Saint for Suicides
Paul Halsall
Saints Domnina and her two daughters Bernice and Proseduce. Theses saints
used to be commemorated in the Roman Martyrology on Octoober 14. The
story is in both Eusebius' _Ecclesiastical History_, and the
subject of a laudation by St. John Chrysostom,
The Domnina was the wife of a pagan official. She and her daughters
attempted to escape his control during the onset of the
Diocletian Persecution. As they were escaping the city of Antioch,
the father of the family persued them, with soldiers, and captured
them. On the way back to the city, the three women - to preserve
the daughters' virginity from the soldiers - created a ploy to
get near a river. At the river, without force, they threw themselves
in and, as Eusebius says, "did away with themselves".
In the face of terrible circumstances then, these three women
committed suicide, and yet were lauded as saints.
Eusebius Reference: Bk8.12.3, Chrysostom, _Opera_ I, 557-71 (=
Migne, PG, 50, cols. 629-40).
Paul Halsall
Hal...@murray.fordham.edu
Dan Connolly
I found this strange as well. Look at the following two passages from St.
Augustine in "The City of God". Book I, passage 20. That Christians have
no authority for committing suicide in any circumstances whatever.
"Nay, the law, rightly interpreted, even prohibits suicide, where it says,
'Thou shalt not kill.'"
and Book I, passage 26. That in certain peculiar cases the examples of
the saints are not to be followed.
"But, they say, in the time of persecution some holy women escaped those
who menaced them with outrage, by casting themselves into rivers which
they knew would drown them; and having died in this manner, they are
venerated in the church catholic as martyrs. Of such persons I do not
presume to speak rashly. I cannot tell whether there may not have been
vouchsafed to the church some divine authority, proved by trustworthy
evidences, for so honoring their memory: it may be that it is so. It may
be they were not deceived by human judgement, but prompted by divine
wisdom, to their act of self destruction."
I guess the argument goes, "Suicide is never permitted; unless God
commanded it. Also, you better be pretty darn sure God commanded or..."
Not a very satisfactory answer. But an answer nonetheless.
Peace,
Dan Connolly
--
Daniel J. Connolly
dc...@cc.bellcore.com
(My opinions, not Bellcore's)
Bellcore
--
Marida Ignacio
I have just come across a *very* interesting saints life. In concerns
Saints Domnina and her two daughters Bernice and Proseduce. Theses saints
used to be commemorated in the Roman Martyrology on Octoober 14. The
story is in both Eusebius' _Ecclesiastical History_, and the
subject of a laudation by St. John Chrysostom,
The Domnina was the wife of a pagan official. She and her daughters
attempted to escape his control during the onset of the
Diocletian Persecution. As they were escaping the city of Antioch,
the father of the family persued them, with soldiers, and captured
them. On the way back to the city, the three women - to preserve
the daughters' virginity from the soldiers - created a ploy to
get near a river. At the river, without force, they threw themselves
in and, as Eusebius says, "did away with themselves".
In the face of terrible circumstances then, these three women
committed suicide, and yet were lauded as saints.
Eusebius Reference: Bk8.12.3, Chrysostom, _Opera_ I, 557-71 (=
Migne, PG, 50, cols. 629-40).
Paul Halsall
Hal...@murray.fordham.edu
---
Let's see, there are 2 distinct sides to the situation
of the would-be oppressor (soldiers) which one may
miss and so I'd like to point out:
1. If they indeed catch the daughters, they would
rape them and then persecute them.
2. Therefore, in so doing, they will commit 2
grave sins in doing these.
Now, on the side of the women:
1. If they did not commit "martyrdom" of a suicide,
they would be letting these men commit the 2 sins
above.
2. And so they would be letting them get away with
these WITHOUT having any other recourse to
STOP them.
3. And if they thought they could fight them instead
and KILL them in the process, then that's NOT
a better way of stopping them from committing
the sin either.
Is it justified for these women to give up their
lives so as to PREVENT others from sinning
themselves?
Was it righteous of God to ask Abraham to offer
his son for sacrifice to Him. Was it righteous for
God to ask his Son, Jesus Christ, to die on the
Cross to save others of sins?
Was it righteous of these women to offer their lives
in sacrifice to God through DEATH instead of giving
way to the men's would-be-committed sins? Actually,
the women SAVED the men from committing the sins.
--
His Peace through the Immaculate Heart of Mary,
Marida
"Human-kind: Where protection of valuable life starts and takes off."
Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you.
Before you were born I dedicated you..."
J.J. Ursic
> Actually, the women SAVED the men from committing the sins.
And so that five year old boy in Chicago should have jumped freely
from the building rather than steal for those other boys or have
them commit sin by murdering him. -J.J.
Marida Ignacio
> Subject: Re: Saint for Suicides
A 5-year old wouldn't know better, J.J., just how
a baby in the mother's womb, to be aborted does NOT
know what's IN STORE for him/herself. See the difference
very well as it is very important.
Tom Kreitzberg
> Was it righteous of these women to offer their lives
> in sacrifice to God through DEATH instead of giving
> way to the men's would-be-committed sins? Actually,
> the women SAVED the men from committing the sins.
Sorry, but things don't work that way. You cannot do evil
that good may result.
My first reaction was to try to justify the actions of the
women. I toyed with a play on words, with the assumption
that they could not have known to a moral certainty that
they would die, with a lesser-of-two-evils approach that
killing oneself is better than denying Christ under
torture. None of it washed.
I think St. Augustine got it right. It's not for me to say
that the women are not rightly seen as martyrs and saints,
but at the same time I can say that it is wrong to intentionally
kill oneself.
Tom
J.J. Ursic
>On Oct 31, 2:35pm, J.J. Ursic wrote:
>> Subject: Re: Saint for Suicides
>> Marida Ignacio <mar...@COMM.MOT.COM> writes:
>>
>> from the building rather than steal for those other boys or have
>> them commit sin by murdering him. -J.J.
>
> A 5-year old wouldn't know better, J.J., just how
> a baby in the mother's womb, to be aborted does NOT
> know what's IN STORE for him/herself. See the difference
> very well as it is very important.
Then you feel an eighteen year old in the same situation should jump?
How about you, Marida, would you commit suicide rather than lose your
virginity? I think it would translate into sacrificing yourself to a
false god, namely, virginity. -J.J.
Alec Ott
> > the daughters' virginity from the soldiers - created a ploy to
> > get near a river. At the river, without force, they threw themselves
> > in and, as Eusebius says, "did away with themselves".
> >
> > In the face of terrible circumstances then, these three women
> > committed suicide, and yet were lauded as saints.
This may be a silly question, but how do we know they couldn't swim, or
that it was a certainty that they would drown? Also, what was their intent:
to risk great danger to escape or simply to commit suicide?
Is there any further details about the incident?
Alec Ott
J.J. Ursic
>"J.J. Ursic" <UR...@CLACK.CS.HH.AB.COM> writes:
>Marida Ignacio <mar...@COMM.MOT.COM> writes:
>>On Oct 31, 2:35pm, J.J. Ursic wrote:
>>> Subject: Re: Saint for Suicides
>>> Marida Ignacio <mar...@COMM.MOT.COM> writes:
>>> > Actually, the women SAVED the men from committing the sins.
>>>
>>> And so that five year old boy in Chicago should have jumped freely
>>> from the building rather than steal for those other boys or have
>>> them commit sin by murdering him. -J.J.
>>
>> A 5-year old wouldn't know better, J.J., just how
>> a baby in the mother's womb, to be aborted does NOT
>> know what's IN STORE for him/herself. See the difference
>> very well as it is very important.
>
>Then you feel an eighteen year old in the same situation should jump?
>
> not apply when it comes to morality. Giving the example
> of the kid/adult/whatnot who was up to-be-murdered is
> a very sensitive issue. Look at it - someone is ALREADY
> trying to kill him (pushing him down) THEREFORE, there is
> NO point in committing suicide since DEATH was at-hand
> no matter how the boy refused it. And indeed suicide
> is not the answer at all.
Those three women who killed themselves were in the same situation. They
chose suicide and were declared saints. It seems it was a correct
answer for them.
>How about you, Marida, would you commit suicide rather than lose your
>virginity? I think it would translate into sacrificing yourself to a
>false god, namely, virginity. -J.J.
>
> No. Because there are those who are COMMITTED as
> those who are called for it for the kingdom of God.
> Take note that I am never condoning suicide at all.
> But, rather I'm taking both sides of the situation
> into consideration. As much we could, being in
> a MOST DIFFICULT situation as these saints were,
> with what we know we MUST stand up STRONGLY for our
> convictions on faith and moral as TO NOT GIVE IN to
> any injustice, wrongdoing just to anyone who
> will cause us to renounce these convictions and
> in turn will result in this someone committing a
> sin.
So there is nothing wrong in a person commiting suicide if
faced with a situation where if they continued to live
they would put someone else in a position to commit a sin.
> It is very easy to argue here as to say "NO, I'd
> rather be raped", etc. but to those who really are holding
> on too strongly to their convictions, as to simply
> rely on prayers and offering themselves up to God
> INSTEAD to the hands of their oppressors, it is
> between them and God. Inasmuch as we could, we MUST
> AVOID any such wrongdoings but some people can be
> drawn up into their emotional attachments that they
> may not know and think clearly the best of what
> they will have to do next in such situations. No.
> It was not an easy way out as DEATH is never the
> preference and best to easily be accepted by anyone.
I doubt most who are contemplating suicide are thinking clearly.
But I agree it is between themselves and God, as all decisions
in life ultimately are. -J.J.
Doug Delorge
Alec Ott
------------------------
BRAVO!! I was hoping womeone would ask Paul Hassle this
question!!
Doug DeGeorge (Delorge)
Marida Ignacio
Marida writes:
....
> It is very easy to argue here as to say "NO, I'd
> rather be raped", etc. but to those who really are holding
> on too strongly to their convictions, as to simply
> rely on prayers and offering themselves up to God
> INSTEAD to the hands of their oppressors, it is
> between them and God. Inasmuch as we could, we MUST
> AVOID any such wrongdoings but some people can be
> drawn up into their emotional attachments that they
> may not know and think clearly the best of what
> they will have to do next in such situations. No.
> It was not an easy way out as DEATH is never the
> preference and best to easily be accepted by anyone.
I doubt most who are contemplating suicide are thinking clearly.
But I agree it is between themselves and God, as all decisions
in life ultimately are. -J.J.
Yes, and for all we DO NOT know, they did NOT intentionally
drown themselves as someone already asked, what the
rest of the story was really.
Lance Simmons
In a previous article, to...@BUSHRAT.JPL.NASA.GOV (Tom Kreitzberg) says:
>I think St. Augustine got it right. It's not for me to say
>that the women are not rightly seen as martyrs and saints,
>but at the same time I can say that it is wrong to intentionally
>kill oneself.
Unless God commands you to do it, in which case you do nothing
wrong. If the reason you mustn't commit suicide is that it is
an intentional usurpation of God's authority (and this is the
traditional reason), then you can't very well use that as a
reason to resist God's command to kill yourself, can you?
The funny thing is that people who argue that evil may be done
in order to obtain good say they are appealing to _human_ motives,
whereas these martyrs are held to be such only on the assumption
that they were obeying a divine command. If Paul H. were to argue
that "sometimes God commands that bad things must be done," we
might have some more common ground to work with. But I cannot
make anything of the proposal to kill innocent persons based
only on human reasonings. It sounds to my ears like "sometimes
_I_ command that bad things be done," which just does not have
the same resonance.
These sorts of cases are very common in the Catholic tradition.
How do we explain Hosea taking to himself a prostitute, or
Abraham sacrificing Isaac, or the Israelites stealing the
Egyptians' property? I'm somewhat surprized no one has brought
up the suicidal virgins before today, since they are a standard
part of the literature on suicide. The Catholic tradition has
always held that God is the author of life, and has absolute
dominion over creation. If He tells you to kill yourself, you
do it, obviously. I'm surprized to learn that anyone would
think otherwise.
--
Lance Simmons
sim...@acad.udallas.edu
John Vogel
> Was it righteous of these women to offer their lives
> in sacrifice to God through DEATH instead of giving
> way to the men's would-be-committed sins? Actually,
> the women SAVED the men from committing the sins.
>
>
Horse Hockey!
victims need not give opportunity or assistance to opressors, but
suicide in order to prevent someone else from preventing a sin is stupid
at least in the context stated.
By planning on raping the women, the soldiers had already sinned
in their hearts. Preventing the abuse did not even save them from sin.
If preventing someone else from opressing you is a requirement
then every priest who has ever been jailed by a totalitarian government
would need to hang themselves in their cells (in order to prevent further
sins) or at least bite down on poison pills as the soldiers came to their
doors.
Marida,
The logic of this situation fails. There is no such
requirement. If JJ profanes God and you believe it a sin, it must be
sinful for you to answer him and then encourage him to do more. In fact,
in order to slow down the amount of profane statements you should cancel
your internet account. Think of the sins you'll prevent.
Tom Kreitzberg
>> I think St. Augustine got it right. It's not for me to say
>> that the women are not rightly seen as martyrs and saints,
>> but at the same time I can say that it is wrong to intentionally
>> kill oneself.
>
> Unless God commands you to do it, in which case you do nothing
> wrong.
Right. I don't know that God told the women to kill themselves,
or that he didn't. All I know is that they did kill themselves,
and that they were considered martyrs by other Christians who
knew them. St. Augustine was in the same position. His concern
wasn't with whether the women acted properly, but with whether
others would follow their example. And absent an explicit
command from God, it is a lousy example to follow.
> If [God] tells you to kill yourself, you do it, obviously.
> I'm surprized to learn that anyone would think otherwise.
You didn't learn it from me. But anyway, we have yet to
establish that God would tell someone to kill himself,
which is I think one of the questions raised by this
example.
Tom
Marida Ignacio
Marida Ignacio <mar...@COMM.MOT.COM> writes:
>On Oct 31, 2:35pm, J.J. Ursic wrote:
>> Subject: Re: Saint for Suicides
>> Marida Ignacio <mar...@COMM.MOT.COM> writes:
>> > Actually, the women SAVED the men from committing the sins.
>>
>> And so that five year old boy in Chicago should have jumped freely
>> from the building rather than steal for those other boys or have
>> them commit sin by murdering him. -J.J.
>
> A 5-year old wouldn't know better, J.J., just how
> a baby in the mother's womb, to be aborted does NOT
> know what's IN STORE for him/herself. See the difference
> very well as it is very important.
Then you feel an eighteen year old in the same situation should jump?
J.J., you can know better that this type of logic does
not apply when it comes to morality. Giving the example
of the kid/adult/whatnot who was up to-be-murdered is
a very sensitive issue. Look at it - someone is ALREADY
trying to kill him (pushing him down) THEREFORE, there is
NO point in committing suicide since DEATH was at-hand
no matter how the boy refused it. And indeed suicide
is not the answer at all.
How about you, Marida, would you commit suicide rather than lose your
virginity? I think it would translate into sacrificing yourself to a
false god, namely, virginity. -J.J.
No. Because there are those who are COMMITTED as
those who are called for it for the kingdom of God.
Take note that I am never condoning suicide at all.
But, rather I'm taking both sides of the situation
into consideration. As much we could, being in
a MOST DIFFICULT situation as these saints were,
with what we know we MUST stand up STRONGLY for our
convictions on faith and moral as TO NOT GIVE IN to
any injustice, wrongdoing just to anyone who
will cause us to renounce these convictions and
in turn will result in this someone committing a
sin. It is very easy to argue here as to say "NO, I'd
rather be raped", etc. but to those who really are holding
on too strongly to their convictions, as to simply
rely on prayers and offering themselves up to God
INSTEAD to the hands of their oppressors, it is
between them and God. Inasmuch as we could, we MUST
AVOID any such wrongdoings but some people can be
drawn up into their emotional attachments that they
may not know and think clearly the best of what
they will have to do next in such situations. No.
It was not an easy way out as DEATH is never the
preference and best to easily be accepted by anyone.
Paul Halsall
Eusebios, and then cross referenced it. Dan Bellcore provided an extremely
interesting reference in Augstine which I did not know about. I have not
read the account in Chrysostom (which is the most extenive, and probably
available in English somewhere.)
Paul Halsall
Hal...@murray.fordham.edu
[excuse typos as ususalk
Paul Halsall
Sometimes you sound *just* like Jim Jones.
How far, exactly, are you, from Waco?
Paul Halsall
Hal...@murray.fordham.edu
Marida Ignacio
On Mon, 31 Oct 1994, Marida Ignacio wrote:
> Paul Halsall <HAL...@MURRAY.FORDHAM.EDU> writes:
.....
>
Victims need not give opportunity or assistance to opressors, but
suicide in order to prevent someone else from preventing a sin is stupid
at least in the context stated.
By planning on raping the women, the soldiers had already sinned
in their hearts. Preventing the abuse did not even save them from sin.
....
Indeed, people can SIN in their minds/thoughts. That's
why if we love God we must love Him with ALL our heart,
mind and soul.
And since we MUST love God with ALL our heart, mind and soul,
as even Christ taught, if one eye commits a sin, take it out,
or one leg commits a sin, take it out, etc...better for us
to be blind or limping than the rest of us to burn in
eternal hell, yet, SACRIFICING our whole body (suicide)
may not necessarily the way to go here.
As I said in other posts, there can be several sins in
the picture and I am NOT condoning any of them including
suicide, itself. All I've tried is to relate the probabilities
on both sides and I also mentioned that these women, in
such a VERY DIFFICULT and fearsome situation, could all
be stressed out that their thinking could be failing them
and FAST decisions were at stake.
This morning, I got a glimpse of an accident that came about
while driving in the superhighway. Everything went all in
a loud screech as brakes were stepped on and I saw this
one car went PERPENDICULAR on our path and jammed towards
the left. It was only this one car and nobody else was
involved. As we moved on I got a glimpse of the lady
driving and except for the headlights of her car crashed,
I saw her conscious and ok though looking all shooked up
for what just happened to her, or her CAR, the machine,
actually. I then remember when I first learned driving,
one of my father's advice regarding SAVING LIVES (others')
in case of accident, he said, "in case you are about to
hit someone, DO NOT CARE what happens to the car or
right away just yourself, but RATHER AVOID hitting that
person inasmuch as you can".
In the case of these women saints, they did NOT think
well of themselves or if what they would commit would
cause them their lives. Rather they thought first of
their STRONG CONVICTION and FAITH in UPHOLDING what
they'd offered just for God (just as the PRINCIPLE of
my own father's teaching I continue to uphold) and at the
same time, further condemnation (by more sins) of their
oppressors have also been been prevented. It could be
MUCH MORE easier for me to prevent putting myself in the
accident while avoiding hitting the person as I know
defensive driving whenever necessary (having seatbelts on
and air bags and such) but it could NOT have been this easy
for these women to live up to what they knew they must hold
on to in their situation.
John Vogel
> John Vogel <jvo...@DGS.DGSYS.COM> writes:
>
> On Mon, 31 Oct 1994, Marida Ignacio wrote:
>
> > Paul Halsall <HAL...@MURRAY.FORDHAM.EDU> writes:
> .....
> >
> Victims need not give opportunity or assistance to opressors, but
> suicide in order to prevent someone else from preventing a sin is stupid
> at least in the context stated.
> By planning on raping the women, the soldiers had already sinned
> in their hearts. Preventing the abuse did not even save them from sin.
> ....
> actually. I then remember when I first learned driving,
> one of my father's advice regarding SAVING LIVES (others')
> in case of accident, he said, "in case you are about to
> hit someone, DO NOT CARE what happens to the car or
> right away just yourself, but RATHER AVOID hitting that
> person inasmuch as you can".
>
> In the case of these women saints, they did NOT think
> well of themselves or if what they would commit would
> cause them their lives. Rather they thought first of
> their STRONG CONVICTION and FAITH in UPHOLDING what
> they'd offered just for God (just as the PRINCIPLE of
> my own father's teaching I continue to uphold) and at the
> same time, further condemnation (by more sins) of their
> oppressors have also been been prevented. It could be
> MUCH MORE easier for me to prevent putting myself in the
> accident while avoiding hitting the person as I know
> defensive driving whenever necessary (having seatbelts on
> and air bags and such) but it could NOT have been this easy
> for these women to live up to what they knew they must hold
> on to in their situation.
>
Marida,
If a man is about to rape you, and you manage to kill yourself
prior to penetration, you have not saved him from sin. I am willing to
call the women martyrs in that they died as a direct result of their
faith, but to suggest that _any_ sin was prevented by their death is wrong.
The women can only be held in a positive light for the manner of
their death if we are willing to also attach blame to the victims of the
rape.
Personally, even though it is politically correct, I'm not
willing to blame the victims of rape.
Conversely, what sin would the women have committed had they not died?
jOHN
John Vogel
> As for us, we CAN see the state of grace and martyrdom that they
> have chosen in contrast to MORE COMPLICATIONS and MORE SINS that
> would have been committed from both sides. Instead of 10 or more
> there was only 1 sin - suicide - instead.
>
As Lance will no doubt be able to tell you from Church teaching,
we are only responsible for our own actions. I cannot prevent
fornication or rape by others by committing a sin of my own. Your
reasoning on this is faulty. It takes a foolish look at their actions.
In the context of sainthood, it only makes sense if we assume
they died as a result of trying to seek religious freedom. If we try and
get into the motivations for their choice of suicide at that specific
moment we end up condemning them for suicide. If we assume the situation
only ocurred because they were seeking freedom, then it at least makes sense.
John
Marida Ignacio
On Tue, 1 Nov 1994, Marida Ignacio wrote:
John, there is NO point in rationalizing or justifying whatever
happened. It was a very difficult situation and neither you nor
I can really know what could have happened if put in the same
very difficult situation. It's so easy to blast blah-blah-blahs
on here by mere words. REAL situation is exactly more different.
And as I said before I do NOT condone suicide. If you want, TAKE
THIS UP WITH THESE DEAD SAINTS yourself as you want to argue about
something they are the only ones who would really know exactly
what and why they did it. It's between them and God at this point.
As for us, we CAN see the state of grace and martyrdom that they
have chosen in contrast to MORE COMPLICATIONS and MORE SINS that
would have been committed from both sides. Instead of 10 or more
there was only 1 sin - suicide - instead.
Marida Ignacio
As Lance will no doubt be able to tell you from Church teaching,
we are only responsible for our own actions. I cannot prevent
fornication or rape by others by committing a sin of my own. Your
reasoning on this is faulty. It takes a foolish look at their actions.
John, are you going to continue to argue about this
from your point of view or from Lance's point of view
or are you going to ACTUALLY FACE THE FACT that
what I said is VERY MUCH TRUTHFULLY the OUTCOME?
I am NOT even RATIONALIZING on anything so far
because I WOULD RATHER NOT justify sin. All I'm
doing is STATING THE ABOVE FACT. No more, no less.
Take it or leave it, there's no care as I said over
and over, if you only care to listen, IT IS SINFUL
to commit suicide <period> It is really a vain and
fruitless effort to even consider justifying a sin.
And again instead of taking this up to me, take it
up with those who were in such a DIFFICULT situation
as you'd like to argue on and on about it.
Here's an inspired post I wrote and sent out before
regarding SUICIDE and NEVER giving in to Satan's
temptation (NEVER rationalization or justification
but RATHER REVELATION/exposure of truth; which is all
I've done by looking at both sides of the situation):
Prince of Pains, you evil swine, we won't let you succeed once more.
We will expose you, and others like you (ie. Kevorkian) and your evil
ways. Consider this the worst amongst the worst of your days.
----
About those who are terminally or those who are in pain and would
like to end it with suicide:
The pain seems endless, all right.
Lord, Jesus Christ, may we share in the pains of others such that
their pains may be alleviated?
Besides, those who are in physical, emotional, spiritual pains,
there are plenty more pains from the Prince of Pains.
Aborted babies are in pain.
The poor and homeless are in pain.
Every criminal who commits a crime is in pain.
Every sinner who sins some more is in pain.
Their victims and those they influence are in pain.
To those in pain, may we know your pain and so we may expose them?
Those you leave behind will be in pain not just because of seeing
the pain you suffer but with the viciousness and evil way you'd
like to end it.
Will it actually end there?
No.
It will extend its painful fruits to everyone who'd remember this
evil and painful way.
Once again, the Prince of Pains will prevail in his endeavors.
Why would we want him?
Why would we want him to succeed once more in overcoming his victims
by letting them surrender in the painful strikes of his evil hands?
Nobody couldn't stand him and fight his evil fight of inflicting pains.
Nobody except Jesus Christ and the martyrs He commissioned.
Don't you want to join His commissioned martyrs?
We have to unless we would want the Prince of Pains succeed again.
He conquers many since very few would like to persevere and endure
his painful afflictions.
Yes. He wins all the time on those who surrenders by committing suicide.
Yes, those who help his victims surrender, contributes to his wins.
Why would we let the Prince of Pains conquer us this way?
Why would we let him win over us?
No. We should stop his vicious strategies of victimizing us and
making us surrender easily.
Please, Lord Jesus, don't let the Prince of Pains succeed anymore.
May his victims endure, stand strong and stay strong despite all
the punches of pains he throws at them.
May his victims persevere so as to let him see how they can look
him straight to tell him that his pains given to them are not
going to break them down that easily.
Lord, Jesus Christ, with Your graces of strength and endurance,
may the Prince's of Pains victims be able to take the painful
blows for as long as he gives them.
May his victims be able to take them all so he'll run out of his
rotten fruits of pains that he'd not have anything left to give
to others (and therefore, stop this rotten tree planting).
May this be the last batch of victims who will endure the saturation
of pains so the Prince of Pains will not think he won over them again.
Not if his victims don't surrender easily.
Lord, Jesus, please don't let his victims surrender.
Please strengthen them with Your own strength as how you endured
Your Cross.
Prince of Pains, go ahead and make our day so you'd run out of these
inflictions of pain to give to others. With the Lord Jesus' help,
we can stand them all. Go back to your dark throne since we will
stand our ground on this sacrifice and battle them pains even to
the last drop of strength.
We won't give up without a good fight.
Upon our perseverance against the evil swine's blows, he will know
not to try us again and so we must tell everyone not to surrender
this fight.
John 16:20-22
Verily, verily, I say unto you, "That ye shall weep and lament, but
the world will rejoice: and ye shall be sorrowful, but your sorrow
shall be turned into joy.
A woman when she is in travail hath sorrow becuase her hour is come:
but as soon as she is delivered of the child, she remembereth no more
the anguish, for joy that a man is born into the world.
And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your
hear shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you."
Everyone concerned, feel free to use this strategy to support anybody
you want to hang in there in fighting the battle against the Prince
of Pains such that if they persevere, the evil swine will not win over
them easily.
Monica L. Murphy
This reminds me of the story I once heard of some Poor Claires (in New York
perhaps) that for some reason or other had lost their contact person and,
rather than break their promise to God wrt avoiding public contact (???)
nearly starved themselves to death. I don't recall if any of them
actually died.
--
Monica Lynn-Rose Murphy Computing Lab Consultant
mo...@pitt.edu University of Pittsburgh
Cute Quote Coming...
Jim McIntosh
Murphy) wrote:
> This reminds me of the story I once heard of some Poor Claires (in New York
> perhaps) that for some reason or other had lost their contact person and,
> rather than break their promise to God wrt avoiding public contact (???)
> nearly starved themselves to death. I don't recall if any of them
> actually died.
This sounds like an urban myth (religious myth?). First of all, Poor
Clares do leave their convent at rare times. I met a member of a Poor
Clare convent in the Bronx at a Franciscan Workshop on Peacemaking
held in the Bronx in 1988. Two Clares from the DC convent attended
the Transitus planning session this year in Silver Spring, MD. The
whole commnity (at least those well enough to travel) came out for
the Transitus itself (the Transistus is when Franciscans gather on
October third to commemorate the passing of St. Francis of Assisi
from this world to the next).
Even if they had taken a vow of silence, an "extern" sister is appointed
by the superior of the house whose duty is to deal with outsiders.
This is sometimes a permanent appointment, but can also be rotated. If
the current "extern" were to be unable to fulfill her duties, another
would be appointed to replace her.
Peace and all good!
Jim McIntosh, sfo (j...@american.edu)
The American University
Washington, DC USA 20016-8019
Paul Halsall
Some Catholic intellectuals faced with the paradox that the early
Church hailed as saints three women who threw themselves in the river,
and the later magesterium had said that suicide was not allowed, attempted
to redefine and obscure the issue to save the magesterium ist embarrassment.
Covnetionally, of course, this is known as "lying".
Paul Halsall
Marida Ignacio
I would be beneficial to go back and take some scholastic philosopy
courses as some Jesuit University. The yound ladies did not kill
themselves intentionally. The removed themselves from the area of danger
by the only means available. The fact that their deaths occured from
drowning was not the desired consequence.
Heh-heh-heh....this is like juggling the letters in
word "suicide" and CHEATING by taking other letters
outside it so it will turn to the word "defense".
No one has related exactly what happened in the situation.
(1)If it were suicide, it is wrong <period>
(2)If it were how you put it above, then it is a tragedy.
<period>
AND (1) is NOT the same as (2).
THINK and DISCERN WELL the TRUTH, JohnB, instead of merely
copying someone else's rationalization and then
misimplicatingly imposing it on the situation at hand.
Then you'll get yourself a good and real resolution.
Marida Ignacio
JOhn Barron's post is quite to the point.
Well, JohnB's post is rationalization of only one
possible side of the story.
Some Catholic intellectuals faced with the paradox that the early
Church hailed as saints three women who threw themselves in the river,
and the later magesterium had said that suicide was not allowed, attempted
to redefine and obscure the issue to save the magesterium ist embarrassment.
Covnetionally, of course, this is known as "lying".
Actually, you've not presented the WHOLE story
as to what ACTUALLY happened and so who's
really lying where? So far, with such MEAGER
account, all we've got are GENERAL handling of
the pertinent issues (suicide, sins, defense, pains,
etc.) that may be irrelevant to what actually happened
in this SPECIFIC story and what the sainthood
was given for.
Paul Halsall
John Vogel
>
> Actually, you've not presented the WHOLE story
> as to what ACTUALLY happened and so who's
> really lying where? So far, with such MEAGER
> account, all we've got are GENERAL handling of
> the pertinent issues (suicide, sins, defense, pains,
> etc.) that may be irrelevant to what actually happened
> in this SPECIFIC story and what the sainthood
> was given for.
>
We'll await the report of your research into the whole complete
story.
John Vogel
> story.
>
> Well, John, so happen your command/wish
> is not my command. And that post was actually
> directed to Paulh who was the originator of
> the story.
>
> And, of course, this does not also remove the
> fact of beating an already dead horse to death
> some more as I said, if you have a case with
> them, John, then TAKE IF UP WITH THOSE WHO
> were directly concerned in the incident.
>
>
(Could you cut down the blank space at the top of your signature?)
Do you know the difference between ignorance and apathy?
(Traditional answer: I don't know and I don't care!)
Marida Ignacio
On Fri, 4 Nov 1994, Marida Ignacio wrote:
Well, John, so happen your command/wish
is not my command. And that post was actually
directed to Paulh who was the originator of
the story.
And, of course, this does not also remove the
fact of beating an already dead horse to death
some more as I said, if you have a case with
them, John, then TAKE IF UP WITH THOSE WHO
were directly concerned in the incident.
Marida Ignacio
On Fri, 4 Nov 1994, Marida Ignacio wrote:
> story.
>
> Well, John, so happen your command/wish
> is not my command. And that post was actually
> directed to Paulh who was the originator of
> the story.
>
> And, of course, this does not also remove the
> fact of beating an already dead horse to death
> some more as I said, if you have a case with
> them, John, then TAKE IF UP WITH THOSE WHO
> were directly concerned in the incident.
>
>
(Could you cut down the blank space at the top of your signature?)
Do you know the difference between ignorance and apathy?
(Traditional answer: I don't know and I don't care!)
---
Whether this is a rhetorical one or not, this
is the response - we can readily DISCERN well
resolutions to problem/issue by reflecting well
on the teachings of Christ as promulgated by
the Church. And so:
Matthew 12:33
Either DECLARE the tree good and its fruit is good,
or DECLARE the tree rotten and its fruit is rotten,
for a tree is known by its fruit.
And so without beathing around the bush or beating
a dead horse, resolution is already at hand and
the good life from the good tree (moral lessons)
must go on.
Doug Delorge
I'm waiting for HIM to clarify this, not Marida.
Doug
----------------------------------------------
Alexander Pruss
always wrong for a man to take the life of an innocent man on his own
authority (i.e., not on God's). If God commanded the women to kill
themselves, then this was lawful, for God is the Master of Life---as
Deuteronomy puts it, He gives life and He kills. On the other hand, if
the women decided on their own to kill themselves, then they acted
wrongly, though one could argue that perhaps the Church's teaching on this
matter was not explicitly taught to them, and thus they were in some way
excused by their invinscible ignorance.
As to the degree of certainty that one needs to have that God is
commanding one to kill oneself, this has to be very large... And,
furthermore, St Thomas More (_Dialogue of Comfort_) says that it is our
duty to attempt to prevent a suicide---even if the suicide claims to be
commanded by God. This is because God's general norm is to prohibit all
killing of innocent human life, and without ourselves having been with
certitude convinced that the person is commanded by God, it is our duty
to do our best to prevent the suicide.
Note that Samson in effect caused his own death. But St Thomas More has
a very ingenious commentary here. He notes that Samson's superhuman
strength was the effect of God's miraculous action and not of nature.
Thus, St Thomas More reasons that if Samson felt called by God to pull
down the temple (and thus to cause his own death as well), then he would
also _know_ that God called him to it, because at the same time God had
given him miraculous strength for this action which action would not be
possible according to the laws of nature.
In Christ,
Alex.
Paul Halsall
It seems to me vastly presumptious to say "since Augustine, the tradition
of the Universal church....."
Although occassonally, the Greeks would say nice things about Augustine,
they did not, as far as I can see, read him, nor conisider him
to be partiuclalrly authoratative (after all there is not really
a concept of "original sin" among the Orthodox). I am not saying that
this means that the Orthodox supported suicide; I am pretty sure
that their opposition (can anybody cite any?) was NOT based
on Augustine!
Paul Halsall
Hal...@murray.fordham.edu
Alexander Pruss
: Alex,
: It seems to me vastly presumptious to say "since Augustine, the tradition
: of the Universal church....."
I was not saying that "because of Augustine." I said, "since Augustine."
I should have said more precisely, "at least since the time of Augustine".
Correlation is not causality. Sorry for the unclear language.
Alex.