Cecilia Chang- NY Mag

Since you are an authority on everything, answer this: If Judas did much more good than bad, then would he have a place in heaven? Which is worse, Judas' betrayal, or PEter's denial. Try to do answer this without consulting your trusted internet. I am confident you cannot.
Click to expand...

You have long demonstrated a misplaced confidence, which is why you so often end with my boot lodged in your lower intestine.

I'm something of a fallen away Catholic but I vaguely remember my catechism. Having hung himself Judas was on the fast track to hell, do not pass go, do not collect 30 pieces of silver. On the other hand he self snuffed as an act of contrititon, which remorse for his sins might well have been credited by a merciful god, should there have been one, which there isn't. So the answer is no, he didnt go to heaven because there's no such thing, but if there were, maybe.

The second one is a no brainer. As the decendant of sicilian grandfather I can tell you that Judas ratting out the baby Jesus to the authorities was much worse than Peter denying everything, Peter having learn two great things in life: Never rat on your friends and always keep you mouth shut.
Click to expand...

I love when you engage. You do it to annoy, not to create dialogue. This is why Redmen.com is a much better place without you.

For a lapsed Catholic, you did fairly poorly. Judas' suicide was never considered as an Act of Contrition by any Christian theology. In fact, it was he was capable of asking for forgiveness for his sin, he would have been redeemed by a mericful God, through the work of reconciliation of sin at Calvary by Jesus. you don't have to believe it, but that is Christian theology. The only unforgivable sin is blasphemy.

Your second point is also wrong. The sins of denial and betrayal are considered equal in Chrisitan commentary. The only difference between the two is that Peter asked for forgiveness, symbolically, three times, while Judas could not bring himself to do so, instead committing suicide in the depths of his despair.

Perhaps someday you will return to the Church. Even you would be welcome.
 
Breaking News! Father Maher becomes President of Niagara. I thought he would take over for harrington but apparently not.
 
This is from a newly posted article in The Torch. This quote from Chairman of the BOT D'Angelo is certainly better than what was represented last week:

"Board of Trustees chairman Peter D’Angelo told the Torch that, contrary to Internet rumors, the Board had not asked Harrington to resign as its outside investigation continues.

The board has retained white-collar attorney Frank Wohl.

“We are still reviewing the facts,” D’Angelo said in a phone interview. “So [asking him to resign] would be inappropriate and totally premature.”"

The article says the investigation is expected to finish by the end of the semester. The Torch also published an article that skewers Rob Wile.
 
thanks to fun for taking this thread full of innuendo, assumption and debate on such things as what constitutes a "fact" and veering into the bizarre. it reminds me of Larry, Mo and Curly in their Doctor's outfits, sounding all serious and medical while they prepare for brain surgery with a butter knife. In this comedy short of a thread, turned Peter Jackson butt cramper, we sit down all intellectual and edumacated like, in our elbow patched jackets to discuss theology (I'm the guy with the salad bowl haircut smoking the large pipe - and inhaling the strange but oddly familiar smoke). Our weapons include our vast knowledge of Catholic history and theology gained from watching the Davinci Code too many times, and a copy of the repair manual (Chiltons) for a 1969 Chevy Camaro. We will compare and contrast these against the 61 Volume Blackfriars Edition of the Summa Theologiae. By taking random quotes from each combined with some skillfully executed eye-pokes (and blocks thereof)we will masterfully prove some point and come out on top as the Master of the College Basketball Universe.

I'm an idiot for jumping in here (and let the vow of poverty stuff pass), but in Catholic theology the "unforgivable sin" is a concept which comes from the New Testament from the words of Jesus where he states that (to paraphrase) pretty much any sin including blasphemy against him is forgivable but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is not. St. Augustine is the established authority on this issue, although Aquinas treats it in detail in the Summa, but he relies upon Augustine. The bottom line in understanding of this issue is that this sin is that of final impenitence. Or as more modern theologians have put it, refusing the mercy of God in the full clarity of death. God is ready to forgive, but you won't have it.

Since you are an authority on everything, answer this: If Judas did much more good than bad, then would he have a place in heaven? Which is worse, Judas' betrayal, or PEter's denial. Try to do answer this without consulting your trusted internet. I am confident you cannot.
Click to expand...

You have long demonstrated a misplaced confidence, which is why you so often end with my boot lodged in your lower intestine.

I'm something of a fallen away Catholic but I vaguely remember my catechism. Having hung himself Judas was on the fast track to hell, do not pass go, do not collect 30 pieces of silver. On the other hand he self snuffed as an act of contrititon, which remorse for his sins might well have been credited by a merciful god, should there have been one, which there isn't. So the answer is no, he didnt go to heaven because there's no such thing, but if there were, maybe.

The second one is a no brainer. As the decendant of sicilian grandfather I can tell you that Judas ratting out the baby Jesus to the authorities was much worse than Peter denying everything, Peter having learn two great things in life: Never rat on your friends and always keep you mouth shut.
Click to expand...

I love when you engage. You do it to annoy, not to create dialogue. This is why Redmen.com is a much better place without you.

For a lapsed Catholic, you did fairly poorly. Judas' suicide was never considered as an Act of Contrition by any Christian theology. In fact, it was he was capable of asking for forgiveness for his sin, he would have been redeemed by a mericful God, through the work of reconciliation of sin at Calvary by Jesus. you don't have to believe it, but that is Christian theology. The only unforgivable sin is blasphemy.

Your second point is also wrong. The sins of denial and betrayal are considered equal in Chrisitan commentary. The only difference between the two is that Peter asked for forgiveness, symbolically, three times, while Judas could not bring himself to do so, instead committing suicide in the depths of his despair.

Perhaps someday you will return to the Church. Even you would be welcome.
Click to expand...
 
For a lapsed Catholic, you did fairly poorly. Judas' suicide was never considered as an Act of Contrition by any Christian theology. In fact, it was he was capable of asking for forgiveness for his sin, he would have been redeemed by a mericful God, through the work of reconciliation of sin at Calvary by Jesus. you don't have to believe it, but that is Christian theology. The only unforgivable sin is blasphemy.

Your second point is also wrong. The sins of denial and betrayal are considered equal in Chrisitan commentary. The only difference between the two is that Peter asked for forgiveness, symbolically, three times, while Judas could not bring himself to do so, instead committing suicide in the depths of his despair.
Click to expand...

Sorry. I didn't understand that you were quizzing me on Catholic theology. Had I I'd have pleaded ignorance. When I was a still a tad I decided that the idea of a merciful God was irrational. (As usual, YMMV.) Since then I've read the Bible some but prefer the Old Testament to the New - all that fire flood and slaughter makes for a ripping yarn - except Revelation, when everyone gets what's coming to them. Otherwise I find the plot implausible: too much deus ex machina.

I note that you conflate Catholic and Christian. You should not. Having googled - you should consider doing so once in a while, it'd cut down on the frequency with which you spout twaddle - it seems the Gnostics among others believed Judas worthy of veneration for having done his part to hasten the advent of God's kingdom on earth. They were cured of their heresy by fire, but still were Christian while they burned.

I further note that you capitalized Act of Contrition. Being a careful writer - as opposed to a sloppy reader - I did not, as I was referring not to a prayer or to some parochial behavior but to an act that signified "remorse for wrongdoing." I got the idea that Judas felt poorly about his behavior from a Catholic in good standing:

Then when Judas, who had betrayed Him, saw that He had been condemned, he felt remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, "I have sinned by betraying innocent blood." But they said, "What is that to us? See to that yourself!" And he threw the pieces of silver into the sanctuary and departed; and he went away and hanged himself.

That certainly sounds to me like the contrition, confession and penitence required by the Catholic sacrament. And it goes without saying that with a broken neck he lacked the ability to go forth and sin any more.

As for my take on Peter, argue with Jimmy Burke.

As for Paul's take on me (infra), I don't argue at all.


Perhaps someday you will return to the Church. Even you would be welcome.
Click to expand...

How christian of you to say so.
 
I always thought the unforgivable sin was hiring Norm Roberts. Guess thats why I barely passed theology classes
 
For a lapsed Catholic, you did fairly poorly. Judas' suicide was never considered as an Act of Contrition by any Christian theology. In fact, it was he was capable of asking for forgiveness for his sin, he would have been redeemed by a mericful God, through the work of reconciliation of sin at Calvary by Jesus. you don't have to believe it, but that is Christian theology. The only unforgivable sin is blasphemy.

Your second point is also wrong. The sins of denial and betrayal are considered equal in Chrisitan commentary. The only difference between the two is that Peter asked for forgiveness, symbolically, three times, while Judas could not bring himself to do so, instead committing suicide in the depths of his despair.
Click to expand...

Sorry. I didn't understand that you were quizzing me on Catholic theology. Had I I'd have pleaded ignorance. When I was a still a tad I decided that the idea of a merciful God was irrational. (As usual, YMMV.) Since then I've read the Bible some but prefer the Old Testament to the New - all that fire flood and slaughter makes for a ripping yarn - except Revelation, when everyone gets what's coming to them. Otherwise I find the plot implausible: too much deus ex machina.

I note that you conflate Catholic and Christian. You should not. Having googled - you should consider doing so once in a while, it'd cut down on the frequency with which you spout twaddle - it seems the Gnostics among others believed Judas worthy of veneration for having done his part to hasten the advent of God's kingdom on earth. They were cured of their heresy by fire, but still were Christian while they burned.

I further note that you capitalized Act of Contrition. Being a careful writer - as opposed to a sloppy reader - I did not, as I was referring not to a prayer or to some parochial behavior but to an act that signified "remorse for wrongdoing." I got the idea that Judas felt poorly about his behavior from a Catholic in good standing:

Then when Judas, who had betrayed Him, saw that He had been condemned, he felt remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, "I have sinned by betraying innocent blood." But they said, "What is that to us? See to that yourself!" And he threw the pieces of silver into the sanctuary and departed; and he went away and hanged himself.

That certainly sounds to me like the contrition, confession and penitence required by the Catholic sacrament. And it goes without saying that with a broken neck he lacked the ability to go forth and sin any more.

As for my take on Peter, argue with Jimmy Burke.

As for Paul's take on me (infra), I don't argue at all.


Perhaps someday you will return to the Church. Even you would be welcome.
Click to expand...

How christian of you to say so.
Click to expand...

I haven't even read your response. The whole subject matter of this banter is off the course of this thread

The religion and politics section nearly destroyed this site. I'm confident in my knowledge of theology, and by your initial ill informed responses, I am also confident that as usual, you had to resort to the internet to construct a scathing response. Since you aren't employed you have time for that. If you would like to continue this subject, PM me.

It's an obfuscation to suggest that because FH has done so much good, stealing a relatively small amount of money is acceptable. Of course someone who thinks of himself as an attorney would have fun constructing a defense for FH. After all, lots of sleezy lawyers make a good living doing just that.
I think it's time for you to go home to your own website.
 
I haven't even read your response. The whole subject matter of this banter is off the course of this thread

The religion and politics section nearly destroyed this site. I'm confident in my knowledge of theology, and by your initial ill informed responses, I am also confident that as usual, you had to resort to the internet to construct a scathing response. Since you aren't employed you have time for that. If you would like to continue this subject, PM me.

It's an obfuscation to suggest that because FH has done so much good, stealing a relatively small amount of money is acceptable. Of course someone who thinks of himself as an attorney would have fun constructing a defense for FH. After all, lots of sleezy lawyers make a good living doing just that.
I think it's time for you to go home to your own website.
Click to expand...

Although I've not even bothered to read your response I'm quite confident that in it you state that you've not read my response. If that's so no doubt it improved the clarity of your reply, as you are easily confused by facts and logic. Moreover, although I have not read it I'm sure it contains references to my law degree, which you mention constantly because you find my education threatening; my early retirement to the life of a gentleman farmer, because you toil as a middle manager in some hellish cubicle while I while away my free hours exploring my many passions and interests; the website Big East Boards, where I post many interesting monkeyshines about basketball, which you evidently read religiously; a misstatement of what I said in my previous post, partly because you're an inveterate liar and partly because you don't read very well; a reference to my habit of googling facts of which I am unsure, because you feel that everyone should be as uniformed as are you; a statement that you are confident that what you said is true is true, despite all facts, data, statistics, logic, and science to the contrary; and an invitation to not post here anymore, because you are tired of me kicking you.

The good news is that having taken into account your kind words earlier in the thread noting that (and I'm paraphrasing) I bring clarity and insight into issues that other wise might remain caliginous and having considered your learned theological instruction in the ways of the Christ I've determined that it would be covetous of me to keep such erudition to myself and so have decided to once again become an active member of this important basketball forum. Thanks for providing the impetus for my decision. I look forward to our future association, which I trust will be long and fruitful.
 
Fun & Beast

If you do not stay on topic and avoid discussions regarding religion then your posts will be deleted.
otis.
 
Fun & Beast

If you do not stay on topic and avoid discussions regarding religion then your posts will be deleted.
otis.
Click to expand...

Otis, re-read my post. You are admonishing me AFTER i've said I've printed that I am not responding to this kind of garbage. It's clear that Fun gets a rise out of annoying people. It's amazing he can have his own website with his demented nature. PM me if you'd like. I'm done with him (again)
 
Check out today's torch faculty and students very upset FH has cancelled all meetings with both groups indefinitely.
 
Below is a link to the story that appeared in the St.john's student newspaper "The Torch" entitled "Students Upset With Misuse of Tuition"

http://www.torchonline.com/news/2013/03/13/students-upset-with-misuse-of-tuition/
Click to expand...

Although I am certain FH viewed these loans as coming from the excesses of huge donations he helped raise and not from tuition dollars, the sutdents have a valid point.

In the spirit of St. Vincent dePaul, how many interest free loans did FH grant to students from poor families, or even to middle class families enduring the hardship of unemployment, deaths in families, or illness. Instead, all we know about is gigantic loans given to a young man who already was gifted with a stupendous salary.

Thinking about it, if I was going to be skimming donors money in the form of expensive trips, watches, wine, clothing, and vacations, who would I want as a right hand man - someone capable of implementing compliance and proper auditing when approving expenses, or an inexperienced dupe who would be complicit in the spoils of fundraising. Perhaps Wile, who became complicit, was just the dupe that FH was looking for. After all, despite a "father-son" relationship, even John Gotti senior wanted Junior Gotti in the family business. Come to think of it, in the HArrington-Wile "father-son" relationship, perhaps the only thing missing was the Holy Spirit.
 
Fun & Beast

If you do not stay on topic and avoid discussions regarding religion then your posts will be deleted.
otis.
Click to expand...

Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, calling Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine.
 
A question I need to ask knowing Chang was an earner and corrupt for so many years why was she turned in to the Feds and the queens da ? Did the board once they received the letter from the Chinese student do the turning in independent of FH?
 
A question I need to ask knowing Chang was an earner and corrupt for so many years why was she turned in to the Feds and the queens da ? Did the board once they received the letter from the Chinese student do the turning in independent of FH?
Click to expand...

One thing that has been speculated is that as her spending continued, she had a sharp decline in the amounts of moeny she could raise, resulting in a net loss for the university.
 
It is interesting to note that three former employees that would have had the ability to sign off on dean changes and rob wiles t and es have all left SJU. Jim Pellow COO who made around $700,000 Former vp of business affairs Jacqueline travisiano, and former CFO Tom Nedell have all left SJU.

They all left in 2010 or 2011 before the trial in 2012.
 
According to the 2009 990 IRS form filled out by SJU Jim Pellow was provided a loan for $300,00. go to guidestar.org and look at St. John's 990's from 2009 till 2012.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top