I have been away from the boards for a while.
Like most old people I fear it will take me a while to retrain the "muscle-memory" of my brain to the new styles and procedures.
There have been multiple threads on the basketball board involving the addition of an openly gay player by SHU's basketball team and the dismissal/reassignment of a seemingly-beloved chaplain away from SHU by the Archbishop of the Diocese.
Many complained about these threads placement on a basketball board --- and not unjustifiably so --- so I thoiught I might reignite a logical and thoughtful discussion of the topics here, "Off the Ship".
Not being a moderator, I could not "move" those threads here, but I took parts of one thread and have reproduced it below --- as faithfully as I could --- to remind myself of various topics raise.
It is my hope that we might be able to clear-up seeming misimpressions on both sides, by being logical, reasonable and sensitive to others' points of view.
I truly grieve about the myriad of misunderstandings that abound and would love to clear up even a few of them.
One of my pet-peeves about any dialogue is when someone resorts to ad hominem attacks --- a topic itself which we might pursue.
Another peeve is when rhetorical hyperbole devolves into gross exaggeration and misrepresentation.
Still a third --- and to me most bothersome --- is the people who for lack of a better noun I shall simply refer to as hypocrites. The ones who simultaneously condemn the religious for intolerance and then themselves call for a witch-hunt to end the career of one with a different opinion on a message board.
That said, I would propose certain clarifications which many might slough off as mere "semantic" distinctions, but which proper debate mandates if the discussion is to be clear and conclusive. We need a definition of terms.
1. There is a very important distinction between the institution known as the "Catholic Church" and its members or clergy. The Church has always admitted that it is composed only of sinners. Not one of us is sinless. The first Pope, Peter, denied and abandoned Christ. But that did not cause the forfeiture of his Keys to God's Kingdom. So, please, ascribe to the Church only the official teachings of the Church, and ascribe to its members, its clergy and its popes their respective ACTIONS --- both personal and official.
2. The Church has always differentiated its doctrine (mostly matters of faith and morals) from its rules or its practices or its rituals. I am not a scholar, but I have read much Church history and I am not aware of even SINGLE instance in which the Church EVER changed doctrine one iota.
3. The Church has always preached to hate the sin but to love the sinner. The Church --- not its individual members or clergy --- does NOT judge people but leaves that to God. The Church, itself, DOES judge BEHAVIOR based on Christ's teachings. Jesus would not cast the first stone --- even though He was without sin --- BUT he ALSO told the adulterous woman to "sin no more".
4. We are only here to get to heaven. The Church's role is to shepherd Christ's flock in that direction. In the past some overly-mortal Christians confused the Church's moral responsibilities with temporal authority.
5. All humans have atavistic emotions and drives (e.g. fight or flight), but each is also made in God's image. This does not mean we look like Him, but that like God we have the conscious ability to choose our actions.
6. When one makes a statement of fact he should stand ready to back it up with statistical or empirical evidence. With humans behavior is almost never truly perfect so, as in quantum physics, the better course of analysis is probabilistic, not absolute. Meaningful statistical deviations are scientifically significant.
So, given the 10,000 character limit per post I shall hereafter attempt to replicate at least one of the "basketball" threads:
Like most old people I fear it will take me a while to retrain the "muscle-memory" of my brain to the new styles and procedures.
There have been multiple threads on the basketball board involving the addition of an openly gay player by SHU's basketball team and the dismissal/reassignment of a seemingly-beloved chaplain away from SHU by the Archbishop of the Diocese.
Many complained about these threads placement on a basketball board --- and not unjustifiably so --- so I thoiught I might reignite a logical and thoughtful discussion of the topics here, "Off the Ship".
Not being a moderator, I could not "move" those threads here, but I took parts of one thread and have reproduced it below --- as faithfully as I could --- to remind myself of various topics raise.
It is my hope that we might be able to clear-up seeming misimpressions on both sides, by being logical, reasonable and sensitive to others' points of view.
I truly grieve about the myriad of misunderstandings that abound and would love to clear up even a few of them.
One of my pet-peeves about any dialogue is when someone resorts to ad hominem attacks --- a topic itself which we might pursue.
Another peeve is when rhetorical hyperbole devolves into gross exaggeration and misrepresentation.
Still a third --- and to me most bothersome --- is the people who for lack of a better noun I shall simply refer to as hypocrites. The ones who simultaneously condemn the religious for intolerance and then themselves call for a witch-hunt to end the career of one with a different opinion on a message board.
That said, I would propose certain clarifications which many might slough off as mere "semantic" distinctions, but which proper debate mandates if the discussion is to be clear and conclusive. We need a definition of terms.
1. There is a very important distinction between the institution known as the "Catholic Church" and its members or clergy. The Church has always admitted that it is composed only of sinners. Not one of us is sinless. The first Pope, Peter, denied and abandoned Christ. But that did not cause the forfeiture of his Keys to God's Kingdom. So, please, ascribe to the Church only the official teachings of the Church, and ascribe to its members, its clergy and its popes their respective ACTIONS --- both personal and official.
2. The Church has always differentiated its doctrine (mostly matters of faith and morals) from its rules or its practices or its rituals. I am not a scholar, but I have read much Church history and I am not aware of even SINGLE instance in which the Church EVER changed doctrine one iota.
3. The Church has always preached to hate the sin but to love the sinner. The Church --- not its individual members or clergy --- does NOT judge people but leaves that to God. The Church, itself, DOES judge BEHAVIOR based on Christ's teachings. Jesus would not cast the first stone --- even though He was without sin --- BUT he ALSO told the adulterous woman to "sin no more".
4. We are only here to get to heaven. The Church's role is to shepherd Christ's flock in that direction. In the past some overly-mortal Christians confused the Church's moral responsibilities with temporal authority.
5. All humans have atavistic emotions and drives (e.g. fight or flight), but each is also made in God's image. This does not mean we look like Him, but that like God we have the conscious ability to choose our actions.
6. When one makes a statement of fact he should stand ready to back it up with statistical or empirical evidence. With humans behavior is almost never truly perfect so, as in quantum physics, the better course of analysis is probabilistic, not absolute. Meaningful statistical deviations are scientifically significant.
So, given the 10,000 character limit per post I shall hereafter attempt to replicate at least one of the "basketball" threads:
Last edited: