates among laity, nor even his abominable leadership of the clergy.  It is his effect on private prayer of the laity.  (JMO)  I have lost dozens upon dozens of opportunities for indulgences directly because of him.  Since I know that God reads my heart and will not be mocked, I cannot sincerely "pray for the Pope's intentions" because I cannot trust what those intentions are.  And yes, I mean his intentions for the Church because I don't know what those are, and it sometimes frightens me what those intentions are.  It saddens me enormously and discourages me greatly that I have been robbed of these opportunities for indulgences.  Surely I am not alone.

You might want to consult a priest about this Miriam, but I'm quite certain that you shouldn't worry about this and should not be depriving yourself of indulgences; because I might be mistaken, but I think that "praying for the pope's intentions" has a specific legal designation, such that you are praying for a certain set of 3 or 4 default things which the pope intends by virtue of his office (e.g. praying for the success of the missions is I think one of them), intentions which are all fully good and orthodox; and even if the pope has his own private intentions which are contrary to the will of God, you don't have to worry because God will not grant them and He knows that you don't intend to co-operate with such ill intentions whenever you "pray for the pope's intentions."

Sometimes I pray for his intentions - that they may improve  ;)! But I suppose that doesn't really count.. so I pray for his Catholic intentions (even a stopped clock is right twice a day).
[Matthew 8:26]  And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

[Job  38:1-5]  Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: [2] Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? [3] Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. [4] Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. [5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
 

Offline Lynne

  • happy to be Catholic!
  • Mary Garden
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 9014
  • Thanked: 3757 times
  • We're all special snowflakes
  • Religion: Catholic (SSPX)
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #64 on: February 08, 2019, 01:59:26 PM »
The most nefarious effect of Francis' statements is not the intellectual confusion he creates among laity, nor even his abominable leadership of the clergy.  It is his effect on private prayer of the laity.  (JMO)  I have lost dozens upon dozens of opportunities for indulgences directly because of him.  Since I know that God reads my heart and will not be mocked, I cannot sincerely "pray for the Pope's intentions" because I cannot trust what those intentions are.  And yes, I mean his intentions for the Church because I don't know what those are, and it sometimes frightens me what those intentions are.  It saddens me enormously and discourages me greatly that I have been robbed of these opportunities for indulgences.  Surely I am not alone.

You might want to consult a priest about this Miriam, but I'm quite certain that you shouldn't worry about this and should not be depriving yourself of indulgences; because I might be mistaken, but I think that "praying for the pope's intentions" has a specific legal designation, such that you are praying for a certain set of 3 or 4 default things which the pope intends by virtue of his office (e.g. praying for the success of the missions is I think one of them), intentions which are all fully good and orthodox; and even if the pope has his own private intentions which are contrary to the will of God, you don't have to worry because God will not grant them and He knows that you don't intend to co-operate with such ill intentions whenever you "pray for the pope's intentions."

I pray for the pope and his holy intentions.

Father Z covered this once. You can pray for the objective intentions of the Pope. There's a list of 6 intentions, I believe, that are orthodox. 
In conclusion, I can leave you with no better advice than that given after every sermon by Msgr Vincent Giammarino, who was pastor of St Michael’s Church in Atlantic City in the 1950s:

    “My dear good people: Do what you have to do, When you’re supposed to do it, The best way you can do it,   For the Love of God. Amen.”
 
The following users thanked this post: MundaCorMeum

Offline Miriam_M

  • Mary Garden
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 5760
  • Thanked: 3551 times
  • Never have been "MiriamB"
  • Religion: Traditional Roman Catholic
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #65 on: February 08, 2019, 03:26:00 PM »
I respect the replies of others.  I guess, for me, I demand more wholeheartedness of myself when it comes to his intentions.  It would be the same as if I entered the confessional and were not fully repentant of a mortal sin. (That's never happened to me regarding mortal sins, but it's a possibility for any of us.)  For venial sins, all that is necessary is to be fully repentant of one of the confessed sins, for the others to be forgiven as well.

Someone mentioned the missions; maybe it was John Lamb.  The question would still be for me, Which missions?  When trad apostolates do missionary work, my understanding is that they say and preach the Traditional Latin Mass; too bad if the locals don't know Latin.  (Possibly they don't know English either.)  When particular religious congregations, such as modern women's congregations, do missionary work, they often compromise the faith a great deal to "accommodate" to the local culture. In fact, sometimes, religion is not mentioned at all!  (It's just "glorified" social work, if "glory" even applies in that context.)  The latter is directly from people who do such work.  These are essentially just secular NGO's with a religious name attached to them.

Then there are congregations of men who encourage an "enculturated" Novus Ordo Mass -- pagan prayers, dancing, what have you.  I'm sure those are sanctioned by the Vatican.  And all of the above would fall into the category of "success of the missions."  Why would I want to pray for the multiplication of false religions? 
 

Offline Kreuzritter

  • Wachtmeister
  • ***
  • Posts: 840
  • Thanked: 630 times
  • Religion: Roman Catholic
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #66 on: February 08, 2019, 03:30:26 PM »
Kreuz, I think there is a certain degree of subjectivism in morality because it deals necessarily with moral subjects, with minds. What about an ignorant pagan who shows up at Mass and receives Holy Communion with the intentions of "doing as the Christians do & honouring their traditions"? Objectively, he has committed a grave evil (sacrilege) – but subjectively, is he guilty of a mortal sin? In fact, he may subjectively be doing a good thing, assuming he isn't being gravely negligent in neglecting to look up the Church's law.

Allow me to elucidate by example: if I knowingly and wilfully take the life of another human being without just cause, it is totally irrelvant to this being an act of evil and a mortal sin that I "know" that is "forbidden"; the very knowing of what I am doing and my willing to do it, being the thing is in its very essence evil, is what holds me morally culpable, for whether or not I know that it is "forbidden", I know what I am doing and I know what murder is, and I want what is evil. On the other hand, a person who is out of his wits or a young child may not know what he is doing, even if he wills to do it, and is therefore not culpable of any mortal sin.

Note I've made no "objective" and "subjective" distinction here.

In your example, I see no sacrilege. Sacrilege in essence involves an intention to profane what is sacred, and the person is not doing that. He may be guilty of deception or imprudence in culpable ignorance, but he is not, objectively or subjectively, committing sacrilege; what happens is as intrinsically evil as the priest accidentally dropping the consecrated host on the floor.

Does this make sense, to help you understand my position?

In the case of heresy, its merely material if I have faith in Christ and Church and would believe rightly but am mistaken for some innocent reason, because there's no evil in me (here the absence of knowledge regards the doctrine on which I am mistaken, not the moral status of my act, an act which is not the sin of heresy!); if I am a heretic, the evil is in my obstinate defiance of God, Scripture or Church, for whatever motive, even if the motive be "well-intentioned" so some good may result, for that defiance is evil and I know what it is.

Quote
As I understand it, subjectivism properly speaking is an error or heresy when it goes so far as to say that it's left to the moral subjects themselves to determine what is the moral law; I do not deem it heretical subjectivism to say that our guilt is proportionate to the degree of our knowledge of the laws which we have trespassed. Some might say this leads to absurd consequences like fornication or abortion being guiltless for those who apparently aren't aware of their culpability, but the truth is that most able human beings have an intuitive awareness of the sinfulness of such acts because of the natural law written on their hearts, and they are guilty to the extent that they wilfully suppress this knowledge.

Human beings have an intuitive and immediate experiential awareness of what those acts are, and wanting them, never mind knowingly doing them, is opposed to God, the good, and love, the true sense of the work of the law written on the heart. There is no such thing, anywhere, of someone being incupable of mortal sin for something like murder because by some vague notion of natural law and "forbiddenness" he didn't have intellectual knowledge of that, or because his malformed conscience didn't trouble him.

In this sense, I reject subjectivism completely, one might say with respect to intrinsic evils. However, if it's something like positive law of the Church, even something like the prescription to attend mass on Sunday, of course there is no mortal sin, indeed no sin at all, if I am ignorant of that law. Indeed, if there is some intention for a greater good, like maybe saving a life, it can even be justly "disobeyed" (He said to them, "If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out?).

I hope this clarifies somewhat the direction from which I'm coming at this; it fundamentally has nothing to do with the Greek conception of ethics that begins with Socrates and forms the basis of academic philosophical debates for 2500 years of Western history.
 

Offline Padraig

  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 95
  • Thanked: 88 times
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #67 on: February 15, 2019, 02:50:43 PM »
Just came to this thread for the first time today, and saw this:

It's a timely topic, but I'm going to have to disagree with Fr. on a few points.

 :rofl: Oh, the irony!
 
The following users thanked this post: mikemac, TradGranny

Offline Michael Wilson

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 6395
  • Thanked: 4065 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #68 on: February 15, 2019, 03:01:16 PM »
Just came to this thread for the first time today, and saw this:

It's a timely topic, but I'm going to have to disagree with Fr. on a few points.

 :rofl: Oh, the irony!
If you enjoy sticking your finger in a pencil sharpener, then go ahead and argue with Quare; if not, then I don't recommend it.
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers
 
The following users thanked this post: Padraig

Offline Padraig

  • Hellebardier
  • *
  • Posts: 95
  • Thanked: 88 times
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #69 on: February 15, 2019, 03:07:41 PM »
Oh, I don't intent to argue. My capacity for futility is in short supply today.

Besides, the irony of having an argument on intellectual pride (while apparently lost on others) is something I can't get past.
 
The following users thanked this post: mikemac, Lynne, MundaCorMeum

Offline Michael Wilson

  • St. Joseph's Workbench
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 6395
  • Thanked: 4065 times
  • Religion: Catholic
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #70 on: February 15, 2019, 03:11:17 PM »
Oh, I don't intent to argue. My capacity for futility is in short supply today.

Besides, the irony of having an argument on intellectual pride (while apparently lost on others) is something I can't get past.
Sorry, I missed the humor; you're right.
"The World Must Conform to Our Lord and not He to it." Rev. Dennis Fahey CSSP

"My brothers, all of you, if you are condemned to see the triumph of evil, never applaud it. Never say to evil: you are good; to decadence: you are progess; to death: you are life. Sanctify yourselves in the times wherein God has placed you; bewail the evils and the disorders which God tolerates; oppose them with the energy of your works and your efforts, your life uncontaminated by error, free from being led astray, in such a way that having lived here below, united with the Spirit of the Lord, you will be admitted to be made but one with Him forever and ever: But he who is joined to the Lord is one in spirit." Cardinal Pie of Potiers
 

Offline Maximilian

  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 4920
  • Thanked: 2449 times
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #71 on: March 19, 2019, 08:33:57 PM »
Just returned to review this thread after finishing listening to Fr. Ripperger's talk.

Overall, I am impressed by the quality of discourse occurring here. Most of the participants are making a display of the virtues of Traditional Catholics rather than our vices.

Many excellent points were made. I ended up thanking a good many posts in addition to the few I had "Thanked" the first time around.

My recollection of this discussion was that it represented a humiliating confirmation of Fr. Ripperger's criticisms of traditionalists. But now upon re-reading the thread, I see that I was unduly influenced by just a small number of posts. The great majority were intelligent and well-informed and apropos to the topic, as well as reflecting a certain degree of intellectual humility about one's own positions.
 
The following users thanked this post: Elizabeth, Xavier

Offline Elizabeth

  • Mary Garden
  • Feldwebel
  • ***
  • Posts: 4981
  • Thanked: 2069 times
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #72 on: March 20, 2019, 09:47:20 PM »
For the record, I wish to say that I also very much disagree with Fr. R's constant trad bashing, and mostly because he's basing his criticism on a narrow slice of the population that has little in common with the trads I know.  He is simply not accurate in that regard, and it is just as much a form of stereotyping as any other form.

Sometimes I can't help wondering if this is just a sardonic sense of humor of his.
 

Offline Lynne

  • happy to be Catholic!
  • Mary Garden
  • Hauptmann
  • ****
  • Posts: 9014
  • Thanked: 3757 times
  • We're all special snowflakes
  • Religion: Catholic (SSPX)
Re: Fr R on intellectual pride
« Reply #73 on: March 21, 2019, 07:36:21 AM »
For the record, I wish to say that I also very much disagree with Fr. R's constant trad bashing, and mostly because he's basing his criticism on a narrow slice of the population that has little in common with the trads I know.  He is simply not accurate in that regard, and it is just as much a form of stereotyping as any other form.

Sometimes I can't help wondering if this is just a sardonic sense of humor of his.

Well, it's really quite annoying (and not very pastoral).  ::)
In conclusion, I can leave you with no better advice than that given after every sermon by Msgr Vincent Giammarino, who was pastor of St Michael’s Church in Atlantic City in the 1950s:

    “My dear good people: Do what you have to do, When you’re supposed to do it, The best way you can do it,   For the Love of God. Amen.”