"And as to tolerance, it is surprising how far removed from the equity and prudence of the Church are those who profess what is called liberalism. For, in allowing that boundless license of which We have spoken, they exceed all limits, and end at last by making no apparent distinction between truth and error, honesty and dishonesty. And because the Church, the pillar and ground of truth, and the unerring teacher of morals, is forced utterly to reprobate and condemn tolerance of such an abandoned and criminal character, they calumniate her as being wanting in patience and gentleness, and thus fail to see that, in so doing, they impute to her as a fault what is in reality a matter for commendation. But, in spite of all this show of tolerance, it very often happens that, while they profess themselves ready to lavish liberty on all in the greatest profusion, they are utterly intolerant toward the Catholic Church, by refusing to allow her the liberty of being herself free."

http://w2.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_20061888_libertas.html [35]

Great post, Pete! To hear many in the Church today, one would be led to believe that there is only one virtue - tolerance, and one vice - JUDGMENTALISM.

Tolerance is understanding that ones own deeply felt convictions are never compromised when refusing to judge, condemn, oppress, or persecute those whose convictions are not ours.

While we may not judge motives, intentions, and guilt before God, we are commanded by Christ Himself to judge actions, speech, writing against truth and in this way we can help others by offering truth.

"Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly." (Jn 7:24).

"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them" (Mt 7:15, 16).

"Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by their fruits you will know them." (Mt 7:19-20).

St Paul adds:
"Test everything: retain what is good." (1Thess 5:21).

"The spiritual person, however, can judge everything but is not subject to judgement by anyone." (1 Cor 2:15).

"I, for my part, although absent in body but present in spirit, have already, as if present, pronounced judgement on the one who has committed this deed..." (1 Cor 5:3; read 1-13).

"I am speaking as to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I am saying." (1 Cor 10:15).

Thus, we may never refuse to judge as Christ commanded.

The problem with such broadmindedness is as Archbishop Fulton J Sheen has written: we “are suffering from tolerance: tolerance of right and wrong, truth and error, virtue and evil, Christ and chaos.

“A person who can make up his or her mind in an orderly way, as a person might make up a bed, is called a bigot; but a person who cannot make up his or her mind, any more than one can make up for lost time, is called tolerant and broadminded.”

Bishop Fulton Sheen was not backward in coming forward:
“Religion has its principles, natural and revealed, which are more exacting in their logic than mathematics…the false notion of tolerance has obscured this fact from the eyes of many who are as intolerant about the smallest details of life as they are tolerant of their relations to God.

“Another evidence of the breakdown of reason that has produced this weird fungus of broad-mindedness is the passion for novelty, as opposed to the love of truth.” (Broad-Mindedness, in The Electronic Christian , MacMillan, 1979).

Cardinal Ratzinger: “I would say that a man of conscience is one who never acquires tolerance, well-being, success, public standing, and approval on the part of prevailing opinion at the expense of truth.” (The Priest, Autumn, 1993).

To quote Dr Jeff Mirus:
“…universal tolerance means the acceptance (and therefore tacit approval) of all behaviors, irrespective of their impact on the common good and on human flourishing. To put the matter simply, tolerance perceived as a virtue always rewards vice….The invocation of tolerance as a virtue will always undermine prudence, the real and necessary virtue that enables us to match proper solutions to particular problems.”
On Prudence and the Tyranny of Tolerance: A Case Study, Mar 11, 2010
https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=433

: Thus, we may never refuse to judge as Christ
: commanded.

And yet He was unequivocal about judgement Matt 7 (my emphasis):

“Stop judging, that you may not be judged.

For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you.

Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?

How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove that splinter from your eye,’ while the wooden beam is in your eye?

You hypocrite, remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter from your brother’s eye.

When Jesus intervenes in the immanent stoning of the woman in John (8:1-11) does he advise those present to 'judge actions, speech, writing against truth and in this way we can help others by offering truth'? Apparently not.

Again, he was unequivocal: 'Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her'.

So, if you are willing to be judged the way you judge others and you have removed the proverbial plank from your eye and are otherwise confident that you are without sin, go ahead!

I assume that 130 years ago, Leo XIII had certain contemporary movements and trends in mind.

The extent to which they apply today, not to mention who they might apply to, is a matter of opinion.

A more contemporary perspective might be Pope Francis' ongoing emphasis on mercy?

It has been said that each of us needs to examine our own conscience, before assuming that we are sufficiently worthy. to judge others who we believe fail to meet the standards that we impose on others.

In judging others a man laboreth in vain; he often erreth, and easily falleth into sin; but in judging and examining himself he always laboreth to good purpose.~Thomas a Kempis

James 4:12

There is only one Lawgiver and Judge, the one who is able to save and destroy. But you--who are you to judge your neighbor?

John 8

The Woman Caught in Adultery

6 They said this to test Him, in order to have a basis for accusing Him. But Jesus bent down and began to write on the ground with His finger. 7 When they continued to question Him, He straightened up and said to them, Let him who is without sin among you be the first to cast a stone at her.

John 6

41 Why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to notice the beam in your own eye? 42How can you say, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while you yourself fail to see the beam in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.…

end

Fulton Sheen also wrote:


Criticism of others is thus an oblique form of self-commendation. We think we make the picture hang straight on our wall by telling our neighbors that all his pictures are crooked.

We may never legitimately refuse to judge as Christ commanded and St Paul supported -- to judge actions, speech, writing against truth and in this way we can help others by offering truth.

http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=1400
Even mercy can be built on sand. Here’s how to tell.
By Dr. Jeff Mirus (bio - articles - email) | Jul 26, 2016
The entire seventh chapter of St. Matthew’s Gospel is well worth reading. Mercy depends on love. Love is ordered to goodness. Goodness demands instruction, counsel and admonishment. If we ignore this reality, mercy loses its transformative strength. We face a real danger today of offering a mercy very much like a house built on sand. When it falls, great will be the fall of it. When it falls, what will become of those within?

: We may never legitimately refuse to judge as
: Christ commanded and St Paul supported -- to
: judge actions, speech, writing against truth
: and in this way we can help others by
: offering truth.

Indeed. And the question is 'what is legitimately?'. Christ seems very unequivocal about that!

: Goodness demands instruction, counsel and
: admonishment.

Again, Jesus had a chance to make this point to those who would stone the woman. According to them, they had a legitimate obligation to stone the woman; they may have even argued that it was demanded by scripture and tradition.

Jesus' priorities were clear. He chose mercy, forgiveness and compassion over instruction, counsel and admonishment.

(Ironically, he did this after doodling in the sand. Mercy built on sand? )

Was Jesus being judgmental when he told the woman to "sin no more" ?



--Previous Message--
: Thus, we may never refuse to judge as Christ
: commanded.
:
: And yet He was unequivocal about judgement
: Matt 7 (my emphasis): “ Stop judging , that
: you may not be judged.
:
: For as you judge, so will you be judged, and
: the measure with which you measure will be
: measured out to you.
:
: Why do you notice the splinter in your
: brother’s eye, but do not perceive the
: wooden beam in your own eye?
:
: How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me
: remove that splinter from your eye,’ while
: the wooden beam is in your eye?
:
: You hypocrite , remove the wooden beam from
: your eye first; then you will see clearly to
: remove the splinter from your brother’s eye.
: When Jesus intervenes in the immanent
: stoning of the woman in John (8:1-11) does
: he advise those present to 'judge actions,
: speech, writing against truth and in this
: way we can help others by offering truth'?
: Apparently not.
:
: Again, he was unequivocal: 'Let the one
: among you who is without sin be the first to
: throw a stone at her'.
:
: So, if you are willing to be judged the way
: you judge others and you have removed the
: proverbial plank from your eye and are
: otherwise confident that you are without
: sin, go ahead!
:

Faz:
“Jesus' priorities were clear. He chose mercy, forgiveness and compassion over instruction, counsel and admonishment.”

False.
Another confused fazing of the words and actions of Jesus as the woman caught in adultery was commanded to “go and sin no more” clearly recognising the sin of adultery and thus instructing, counselling and admonishing clearly.

In reality Jesus founded His Catholic Church to instruct, counsel, and admonish, infusing Her with the sacraments which enable Her to forgive mercifully and compassionately those who do recognise their faults.

I think good Pope Leo's words are even MORE relevant given how ubiquitous the call to "tolerance" is these days and so frequently to things which are contrary, threatening and restrictive to the Catholic Church. As for Pope Francis...history is yet to "judge" him...


--Previous Message--
: I assume that 130 years ago, Leo XIII had
: certain contemporary movements and trends in
: mind.
:
: The extent to which they apply today, not to
: mention who they might apply to, is a matter
: of opinion.
:
: A more contemporary perspective might be
: Pope Francis' ongoing emphasis on mercy?
:

Thanks John. Many follow a "false" (distorted, incomplete or just plain incorrect) Gospel. Pope Leo was very good at explaining the subtle deceptions that can undermine and oppose true Faith.

Pete


--Previous Message--
: Great post, Pete! To hear many in the Church
: today, one would be led to believe that
: there is only one virtue - tolerance, and
: one vice - JUDGMENTALISM.
:
:
:
:

: Was Jesus being judgmental when he told the
: woman to "sin no more" ?

I think He answers that question (with my emphasis):

Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”
She replied, “No one, sir.” Then Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you. Go, and from now on do not sin any more.”

Jesus demonstrates that even he won't judge her but, on the strength of that radical act of non-judgement, invites her to turn her life around.

: Another confused fazing of the words and
: actions of Jesus as the woman caught in
: adultery was commanded to “go and sin no
: more” clearly recognising the sin of
: adultery and thus instructing, counselling
: and admonishing clearly.

There was no 'admonition' in fact Jesus unambiguously avoided specific condemnation even though this woman was 'caught in the act'.

: In reality Jesus founded His Catholic Church
: to instruct, counsel, and admonish, infusing
: Her with the sacraments which enable Her to
: forgive mercifully and compassionately those
: who do recognise their faults.

Indeed. Jesus stark words of caution applied to individuals, like those about to throw stones, who took it upon themselves to judge and condemn.

: I think good Pope Leo's words are even MORE
: relevant ...

Of course you do, Pete, and you're entitled to that view.

: ... given how ubiquitous the call to
: "tolerance" is these days and so
: frequently to things which are contrary,
: threatening and restrictive to the Catholic
: Church.

And that view too.

: As for Pope Francis...history is yet
: to "judge" him...

'History' in the context of 'historical judgement' is hard to pin down but if it is reasonable to refer to Leo, then it is reasonable refer to Francis.

--Previous Message--
: Was Jesus being judgmental when he told the
: woman to "sin no more" ?
:
: I think He answers that question (with my
: emphasis): Then Jesus straightened up and
: said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no
: one condemned you?”
: She replied, “No one, sir.” Then Jesus said,
: “ Neither do I condemn you . Go, and from
: now on do not sin any more.” Jesus
: demonstrates that even he won't judge her
: but, on the strength of that radical act of
: non-judgement , invites her to turn her life
: around.
:
:

Jesus doesn't condemn (judge) the woman to PUNISHMENT. He does "condemn" (judge) her previous actions by saying SIN NO MORE. We have two senses of what it means to condemn or judge. So while Jesus also says "Do not JUDGE", he can't be referring to BOTH SENSES of the term "judge" otherwise he would be contradicting himself.

Faz: “There was no 'admonition' ”
Fact: The woman has sinned through adultery. As to “admonish” means to “caution/warn” it is self-evident that Faz is wrong as Jesus does precisely that “go and sin no more” – the warning could not be clearer, since “counsel” includes “warning”.

Thus Jesus warns her, and all, against sin and exhibits his justice and mercy in forgiveness.

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/jimmy-akin/9-things-you-should-know-about-the-woman-caught-in-adultery
John Paul II said:
“Go, and do not sin again” (Jn 8:11). The last words of this episode show that God does not want the sinner to die, but to repent of the evil he has committed and live.”

Refer to Pope Francis and his call to Mercy by all means. Mercy is great. Mercy is there for when we stray from what is right, recognise we have done wrong, are sorry for it and wish to do right. Mercy is not, however, licence to define or ignore right from wrong or as a censure upon making others aware of right and wrong.

It's obviously a source of great debate in the Church presently whether Pope Francis has erred by invoking a Mercy which redefines or ignores right and wrong. I'm not convinced he has, but he's pushing the limits. My concern is one day he will go "over the edge" undeniably and teach a false and distorted Mercy as outlined above.



--Previous Message--
: I think good Pope Leo's words are even MORE
: relevant ...
:
: Of course you do, Pete, and you're entitled
: to that view.
:
: ... given how ubiquitous the call to
: "tolerance" is these days and so
: frequently to things which are contrary,
: threatening and restrictive to the Catholic
: Church.
:
: And that view too.
:
: As for Pope Francis...history is yet
: to "judge" him...
:
: 'History' in the context of 'historical
: judgement' is hard to pin down but if it is
: reasonable to refer to Leo, then it is
: reasonable refer to Francis.
:

I think that's the point.
'Judgemental' has two meanings:

- concerning use of judgement or critical faculty
- censorious, condemnatory.

Jesus was in a better position than anyone to judge (definition a) that the woman caught in adultery had sinned.

But, having done so, He didn't then seek her condemnation, but her salvation, as He always does.
Her salvation depended on her conversion, her turning away from sin, and He told her so.

For me, Pope Francis' language conveys all this better than Pope Leo's.

I like a lot of Pope Francis's language too. I have some concern he may one day be a little too "accommodating" to the point of departing from the Faith. I hope not. Time will tell...

Pope Leo seemed to have a very keen understanding of the movements and ideas contrary and hazardous to the Faith, much of which is just as relevant today. Perhaps we've all become a little too nervous about being "confrontational", but at some point firm lines need to be drawn. Mercy is not limitless in the sense that if we are errant there will eventually be consequences. Just as ignoring or going against physical laws has consequences so too moral and spiritual. The message of Divine Mercy as revealed to Saint Faustina reminds us there is at some point Justice and Judgement...

"Speak to the world about My mercy; let all mankind recognize My unfathomable mercy. It is a sign for the end times; after it will come the day of justice. ... You will prepare the world for My final coming" (Diary 848 and 829)

Today I am sending you with My mercy to the people of the whole world. I do not want to punish aching mankind, but I desire to heal it, pressing it to My merciful Heart. I use punishment when they themselves force me to do so; My hand is reluctant to take hold of the sword of justice. Before the Day of Justice, I am sending the Day of Mercy. ... I am prolonging the time of mercy for the sake of [sinners]. But woe to them if they do not recognize this time of My visitation (Diary, 1588 and 1160).

Write this: Before I come as the just Judge, I am coming first as the King of Mercy (Diary 83)

http://www.thedivinemercy.org/message/sopocko/story.php?NID=4816




--Previous Message--
: I think that's the point.
: 'Judgemental' has two meanings:
:
: - concerning use of judgement or critical
: faculty
: - censorious, condemnatory.
:
: Jesus was in a better position than anyone
: to judge (definition a) that the woman
: caught in adultery had sinned.
:
: But, having done so, He didn't then seek her
: condemnation, but her salvation, as He
: always does.
: Her salvation depended on her conversion,
: her turning away from sin, and He told her
: so.
:
: For me, Pope Francis' language conveys all
: this better than Pope Leo's.
:
:
:
:
:

: Jesus doesn't condemn (judge) the woman to
: PUNISHMENT. He does "condemn"
: (judge) her previous actions by saying SIN
: NO MORE.

He doesn't condemn her in any way, IMO. In fact he specifically says 'Neither do I condemn you.' It's there in black and white!

Given that, his invitation to sin no more is about her future, not her past.

Jesus response to this crowd of 'condemners and judgers' is to, effectively, dismiss them. Having done that, he offers the woman a completely different approach: non condemnation and and invitation to change her life.

: We have two senses of what it means
: to condemn or judge. So while Jesus also
: says "Do not JUDGE", he can't be
: referring to BOTH SENSES of the term
: "judge" otherwise he would be
: contradicting himself.

He could be contradicting himself if your construction of 'two senses' is reasonable. I don't think it is. Again, he doesn't condemn or judge in any sense so there's no contradiction.

: Fact:

No PDH, there is a difference between a fact and opinion. You may be right, but it is not a 'fact'.

: The woman has sinned through adultery.
: As to “admonish” means to “caution/warn” it
: is self-evident that Faz is wrong

Clearly it is not 'self evident'. Clearly it is your opinion.

: as Jesus
: does precisely that “go and sin no more” –
: the warning could not be clearer, since
: “counsel” includes “warning”.

There is no 'warning'. In the context of specifically avoiding the notion of condemnation and, with it, the stoning, Jesus takes another path.

: Thus Jesus warns her, and all, against sin
: and exhibits his justice and mercy in
: forgiveness.

He certainly exhibits justice, mercy and forgiveness, in stark contrast to those who seek to condemn and do harm, but there is no 'warning'.

: Mercy is not,
: however, licence to define or ignore right
: from wrong ...

Who is making that argument?

: ... or as a censure upon making
: others aware of right and wrong.

In terms of condemnation, if Jesus say he will not do it, why would we?

: It's obviously a source of great debate in
: the Church presently whether Pope Francis
: has erred by invoking a Mercy which
: redefines or ignores right and wrong.

Is it?

: I'm not convinced he has, but he's pushing the
: limits. My concern is one day he will go
: "over the edge" undeniably and
: teach a false and distorted Mercy as
: outlined above.

I dare say many thought that of Pope Leo too because, at the time, his teaching was seen by many as pretty radical. Even now Rerum Novarum is regarded as controversial by some.

: For me, Pope Francis' language conveys all
: this better than Pope Leo's.

... I agree!

Notwithstanding that little bit of mischief, I also acknowledge that Leo was an extraordinary leader for his time (and, maybe, beyond!).

--Previous Message--
: Jesus doesn't condemn (judge) the woman to
: PUNISHMENT. He does "condemn"
: (judge) her previous actions by saying SIN
: NO MORE.
:
: He doesn't condemn her in any way, IMO. In
: fact he specifically says 'Neither do I
: condemn you.' It's there in black and white!

No, he doesn't condemn the woman. I don't think anybody is saying that. He condemns her actions. Surely you're familiar with the expression "love the sinner, not the sin" !
:
: Given that, his invitation to sin no more
: is about her future, not her past.

No, he would have said "Don't sin" but he said "Sin no MORE"..no MORE sins, so her previous actions WERE sinful .. (Crikey, do I really need to explain this??...you're a smart guy Faz!)
:
: Jesus response to this crowd of 'condemners
: and judgers' is to, effectively, dismiss
: them. Having done that, he offers the woman
: a completely different approach: non
: condemnation and and invitation to change
: her life.

Yes, so he judged her previous life.

:
: We have two senses of what it means
: to condemn or judge. So while Jesus also
: says "Do not JUDGE", he can't be
: referring to BOTH SENSES of the term
: "judge" otherwise he would be
: contradicting himself.
:
: He could be contradicting himself if your
: construction of 'two senses' is reasonable.
: I don't think it is.

Why is it not reasonable?

Again, he doesn't
: condemn or judge in any sense so there's
: no contradiction.
:

Then why did he say SIN NO MORE ?? Just as an add-on that had NOTHING to do with the attempted stoning incident?? C'mon Faz...to quote you, you're sounding a bit DESPERATE..ISH to avoid the obvious!

Pete

: For me, Pope Francis' language conveys all
: this better than Pope Leo's.
:
: ... I agree!
:

Haha, I thought I was the one crossing the floor here. But, OK, I'll go you halves.

: Notwithstanding that little bit of mischief,
: I also acknowledge that Leo was an
: extraordinary leader for his time (and,
: maybe, beyond!).

Maybe a good leader, but of the neo-scholastic party - one I'll never belong to.

--Previous Message--
: Mercy is not,
: however, licence to define or ignore right
: from wrong ...
:
: Who is making that argument?

Those who try and separate Mercy and Judgement. Mercy without judgment is meaningless.

:
: ... or as a censure upon making
: others aware of right and wrong.
:
: In terms of condemnation, if Jesus say he
: will not do it, why would we?

Because he condemned her previous actions. Let's take another example, Matthew 23:1-39 Pretty harsh, condemning words for the Pharisees..Was Jesus being NON-JUDGMENTAL then ?

:
: It's obviously a source of great debate in
: the Church presently whether Pope Francis
: has erred by invoking a Mercy which
: redefines or ignores right and wrong.
:
: Is it?

Yes, you're unfamiliar with the Amoris Laetitia controversy?

:
: I'm not convinced he has, but he's pushing
: the
: limits. My concern is one day he will go
: "over the edge" undeniably and
: teach a false and distorted Mercy as
: outlined above.
:
: I dare say many thought that of Pope Leo too
: because, at the time, his teaching was seen
: by many as pretty radical. Even now Rerum
: Novarum is regarded as controversial by
: some.
:

Fortunately it's not up to some, it's not up to anybody..it's up to GOD and he communicates His Judgement through His Church...if you BELIEVE that ??

Pete

: No, he doesn't condemn the woman. I don't
: think anybody is saying that. He condemns
: her actions. Surely you're familiar with the
: expression "love the sinner, not the
: sin" !

I am. But, again, Jesus makes no distinction about his condemnation. He simply doesn't condemn. It's very clear.

: No, he would have said "Don't sin"
: but he said "Sin no MORE"..no MORE
: sins, so her previous actions WERE sinful ..
: (Crikey, do I really need to explain
: this??...you're a smart guy Faz!)

I may or may not be 'smart' by your reckoning, that's beside the point. I have a different view to you.

: Yes, so he judged her previous life.

He could have, but he doesn't. The 'mob' attempts to, but Jesus confronts their judgementalism so profoundly, they withdraw. It's one of the key points of the story. It's a point of difference between the ministry of Jesus and those who would use religion to condemn (to the point of death by stoning!).

: Why is it not reasonable?

Because He doesn't condemn in any sense. It is key to this story that Jesus, by word and action, does not condemn.

: Then why did he say SIN NO MORE ??

He's inviting her to change her life, not out of condemnation. He shows her a different way. The mob wants to condemn, Jesus makes a point of not condemning.

: Just as
: an add-on that had NOTHING to do with the
: attempted stoning incident??

It has everything to do with the stoning incident. Jesus shows the women (and the mob) a new way, a way that is not about judgement and condemnation -- he specifically and unequivocally rejects this -- but about an invitation.

: C'mon Faz...to
: quote you, you're sounding a bit
: DESPERATE..ISH to avoid the obvious!

Not sure what your quoting there.

--Previous Message--
: No, he doesn't condemn the woman. I don't
: think anybody is saying that. He condemns
: her actions. Surely you're familiar with the
: expression "love the sinner, not the
: sin" !
:
: I am. But, again, Jesus makes no distinction
: about his condemnation. He simply doesn't
: condemn. It's very clear.

You're taking the NON-EXPLICIT condemnation of her behaviour as no condemnation. The condemnation is IMPLICIT.

:
: No, he would have said "Don't sin"
: but he said "Sin no MORE"..no MORE
: sins, so her previous actions WERE sinful ..
: (Crikey, do I really need to explain
: this??...you're a smart guy Faz!)
:
: I may or may not be 'smart' by your
: reckoning, that's beside the point. I have a
: different view to you.

It's not about a view. It's simple logic.

:
: Yes, so he judged her previous life.
:
: He could have, but he doesn't. The 'mob'
: attempts to, but Jesus confronts their
: judgementalism so profoundly, they withdraw.
: It's one of the key points of the story.
: It's a point of difference between the
: ministry of Jesus and those who would use
: religion to condemn (to the point of death
: by stoning!).

To state the obvious, we're obviously reading the story differently.

:
: Why is it not reasonable?
:
: Because He doesn't condemn in any sense .
: It is key to this story that Jesus, by word
: and action, does not condemn.
:
: Then why did he say SIN NO MORE ??
:
: He's inviting her to change her life, not
: out of condemnation. He shows her a
: different way. The mob wants to condemn,
: Jesus makes a point of not condemning.

OK, nothing wrong with her previous life..just time to be DIFFERENT, got it.

:
: Just as
: an add-on that had NOTHING to do with the
: attempted stoning incident??
:
: It has everything to do with the stoning
: incident. Jesus shows the women (and the
: mob) a new way, a way that is not about
: judgement and condemnation -- he
: specifically and unequivocally rejects this
: -- but about an invitation.

"Go on a NEW WAY that is DIFFERENT!" I'm getting the hang of this...

:
: C'mon Faz...to
: quote you, you're sounding a bit
: DESPERATE..ISH to avoid the obvious!
:
: Not sure what your quoting there.
:

http://members7.boardhost.com/TrueCatholic/msg/1518585414.html

Pete

: You're taking the NON-EXPLICIT condemnation
: of her behaviour as no condemnation. The
: condemnation is IMPLICIT.

Jesus is very explicit, 'Neither do I condemn you'.

: It's not about a view. It's simple logic.

I agree. It's illogical to assert an 'implicit' condemnation when there is none.

: To state the obvious, we're obviously
: reading the story differently.

Yep.

: OK, nothing wrong with her previous
: life..

No. Jesus doesn't say there's nothing wrong with her previous life, but he explicitly avoids condemning her. In other words, he leaves it up to the woman to reflect on her previous life and invites her to change it. Who better?

: just time to be DIFFERENT, got it.

In the context, Jesus presents the woman with a radically different view about life and her relationship with God (through his agency). He intervenes in her immanent and, no doubt, painful death. This wasn't random a murderous mob, this was a crowd who were acting in a way that was regarded as righteous. Righteously they condemn her because she was 'caught in the act'. They were agents of God's judgement.

Jesus proposes a different way.

First, he confronts the mob with their own sinfulness and makes it clear that as sinners they are in no position to judge, let alone carry out a mortal judgement.

Then he distinguishes himself from the mob by telling the woman, explicitly, the he also won't judge her.

Jesus shows the woman a different way and invites her to see her life in this different context. This is an invitation to metanoia.

Jesus saved her life and in the context of that powerful act of courage and compassion, invites her to live a new life.

: "Go on a NEW WAY that is
: DIFFERENT!" I'm getting the hang of
: this...

This is a clear and explicit example of Jesus making a break from the past and proposing, by word and action, a new way.

In the past, there was no way out for a woman caught in adultery. It was acceptable, if not required, for others to act as God's judge and executioner.

So Jesus' intervention here is definitely a new way. It's the point of the story.

http://members7.boardhost.com/TrueCatholic/msg/1518585414.html

LOL ... ish.

: Those who try and separate Mercy and
: Judgement. Mercy without judgment is
: meaningless.

A woman and Jesus meet. She is an adulteress and, in the eyes of the Law, liable to be stoned. Jesus, through his preaching and the total gift of himself that would lead him to the Cross, returned the Mosaic Law to its true and original intent. Here what is central is not the law or legal justice, but the love of God, which is capable of looking into the heart of each person and seeing the deepest desire hidden there; God’s love must take primacy over all else. This Gospel account, however, is not an encounter of sin and judgement in the abstract, but of a sinner and her Saviour. Jesus looked that woman in the eye and read in her heart a desire to be understood, forgiven and set free. The misery of sin was clothed with the mercy of love. Jesus’ only judgement is one filled with mercy and compassion for the condition of this sinner. To those who wished to judge and condemn her to death, Jesus replies with a lengthy silence. His purpose was to let God’s voice be heard in the consciences not only of the woman, but also in those of her accusers, who drop their stones and one by one leave the scene (cf. Jn 8:9). Jesus then says: “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?… Neither do I condemn you. Go your way and from now on do not sin again” (vv. 10-11). Jesus helps the woman to look to the future with hope and to make a new start in life. Henceforth, if she so desires, she can “walk in charity” (Eph 5:2). Once clothed in mercy, even if the inclination to sin remains, it is overcome by the love that makes it possible for her to look ahead and to live her life differently.
(Misericordia Et Misera, 2016. My emphasis.)

: Let's take another example, Matthew 23:1-39
: Pretty harsh, condemning words for the
: Pharisees..Was Jesus being NON-JUDGMENTAL
: then ?

This continues the theme even more stridently.

When Jesus encounters an individual labelled by society as a 'sinner' either in his ministry or via the stories he tells, he challenges those around him to look beyond judging and opt for mercy and compassion.

But, as in the original story, Jesus reserves particular venom for those who seek to judge or condemn especially in the name of God. It is an explicit, consistent theme.

It is in this context that Jesus later talks about those who would 'lead you astray' and those 'false prophets'.

: Yes, you're unfamiliar with the Amoris
: Laetitia controversy?

Yes, but to call this a 'great debate' is, IMO, a great exaggeration.

I suspect some of the teachings of Pope Leo XIII would have caused much greater consternation!

: Fortunately it's not up to some, it's not up
: to anybody..it's up to GOD and he
: communicates His Judgement through His
: Church...if you BELIEVE that ??

I do my best, Pete.

Nice quote there Faz.

"Misericordia et misera is a phrase used by Saint Augustine in recounting the story of Jesus’ meeting with the woman taken in adultery (cf. Jn 8:1-11)"

Saint Augustine had this to say...

"And because she had heard this, “He that is without sin. let him first cast a stone at her,” (Jn 8:7b) she expected to be punished by Him in whom sin could not be found. But He, who had driven back her adversaries with the tongue of justice, raising the eyes of clemency towards her, asked her,

“Hath no man condemned thee?”

She answered, “No man, Lord.”

And He said, “Neither do I condemn thee;”...

(Jn 8:10-11a)

...by whom, perhaps, thou didst fear to be condemned, because in me thou hast not found sin. “Neither will I condemn thee.”

What is this, O Lord? Dost Thou therefore favor sins? Not so, evidently. Mark what follows:

“Go; henceforth, sin no more.”

(Jn 8:11b)

Therefore the Lord did also condemn, but He condemned sins, not man.

For if He were a patron of sin, He would say,

"Neither will I condemn thee; go, live as thou wilt: be secure in my deliverance; how much soever thou wilt sin, I will deliver thee from all punishment even of hell, and from the tormentors of the infernal world."

- He did not say this!"

http://textualcriticism.scienceontheweb.net/FATHERS/Augustine2.html

So there you have it Faz. According to our good and holy friend Saint Augustine DID CONDEMN...not the woman, but her SINS!

Pete


--Previous Message--
: Those who try and separate Mercy and
: Judgement. Mercy without judgment is
: meaningless. A woman and Jesus meet. She is
: an adulteress and, in the eyes of the Law,
: liable to be stoned. Jesus, through his
: preaching and the total gift of himself that
: would lead him to the Cross, returned the
: Mosaic Law to its true and original intent.
: Here what is central is not the law or legal
: justice, but the love of God, which is
: capable of looking into the heart of each
: person and seeing the deepest desire hidden
: there; God’s love must take primacy over
: all else . This Gospel account, however, is
: not an encounter of sin and judgement in the
: abstract, but of a sinner and her Saviour.
: Jesus looked that woman in the eye and read
: in her heart a desire to be understood,
: forgiven and set free. The misery of sin was
: clothed with the mercy of love. Jesus’ only
: judgement is one filled with mercy and
: compassion for the condition of this
: sinner. To those who wished to judge and
: condemn her to death, Jesus replies with a
: lengthy silence. His purpose was to let
: God’s voice be heard in the consciences not
: only of the woman, but also in those of her
: accusers, who drop their stones and one by
: one leave the scene (cf. Jn 8:9). Jesus then
: says: “Woman, where are they? Has no one
: condemned you?… Neither do I condemn you .
: Go your way and from now on do not sin
: again” (vv. 10-11). Jesus helps the woman to
: look to the future with hope and to make a
: new start in life. Henceforth, if she so
: desires, she can “walk in charity” (Eph
: 5:2). Once clothed in mercy, even if the
: inclination to sin remains, it is overcome
: by the love that makes it possible for her
: to look ahead and to live her life
: differently.
: (Misericordia Et Misera, 2016. My emphasis.)
: : Let's take another example, Matthew
: 23:1-39
: Pretty harsh, condemning words for the
: Pharisees..Was Jesus being NON-JUDGMENTAL
: then ?
:
: This continues the theme even more
: stridently.
:
: When Jesus encounters an individual labelled
: by society as a 'sinner' either in his
: ministry or via the stories he tells, he
: challenges those around him to look beyond
: judging and opt for mercy and compassion.
:
: But, as in the original story, Jesus
: reserves particular venom for those who seek
: to judge or condemn especially in the name
: of God. It is an explicit, consistent theme.
:
: It is in this context that Jesus later talks
: about those who would 'lead you astray' and
: those 'false prophets'.
:
: Yes, you're unfamiliar with the Amoris
: Laetitia controversy?
:
: Yes, but to call this a 'great debate' is,
: IMO, a great exaggeration.
:
: I suspect some of the teachings of Pope Leo
: XIII would have caused much greater
: consternation!
:
: Fortunately it's not up to some, it's not up
: to anybody..it's up to GOD and he
: communicates His Judgement through His
: Church...if you BELIEVE that ??
:
: I do my best, Pete.
:

Last line should read:

"So there you have it Faz. According to our good and holy friend Saint Augustine, Jesus DID CONDEMN...not the woman, but her SINS! "

Pete


--Previous Message--
: Nice quote there Faz.
:
: "Misericordia et misera is a phrase
: used by Saint Augustine in recounting the
: story of Jesus’ meeting with the woman taken
: in adultery (cf. Jn 8:1-11)"
:
: Saint Augustine had this to say...
:
: "And because she had heard this, “He
: that is without sin. let him first cast a
: stone at her,” (Jn 8:7b) she expected to be
: punished by Him in whom sin could not be
: found. But He, who had driven back her
: adversaries with the tongue of justice,
: raising the eyes of clemency towards her,
: asked her,
:
: “Hath no man condemned thee?”
:
: She answered, “No man, Lord.”
:
: And He said, “Neither do I condemn thee;”...
:
: (Jn 8:10-11a)
:
: ...by whom, perhaps, thou didst fear to be
: condemned, because in me thou hast not found
: sin. “Neither will I condemn thee.”
:
: What is this, O Lord? Dost Thou therefore
: favor sins? Not so, evidently. Mark what
: follows:
:
: “Go; henceforth, sin no more.”
:
: (Jn 8:11b)
:
: Therefore the Lord did also condemn, but He
: condemned sins, not man.
:
: For if He were a patron of sin, He would
: say,
:
: "Neither will I condemn thee; go, live
: as thou wilt: be secure in my deliverance;
: how much soever thou wilt sin, I will
: deliver thee from all punishment even of
: hell, and from the tormentors of the
: infernal world."
:
: - He did not say this!"
:
:
: http://textualcriticism.scienceontheweb.net/FATHERS/Augustine2.html
:
: So there you have it Faz. According to our
: good and holy friend Saint Augustine DID
: CONDEMN...not the woman, but her SINS!
:
: Pete
:
:
: --Previous Message--
: Those who try and separate Mercy and
: Judgement. Mercy without judgment is
: meaningless. A woman and Jesus meet. She is
: an adulteress and, in the eyes of the Law,
: liable to be stoned. Jesus, through his
: preaching and the total gift of himself that
: would lead him to the Cross, returned the
: Mosaic Law to its true and original intent.
: Here what is central is not the law or legal
: justice, but the love of God, which is
: capable of looking into the heart of each
: person and seeing the deepest desire hidden
: there; God’s love must take primacy over
: all else . This Gospel account, however, is
: not an encounter of sin and judgement in the
: abstract, but of a sinner and her Saviour.
: Jesus looked that woman in the eye and read
: in her heart a desire to be understood,
: forgiven and set free. The misery of sin was
: clothed with the mercy of love. Jesus’ only
: judgement is one filled with mercy and
: compassion for the condition of this
: sinner. To those who wished to judge and
: condemn her to death, Jesus replies with a
: lengthy silence. His purpose was to let
: God’s voice be heard in the consciences not
: only of the woman, but also in those of her
: accusers, who drop their stones and one by
: one leave the scene (cf. Jn 8:9). Jesus then
: says: “Woman, where are they? Has no one
: condemned you?… Neither do I condemn you .
: Go your way and from now on do not sin
: again” (vv. 10-11). Jesus helps the woman to
: look to the future with hope and to make a
: new start in life. Henceforth, if she so
: desires, she can “walk in charity” (Eph
: 5:2). Once clothed in mercy, even if the
: inclination to sin remains, it is overcome
: by the love that makes it possible for her
: to look ahead and to live her life
: differently.
: (Misericordia Et Misera, 2016. My emphasis.)
: : Let's take another example, Matthew
: 23:1-39
: Pretty harsh, condemning words for the
: Pharisees..Was Jesus being NON-JUDGMENTAL
: then ?
:
: This continues the theme even more
: stridently.
:
: When Jesus encounters an individual labelled
: by society as a 'sinner' either in his
: ministry or via the stories he tells, he
: challenges those around him to look beyond
: judging and opt for mercy and compassion.
:
: But, as in the original story, Jesus
: reserves particular venom for those who seek
: to judge or condemn especially in the name
: of God. It is an explicit, consistent theme.
:
: It is in this context that Jesus later talks
: about those who would 'lead you astray' and
: those 'false prophets'.
:
: Yes, you're unfamiliar with the Amoris
: Laetitia controversy?
:
: Yes, but to call this a 'great debate' is,
: IMO, a great exaggeration.
:
: I suspect some of the teachings of Pope Leo
: XIII would have caused much greater
: consternation!
:
: Fortunately it's not up to some, it's not up
: to anybody..it's up to GOD and he
: communicates His Judgement through His
: Church...if you BELIEVE that ??
:
: I do my best, Pete.
:
:
:

: So there you have it Faz. According to our
: good and holy friend Saint Augustine DID
: CONDEMN...not the woman, but her SINS!

With all respect for such an eminent Father of the Church, it is such tortured logic!

Like you, somehow we go from 'Neither will I condemn thee' and end up with 'Therefore the Lord did also condemn'.

Jesus didn't say, 'I condemn your sin and not you'. He very specifically set aside any condemnation. Even St Augustine can't change the words and the meaning.

I find Pope Francis way more convincing, way more logical and way more compelling. I'd suggest he would also know a thing or two about Saint Augustine.

--Previous Message--
: So there you have it Faz. According to our
: good and holy friend Saint Augustine DID
: CONDEMN...not the woman, but her SINS!
:
: With all respect for such an eminent Father
: of the Church, it is such tomning the personrtured logic!
:
: Like you, somehow we go from 'Neither will I
: condemn thee' and end up with 'Therefore the
: Lord did also condemn'.

We don't GO anywhere. There's two senses of condemnation. Condemning the sinner (which the Lord shows us we must not do) and condemning sin which the Lord does when He says "Sin no more".

:
: Jesus didn't say, 'I condemn your sin and
: not you'. He very specifically set aside any
: condemnation.

No, he condemned sin.

Even St Augustine can't change
: the words and the meaning.

He didn't.

:
: I find Pope Francis way more convincing, way
: more logical and way more compelling.

That doesn't surprise me.

: I'd
: suggest he would also know a thing or two
: about Saint Augustine.

I'd doubt Francis would see Augustine's logic "tortured". He seems to be a fan.

Pete

: We don't GO anywhere. There's two senses of
: condemnation. Condemning the sinner (which
: the Lord shows us we must not do) and
: condemning sin which the Lord does when He
: says "Sin no more".

But you're not getting this from the text because the only reference to condemnation is Jesus saying he won't do it.

And given that Jesus explicitly rejects condemnation, the reference to the type of condemnation (sinner or sin) is not there; it doesn't come from the text.

: No, he condemned sin.

In the context of unequivocally rejecting condemnation of the mob that would exercise their religious duty to judge and condemn a sinner because of the sin, to the point of brutal execution, Jesus invites the woman to change her life.

This is the essence of the 'Good News'. The woman can now see that she no longer has to fear condemnation of others (and herself!). Her invitation to change is not because of condemnation, it is because of compassion and mercy.

The misery of sin was clothed with the mercy of love. Jesus’ only judgement is one filled with mercy and compassion for the condition of this sinner.

: I'd doubt Francis would see Augustine's
: logic "tortured". He seems to be a
: fan.

Not in his interpretation of this Gospel account, apparently.

Correct Pete. Jesus cautioned her to “sin no more.” But “A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices.”(William James). This applies to Faz.

So, the woman has sinned through adultery, and as to “admonish” means to “caution/warn” it is self-evident that Faz is wrong as Jesus cautions/warns “go and sin no more” – the warning could not be clearer, since “counsel” includes “warning”, which he falsely disclaims.
[BTW, See: MS Word Thesaurus, and Chambers Dictionary].

As John wrote: “To hear many in the Church today, one would be led to believe that there is only one virtue - tolerance, and one vice - JUDGMENTALISM.”

: Correct Pete. Jesus cautioned her to “sin no
: more.” But “A great many people think they
: are thinking when they are merely
: rearranging their prejudices.”(William
: James). This applies to Faz.

It's a great quote, PDH, and I've always regarded it as a great irony coming from you.

I'm not disputing that Jesus said, 'Sin no more'. How could I? It's in the text!

Similarly, the text tells us that Jesus specifically rules out condemnation. He doesn't judge the woman. He spells that out. It's in the text.

The challenge this presents to us, in the context of a person caught in the act of sinning, is if Jesus dismisses the 'righteous judges' (the stone throwers and their urgers) and rules out judging himself we are all left with the question: 'Who are we to judge?'.

: So, the woman has sinned through adultery,
: and as to “admonish” means to “caution/warn”
: it is self-evident that Faz is wrong as
: Jesus cautions/warns “go and sin no more” –
: the warning could not be clearer, since
: “counsel” includes “warning”, which he
: falsely disclaims.
: [BTW, See: MS Word Thesaurus, and Chambers
: Dictionary].

I could look up all sorts of words that are not in the text. For example:

Encourage: to inspire with courage, spirit, or confidence

: As John wrote: “To hear many in the Church
: today, one would be led to believe that
: there is only one virtue - tolerance, and
: one vice - JUDGMENTALISM.”

As if all-caps gives an assertion some weight?

Faz: "if Jesus… rules out judging himself we are all left with the question: 'Who are we to judge?'."

The errors of Faz are glaringly repetitious -- rearranging his prejudices. Jesus certainly does not “rule out judging” – He pronounces His judgment: “go and sin no more.”

Jesus clearly commands judging actions, speech, and writing, against truth and in this way we can help others by offering truth:
"Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly." (Jn 7:24).
"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them" (Mt 7:15, 16).
"Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by their fruits you will know them." (Mt 7:19-20).

St Paul adds:
"Test everything: retain what is good." (1Thess 5:21).
"The spiritual person, however, can judge everything but is not subject to judgement by anyone." (1 Cor 2:15).
"I, for my part, although absent in body but present in spirit, have already, as if present, pronounced judgement on the one who has committed this deed..." (1 Cor 5:3; read 1-13).
"I am speaking as to sensible people; judge for yourselves what I am saying." (1 Cor 10:15).

: The errors of Faz are glaringly repetitious

I am persistent.

: -- rearranging his prejudices.

Irony again.

: Jesus
: certainly does not “rule out judging” – He
: pronounces His judgment: “go and sin no
: more.”

That's not a judgement. We know that because he says so. It's an invitation, an encouragement, based on compassion and forgiveness which he demonstrates dramatically in front of the murderous mob.

: Jesus clearly commands judging actions,
: speech, and writing, against truth and in
: this way we can help others by offering
: truth.

Yet, in this instance he rules it out. This is either a contradiction in his teaching or we have to understand the 'judgement' he's talking about in the quotes you provide differently when it comes to our dealings with others we may regard as sinners.

But again, PDH, if you think that judging people is important and you fulfil the requirements Jesus sets out before judging, go ahead.

I'm sure that the people being judged by you will give it the attention it deserves.

CCC 679: ‘Christ is Lord of eternal life. Full right to pass definitive judgement on the works and hearts of men belongs to him as redeemer of the world. He "acquired" this right by his cross. The Father has given "all judgement to the Son". 586 Yet the Son did not come to judge, but to save and to give the life he has in himself. 587 By rejecting grace in this life, one already judges oneself, receives according to one's works, and can even condemn oneself for all eternity by rejecting the Spirit of love. 588’
Notes:
586 Jn 5:22; cf. 5:27; Mt 25:31; Acts 10:42; 17:31; § Tim 4:1.
587 Cf. Jn 3:17; 5:26.
588 Cf. Jn 3:18; 12:48; Mt 12:32; I Cor 3:12-15; Heb 6:4-6; 10:26-31.
https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/catechism/cat_view.cfm

As Jesus said to the Scribes and Pharisees (Jn 8:15-16):
“15 You judge by human standards; I judge no one,
16 but if I judge, my judgement will be true, because I am not alone: the One who sent Me is with Me;”

Jesus cautions and warns.
--------------

: Jesus cautions and warns.

But, as your own reference attests: 'Yet the Son did not come to judge'.

Clearly, PDH, you need to go and pick up your proverbial stone because that's what you think is the right thing to do. Before you 'throw' though, take the proverbial log out of your eye as instructed.

Then, with humility and compassion, you will be fit to judge.

I can't see myself getting there in this lifetime. I'll leave the stone in the garden and keep working at that log.