Joseph Littleshoes
Guest
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:22 pm Post subject: Re: Belief's Role in Perception/Learning (was Re: Tabula Ras |
 |
|
nocTifer wrote:
| Quote: | Joseph Littleshoes <jpstifel@isp.com>:
marques de sade wrote:
dh@. wrote:
not somehow, by believing in jesus and having him be judged in
your place -- that's the grandness of god's love for you. (this is
the christian claim, not mine...)
forgiveness unending.
you tell a pedo that just believe in jesus and he's going to
heaven, guess what that encourages...
that is the criticism of the RC forgiveness machine, yes,
that it encourages a lack of responsibility because at
the end of every day one may once again be 'cleansed'.
...typical newsgroup tabloid, knee jerk reasoning.
conventional criticism of forgiveness mechanisms in
Christian religion allowing for amorality in its
participants.
nocTifer
|
Are you saying that forgiving wrongs encourages the doing of them? i
think its more human nature than any religion, humans sometimes choose
to do things they know are not socially acceptable, are 'wrong' by
conventional standards and this happens among non christians as well as
christians, such that many primitive peoples have their 'taboo's about
such things.
Personally i find it very difficult, especially in the modern west, to
think that a pedophile or CEO or corrupt politician & etc. is
especially concerned about the effects their actions will have on their
status in heaven or hell.
As it seems to me most sex crimes perpetuated by individuals are based
more on compulsion & neurosis than greed it seems to me such a sickness
could be more readily forgiven for the illness it is than those crimes
perpetuated solely to make the individual perpetuating them rich and
powerful.
And as far as any RC orthodoxy goes, many 'sinners' are denied
absolution till their priest feels they have made a sincere effort to
change their behavior, so the self confessed RC pedophile wont get
absolution for the sin as long as they are still sinning.
And even the rich and powerful have been refused absolution till penance
is performed. Of course in such abstruse doctrinal debates it can be
easily overlooked that an individual priest, for whatever reason,
corruption or foolishness or ignorance, forgives and absolves the guilty
party without that party making any restitution just eventually puts the
case before the deity it is all supposed to come from and lead back to
anyway.
Conditional absolution
Antiquity makes no mention of conditional absolution. Benedict XIV
alludes in "De Synodo" (Bk. VII, c. xv) to a passage of Gandavensis (d.
1293), but it is doubtful whether the learned pontiff caught the meaning
of the theologian of Ghent. Gerson in the fifteenth century, both in "De
schismate tollendo" and "De unitate ecclesiæ", stands as sponsor for
conditional absolution, although Cajetan, a century later, calls
Gerson's position mere superstition. But Gerson's position gradually
obtained, and in our day all theologians grant that under certain
circumstances such absolution is not only valid but also legitimate
(Lehmkuhl-Gury, De pœnit., absol. sub conditione); valid, because
judicial pronouncements are often rendered under certain conditions, and
the Sacrament of Penance is essentially a judicial act (Counc. of Trent,
Sess. XIV); also, because God absolves in heaven when certain conditions
are fulfilled here below. The fulfilment may escape man's judgment, but
God no man may deceive. This very doubt makes conditional absolution
possible. Conditions are either (a) present, (b) past, or (c) future.
If there is no god then the whole argument of pedophiles (or worse)
being encouraged by the RC practice of confession - absolution is just a
scapegoat, a simplistic blame game that ignores the real reasons for
deviant behavior and labels a primitive attempt to deal with aberrant
behavior as bad or worse than the behavior itself, and as such is just
another example of the tabloid, newsgroups, knee jerk reasoning so
common around here. A sort of philosophical 'bait and switch' by which
anti Catholics can manufacture yet another crude instrument to further
perpetuate their primary agenda, which cares less for the victims of
crimes and more for its own agenda of demonizing the "Church" because of
their hatred of it.
--
Joseph Littleshoes
"The two main political parties ruled alternately as if by tacit
agreement. Politically they were practically indistinguishable (one
perhaps a shade more liberal) but in both camps supporters were more
swayed by personalities than by issues. Both parties were heavily
dependent on the large industrial conglomerates. Corruption was
widespread, the conglomerates dictated economic policy, and with few
outstanding exceptions, politicians' reputations were low." |
|
