Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Turning the other cheek; is it obligatory, no ifs, no buts?
Topic Started: Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 18:14 (1,433 Views)
OsullivanB

Clare
 
I can't believe He is asking it of everyone in every situation. Or that He is asking me to turn your cheek for you.

I can't believe He is asking it of nations which are under threat.
That seems to have been Peter's reasoning in the Garden, for which he was reproved.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Patrick
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 20:29
Somehow I can't see Mairtin catching a couple of men burgling his house in the dead of the night, exiting with the TV and saying to them, "hold on lads, why don't you take the DVD player and the PC too, and I'll throw in the car?"

:wacko:
Mairtin has never ever claimed to be a perfect Christian.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Was St Peter a nation?

If you are in charge of a country, and some other country decides to invade, do you tell your subjects to accept it; would you rally your subjects with the message: "Come on everyone, men, women, children, let's all turn the other cheek together!"?
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Clare
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 20:00
I can't believe He is asking it of nations which are under threat.
Why should the rules be different for a nation as opposed to the individuals who comprise that nation?

On a wider note, why should a Christian concern him or her self about nationhood, what should it matter to a Christian whether they are living under an English queen, a French king or a German dictator?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

I would probably do what I often do - sin.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Clare
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 20:47
If you are in charge of a country, and some other country decides to invade, do you tell your subjects to accept it; would you rally your subjects with the message: "Come on everyone, men, women, children, let's all turn the other cheek together!"?
Jesus was born, grew up and preached His "turn the other cheek" message in a country that had been invaded. When he talked about loving ones enemy, I'd imagine that their Roman oppressors were the first enemy to come into the minds of most Jews listening to Him.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Mairtin
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 20:49
Clare
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 20:00
I can't believe He is asking it of nations which are under threat.
Why should the rules be different for a nation as opposed to the individuals who comprise that nation?

On a wider note, why should a Christian concern him or her self about nationhood, what should it matter to a Christian whether they are living under an English queen, a French king or a German dictator?
Because if one has responsibility for others, as is the case in leaders of nations, and fathers of families, one ought to be concerned for one's nation and family.

Christians are not called to be indifferent to the safety of others, of their families, of society, are they?
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mairtin
Member Avatar

Clare
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 20:55
Christians are not called to be indifferent to the safety of others, of their families, of society, are they?
For some strange reason, I always thought that Christians are called to one thing only - to bring to Christ themselves, their families and everyone else they possibly can. Doing good for others flows from that. I struggle to see how ideas of nationhood and worrying about who rules a country contribute to it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

Clare
 
Christians are not called to be indifferent to the safety of others, of their families, of society, are they?
If the act is sinful, then the reason for it does not usually excuse, however humanly understandable it is. I thought that was the gist of what you expounded elsewhere as Catholic doctrine.

Would a threat to the safety of one's loved ones be justification for public worship of an idol? I think not. So, if violence is inherently wrong, the occasion of it is indeed a matter of moral indifference.

It is, of course, completely counter-intuitive. But then that's rather what makes Jesus and his message(s) special.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
Mairtin
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 21:01
Clare
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 20:55
Christians are not called to be indifferent to the safety of others, of their families, of society, are they?
For some strange reason, I always thought that Christians are called to one thing only - to bring to Christ themselves, their families and everyone else they possibly can. Doing good for others flows from that. I struggle to see how ideas of nationhood and worrying about who rules a country contribute to it.
I'm not especially interested in nationhood myself, Mairtin. But the ruler of a nation ought to be!

And yes, who rules the country does matter.

I'm rather speechless that you think it has no bearing on bringing Christ to people.

A ruler, or government can either facilitate or hinder bringing Christ to people. How can that not so minor detail be irrelevant?
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
OsullivanB
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 21:01
Clare
 
Christians are not called to be indifferent to the safety of others, of their families, of society, are they?
If the act is sinful, then the reason for it does not usually excuse, however humanly understandable it is. I thought that was the gist of what you expounded elsewhere as Catholic doctrine.

Would a threat to the safety of one's loved ones be justification for public worship of an idol? I think not. So, if violence is inherently wrong, the occasion of it is indeed a matter of moral indifference.

It is, of course, completely counter-intuitive. But then that's rather what makes Jesus and his message(s) special.
It is true that the end does not justify the means, as I often point out.

However, the Church does teach that killing in self-defence is allowed. Not all killing is murder. Murder is never allowed. Killing sometimes is.

And don't pick on me for pointing out that this is what the Church teaches! It is what the Church teaches. I do not make it up. I accept it.

The Catechism of the Council of Trent list types of killing which are lawful.

Violence therefore is a permissible means in some circumstances.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

I expect you're right, as is the Council of Trent. Jesus made a hash of his communication on the point. Still, nobody's perfect, are they. Oh...but...hmmm
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Clare
Member Avatar
Putting the "Fun Dame" into Fundamentalist
OsullivanB
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 21:19
I expect you're right, as is the Council of Trent. Jesus made a hash of his communication on the point. Still, nobody's perfect, are they. Oh...but...hmmm
OsB.

The Church was established by Jesus among other things to interpret His message.

Even without the Catechism of the Council of Trent, it would be patently obvious to me that one is not obliged to turn the other cheek in every situation. Indeed in some situations one may be obliged not to turn the other cheek.

It's the spirit of the law. You (and others) are insisting on the letter of the law, even when adhering to it would violate the spirit.
S.A.G.

Motes 'n' Beams blog

Join in the Fun Trivia Quiz!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rose of York
Member Avatar
Administrator
Clare
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 21:12
The Catechism of the Council of Trent list types of killing which are lawful.
Please may we have that list? One never knows when it may come in handy.
Keep the Faith!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OsullivanB

Clare
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 21:24
OsullivanB
Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 21:19
I expect you're right, as is the Council of Trent. Jesus made a hash of his communication on the point. Still, nobody's perfect, are they. Oh...but...hmmm
OsB.

The Church was established by Jesus among other things to interpret His message.

Even without the Catechism of the Council of Trent, it would be patently obvious to me that one is not obliged to turn the other cheek in every situation. Indeed in some situations one may be obliged not to turn the other cheek.

It's the spirit of the law. You (and others) are insisting on the letter of the law, even when adhering to it would violate the spirit.
You must be right, Clare. I can't think how I could have let the Gospels lead me into such egregious error. It's so wonderful to know that the Tridentine Fathers were there to save us from taking them at face value.
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic »
Add Reply