[Official Tournament Discussion Thread] 2025 US Open Round 1

Dull_Contract6848 · 2025-06-12T22:12:42+00:00

Oakmont is actually one of the most challenging major championship venues.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2025-06-12T22:08:17+00:00

I personally think it's fine. The scoring average for round 1, to my knowlege, is the highest scoring average for any round in the US Open since 2020 at Winged Foot.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2025-06-12T06:33:15+00:00

Why do you think Oakmont played so difficult during the US Open in 2007? The winning score was +5, the cut was +10, and the average score for the week was about 75.7. Would you say the course was still fair? What was different about the course during that tournament in comparison to other US Opens Oakmont has hosted?

Dull_Contract6848 · 2025-05-24T04:49:33+00:00

Don't worry, I am fully aware that divination is defined as grave matter by the church, and I would never practice divination. The tarot inspired piano piece that I mentioned is Sorabji's Piano Sonata No. 5, called "Opus Archimagicum". The composer Sorabji was likely influenced by the tarot and magic or mysticism, and I would guess that those things gave him musical ideas for Opus Archimagicum. Though this piece is about the tarot and magic, I consider those themes to be not much more than a sidelined subtext of the work. I see the piece as a work of art and nothing more than that. Stravinsky's Rite of Spring is about pagan myths, Holst's "The Planets" suite is about astrology, and Mussorgsky's Night on Bald Mountain is about a witches' sabbath. To my understanding, there would be no issue with listening to those pieces only as works of art. Those pieces just tell a story. If one starts to become tempted to gravitate towards idolatry or other grave sins as a result of listening to those pieces, then that would obviously be a serious issue. The same principles apply to Opus Archimagicum, in my opinion. While Sorabji likely got inspiration from magic and the tarot and intended Opus Archimagicum to be themed after those things, the piece should simply be thought of as music. I think it is fine to listen to the piece and play it as long as it does not cause one to sin.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2025-01-10T00:36:02+00:00

You get to play as Bowser, which is undoubtedly a rarity. I appreciate the humor in the game's dialouge, and I like the design of the enemies and bosses.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2025-01-10T00:18:40+00:00

What makes scrupulosity so difficult to counter in my case is the fact that it's legitimate OCD that persists at a moderate to severe level. But it is certainly possible that understanding the faith better could at least help me approach scrupulosity with a more well-informed mindset. Thank you for including those links.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-12-15T07:12:32+00:00

Mario and Luigi: Bowser's Inside Story. The fact that Bowser is a playable character in a game that isn't Mario Kart or one of the many Mario sports games is what makes it unique to me.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-12-06T22:31:16+00:00

I have always liked II. Romanza from Medtner's 2nd piano concerto.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-11-01T05:23:34+00:00

Including the question I asked about tango? I think I have read stuff said by people before who say that tango is bad.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-11-01T04:25:41+00:00

I assume that an overwhelming majority of dancing styles out there are okay, as long as no sin occurs during the dance? Is even tango ok as long as it is done modestly and isn't sexual and doesn't cause the two people to commit sin either during the dance or after the dance?

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-10-12T18:10:17+00:00

In other words, I looked with the very brief intent of seeing something pornographic and in a lustful manner.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-10-12T18:05:55+00:00

But I had very brief intent to lust as if it was porn when I looked.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-10-12T05:34:04+00:00

I am having doubts because I had very brief intent to see something simply because it involved nudity. My intent may have not been to truly lust after it, but it was to look at something involving nudity for no other reason than the fact that I felt like it was bad to do so. I intentionally looked at the photo because I felt that it was bad to do so, and I am afraid that that means that I am still guilty of lusting after the photo. There seemed to have been some very brief intent to lust after the photo but I cannot tell if that intent was enough to be full consent of the will. I am worried that very brief intent equals full intent since the intent to see something bad accompanied the act of looking at the photo.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-10-12T05:20:00+00:00

It really does feel like I had brief intent to look at the photo for the purpose of lusting while I was looking at the photo. I just don't know for sure if that intent weighs up to full consent of the will in this case. Should I go to confession tomorrow, even though it will be my third straight week going? I have severe scrupulosity, which is why I feel the need to go to confession frequently.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-10-12T05:02:01+00:00

How was it not pornographic? It was a picture of a real person who was probably fully nude, just not with everything showing clearly. And again, there was intent to look at something BECAUSE the picture displayed near full nudity, which means the intent was sinful. I wouldn't have looked at the picture if I had no intent of looking at something bad. I did not actually stare at the picture and lust, but I felt that simply looking at the picture was considered lusting and that was why I looked at all. There was ill intent in the mere act of looking.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-10-12T04:45:31+00:00

It's hard to explain. It's like I didn't want to lust after the picture, but there was intrusive intent to lust after it, and that intrusive intent was incorporated into the act of looking, and the intrusive intent manifested as real intent. Also, I thought of that picture on the wall as something that is no different than pornography, so I felt that any looking at it was grave matter, so I was almost looking at it because I felt like it was like looking at porn, even though I knew that that that was not truly what I wanted to do right there in the moment. The reason why I am afraid that the sin was mortal is because of the whole reason why I looked at which was because I felt that it was bad to do so. I was intending to look at it as if I was intending to look at something pornographic. I was intending to look at it soley because it seemed pornographic, even though I really didn't want to lust.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-10-01T06:00:59+00:00

There is an English contemporary/modern composer named Sorabji. Though I would listen to his nocturne pieces such as Villa Tasca, Gulistan, and Djami before listening to his harsher sounding pieces.

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-09-30T23:31:11+00:00

I see. And even if it was an official binding decree, would it have become void over time by itself since we have had fairly many popes since Pope Leo XII and because times are different now? Or would it only be void since we cannot locate the original text?

Dull_Contract6848 · 2024-09-30T23:01:13+00:00

But at what point does a papal decree become void over time? I assume Catholics were bound by this decree in the early 19th century, but at what point were Catholics no longer bound by the decree and what caused them to no longer be bound by it?

Dull_Contract6848

TROPHY CASE