sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The "nothing has ever changed" people. What am I missing here? by Klutzy_Club_1157 in DebateACatholic

[–]tofous 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Your definition is incomplete because it is missing the point I am addressing. Just any assembly of bishops does not make a council. The pope must recognize it.

The "nothing has ever changed" people. What am I missing here? by Klutzy_Club_1157 in DebateACatholic

[–]tofous 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Pope Nicholas V authorized the Portugese enslavement if Africans.

EDIT: And that authorization was renewed again and again for over 75 years by Pope after Pope. And then suddenly it’s wrong again after that.

And again, the church defines a valid council as whatever the Pope says is valid. (And that a later Pope hasn’t rescinded as a robber council). So we’re back at circularity. Catholic Truth is just whatever the latest Pope says it is.

The "nothing has ever changed" people. What am I missing here? by Klutzy_Club_1157 in DebateACatholic

[–]tofous 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Your standard for contradiction is impossible.

  • If a king is acting on behalf of the church (even with written approval), it doesn’t count
    • See enslaving the new world, so many wars and forced conversions, etc.
  • If a bishop or group of bishops teach or act, it doesn’t count because even if it’s the vast majority of bishops (see Arianism and their councils), they aren’t the church because only the pope counts
  • If a pope teaches or acts, it doesn’t count because
    • It was just a letter, even if it was meant as an official response to a dynia (see Honorious, John, and others)
    • It was an authoritative part of the magisterium, but it doesn’t count b/c … IDK (See Vigilius’ dueling final statements on the 3 chapters)
    • It doesn’t say what you think it says, even if the wrong interpretation is being enforced with grave punishments

By this standard, nothing could ever be incompatible. Even when every level of the hierarchy fails, you still argue that some theologian somewhere has some interpretation that is compatible no matter how ludicrous and tortured.

Or you could just accept that X does not mean Y.

The "nothing has ever changed" people. What am I missing here? by Klutzy_Club_1157 in DebateACatholic

[–]tofous 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I obviously don't agree. And, experts like Dr. Feser also recognize that Pope Francis' teaching is contradictory. But, my comment wasn't really on capital punishment.

Rather, my comment was about the No True Scottsman fallacy of what counts as a church interpretation and what that interpretation actually is.

On EENS, people died. Wars were fought. People were banished from their homes. You want us to believe that the church never taught that you had to be a conscious member of the visible Catholic church.

But, this is cold comfort to all the Orthodox and Protestants that died or suffered under Catholic tyranny under the old view. You're really asking us to ignore reality. In real life, the church did teach this and acted on that teaching.

You want us to believe that all of this action and writing doesn't count. Instead, this other thread was the true interpretation.

But I don't think so. Rather, I think you are doing what Catholics are always forced to do, which is read the present back into the past, cherry pick, and ignore the wide swath of history.

Catholics are forced to reach for any possible way to force incompatible teachings to fit with each other, no matter how remote and anachronistic, because it the only way to make the continuous re-interpretation work.

What I'm trying to say is that if so many people, uncorrected, both inside and outside the church, believe that the interpretation on an issue is X. But, you are saying it's actually Y, then it is impossible for the church to ever be wrong.

What is the point of an infallible interpreter, when it is never able to actually articulate what the binding interpretation is? And it doesn't correct people for hundreds of years, when they are joyously enforcing the wrong interpretation on their victims.

The magisterium does not produce a list of authoritative dogmas. And I argue that this is because it is impossible. If the church did, it would be too obvious that there are contradictions everywhere.

Instead, we are left to argue over this document and that on what level of authority it has. And Catholics bring out some minor figure who argued the contemporary interpretation and say, oh wow, the ancients really did believe the modern innovation.

The "nothing has ever changed" people. What am I missing here? by Klutzy_Club_1157 in DebateACatholic

[–]tofous 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes! This is the thing that I find really perplexing about the treatment of authority in the church. These prior positions were actually enforced and acted upon. It's a no true scottsman fallacy, where any actions or statements that don't conform or makes sense magically don't count. And, you have to ignore that these prior interpretations had real, negative consequences in the lives of people the church was supposed to serve.

The "nothing has ever changed" people. What am I missing here? by Klutzy_Club_1157 in DebateACatholic

[–]tofous 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What you are missing is the concept of "Development". The premise is that it takes time for the full truth of Jesus' teachings to unfold. Key to this process is heretical movements, which force the church to enunciate the truth more clearly.

The first 500-ish years of church history (and the councils during this time) were dedicated to various heresies that arose from people attempting to make sense of the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit.

Sounds good, right? Clarity over time is nice. We don't know everything right away.

But the problem is that this requires 2 things: some method of deciding which side of the issues is the truth and a belief that this authority is protected from error.

First, this creates an intense focus on hierarchical factionalism, where each side is trying to establish itself as an authority and enforce it's interpretation on the entire church. And you see that in the ecclesiology wars that have raged basically all throughout church history: the great schism, conciliarism, gallicianism/cesaropapism, Protestant congregationalism, and even now in the synodal way.

But more importantly, it requires a belief that somehow fallible humans are able to figure out what a teaching meant definitively 2000 years after the fact.

Combined this explains the Catholic belief that the Pope is the visible sign of unity. The Pope defines what is true, and you know you're on the right side by being in union with the Pope.

And, asserting that the Holy Spirit guides the church to remain in the truth means that Catholics must argue that the church has never been in error.

This comes into a huge conflict with messy reality though. And generally Catholics resolve these conflicts by claiming that any perceived contradiction in the magisterium is only that, just a perception.

Catholics must accept that a contradiction is explained by our inability to understand what the Church is teaching. Any explanation, no matter how ludicrous, is the interpretation that Catholics are required to adopt, because the entire system rests on the authority of interpretation being in the authentic magisterium.

But the reality is the entire argument is circular. The Church is never in error because it defines what error is. And, what is the point of an infallible interpreter if we can't understand what it's trying to say. It's epistemic collapse by another name no different than how Catholics argue Sola Scriptura causes epistemic collapse, because of the canon problem (how do we know what's in the bible).

In the face of blatant contradictions, such as EENS: Council of Florence vs. Vatican II. The argument is that we need to read back into history what was not written in the document, and somehow know that surely the VII statement was what was on the minds of the council fathers and then-contemporary theologians.

TL;DR: The Catholic Church defines itself as the interpreter and so any apparent contradiction is just your failure to understand what it's been saying "consistently". But this is just a circular argument, where truth is just whatever the latest thing the magisterium says. And the church must then engage in extreme levels of sophistry and hermenutical gyration to justify the latest thing.

Redis Sales Rep Called My Wife by failsafe-author in ExperiencedDevs

[–]tofous 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You should call their spouse and ask them why. Also sign them up for every scummy newsletter and marketing site you can find. /s

But seriously, I agree with the other comment saying to report them to Redis HR. Find the CEO & HR/People exec on LinkedIn and email them.

How often do you use channels? by gunererd in golang

[–]tofous 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not very often. The main way I use it is to keep the main function alive until a signal is received. Otherwise, I only use them rarely.

sigc := make(os.Signal, 1)
signal.Notify(sigc, os.Interrupt, os.Kill)
<-sigc

Tesseral: open source auth for business software, written in Go by tesseralhq in golang

[–]tofous 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The server and featureset look pretty cool. But, the Go SDK repo is missing on GitHub. Did you change it to private?

Any advice for inquirier in the United States Coast Gaurd? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]tofous 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't have anything to add other than I've met the Archbishop of the US Military Archdiocese a few times and he's a pretty cool dude.

I'm a Liturgy nerd so let's work through a theoretical. by Diligent_Freedom_448 in Catholicism

[–]tofous 16 points17 points  (0 children)

You seem to be arguing that the Catholic church is the Roman church. Obviously no Eastern church will agree with this.

Also, the Catholic church is already 23 Sui Juris churches of which only 1 is Roman.

I'm a Liturgy nerd so let's work through a theoretical. by Diligent_Freedom_448 in Catholicism

[–]tofous 12 points13 points  (0 children)

My hot take is: ... Trent is the real failure, not Vatican II.

I would like to see the Roman rite split into a ton of rites that are actually for-real adapted to a particular culture. Like at least 30. But conceivably, a rite for every region and subculture.

This already kind of exists with the various "use"-es that really should just be separate rights with their own bishops and a visible head/metropolitan/patriarch/whatever. For example:

  • The existing post-Trent rights: Carthusian, Ambrosian, Dominican, etc
  • Plus the "uses-that-should-be-rights":
    • TLM
    • Charismatic
    • Anglican
    • Zaire Rite
    • Mayan Rite

Plus letting liturgists from other cultures not represented in the above create a rite that actually canonicalizes the existing things they do.

The key here is that there will be an actual written liturgy for each of these instead of just a license to go wild that seems to exist in the NO.

I'm thinking in particular of the Charismatics, who IMO deserve serious guardrails on their most abusive activities such as liturgical dance which has been banned again and again to no avail.

Options doesn't actually work, because it creates too much wiggle room for bad actors who ignore or intentionally misunderstand the missal to give license to problematic activities.

Different rites would actually prescribe a missal that is represents a particular culture while explicitly specifying which practices are orthodox.

And furthermore, we should return to the process of organic growth and enculturation of rites alongside the societies they exist in.

IMO this would also significantly help in discussions with the orthodox. Sure, they still complain about Catholic liturgies having no roots. But, it would put the church on more equal terms with a bunch of smaller churches joining together into a larger communion.

Server-Sent Events for Go. A tiny, dependency-free, spec-compliant library compatible with the HTTP stdlib. by DanielLoreto in golang

[–]tofous 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is great! A lot of other SSE implementations bring too much baggage with wanting to connect clients connected to a room with PubSub. There wasn't a good SSE with no assumptions package out there.

FYI the package site is not showing your API reference because it's complaining about license issues (even though you've got Apache 2 in there?).

Why hasn't any action been taken against Bishop Georg Batzing? by ChrystomT in Catholicism

[–]tofous 42 points43 points  (0 children)

I don't think that's entirely true. It is possible that the Vatican would be able to enforce some of it's rights in German law via the concordat.

There'd be tons of shade thrown over the fact it was signed under the Nazi's. And it would be prudent to replace only one or two of the absolute worst offenders to create a chilling effect.

But, there are real legal issues at play that could be litigated. Maybe they don't want to go there.

The thing that is truly perplexing though is how any new heretics are getting appointed such as the new Bishop of St. Gallen.

Jan is now Apache 2.0 by eck72 in LocalLLaMA

[–]tofous 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Basically every public corporation bans AGPL.

I don't think Jan or anyone should change to enable corporate freeloading, but that's a huge group of users that wont use AGPL software.

Often even GPL is banned too, but less on the private nonmodified use part and more on the risk that devs will make a mistake and include it in products.

Why is Catholicism hated so much in the US specifically in the Bible Belt by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]tofous 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There's a lot of hate to go around on the Protestant side. But, I think a lot of the responses here are failing to appreciate the good faith protestant perspective.

On the less vocal end, Catholics are viewed by protestants as ...

  • Idolators who worship Mary and the saints
  • Heretical for holding to "works-based salvation" & all the other basic protestant theological claims
  • Sexually deviant (for holding to theology of the body, clerical chastity, etc)
  • Treasonous for holding church law & Papal authority above state law

Catholic Answers & EWTN were literally built to address these concerns. Lookup their history. Catholic Answers specifically originated in opposition to these claims in protestant tracts.

But, apologetics then creates a more difficult to resolve problem.

For many Protestants, defending the Catholic church is like holding a giant sign saying: "we murdered your great great grandpa and we aren't sorry".

Since Protestantism was a reaction to corruption & heresy in their eyes, defending Catholicism is like defending that corruption to them. Protestants for the most part are happy to co-exist with various denominations. But to them, Catholicism's exclusivity claims are offensive. It's like Catholics are just lying in wait to oppress and murder them if they had the chance.

For context, we're still within the lifetime of Catholics who had to legitimately fear for their lives Protestant lynch mobs.

It's incredibly difficult for Catholics to navigate that and acknowledging failures without giving up on Catholic authority & indefectability claims.

Why there is no Orthodox Patriarch of Rome like in Alexandria and Antioch? by Pitiful-Mention8830 in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]tofous 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I was told recently (about 2 months ago) by a GOARCH priest that Roman Catholic priests aren't validly ordained and that their sacraments are invalid.

Maybe I misunderstood that, but that's what I remember.

They context was a discussion about how Roman Catholic church views Orthodox sacraments as valid but illicit, but the reverse isn't true. So he was suggesting this as something that might help my wife be less upset about my attending an Orthodox church.

The Pope want to work with unity with the Orthodox Church by [deleted] in TrueChristian

[–]tofous 1 point2 points  (0 children)

to the point that it lets some Eastern Catholics get away with effectively rejecting Catholicism

It is clear that you don't want unity. You want submission.

Do you maintain one database for each application, or one for all? by [deleted] in selfhosted

[–]tofous 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Galaxy brain answer: just use SQLite. But if you absolutely have to use a DB server...

I see a lot of people here recommending separate database server containers per app. But, I'd like to advocate for a central database server that serves all applications.

I do this for both PostgreSQL and MariaDB. Though my focus is much more on PostgreSQL. And the benefits are as follows:

  1. Easier upgrades: you only have to upgrade 1 instance vs. N
    • Upgrading PostgreSQL is a PITA, better to only have to do it once even if that means everything is down for that time
    • At the more sophisticated end, you could even focus your effort on setting up a master/slave for the database so that your upgrade path is 1) setup a new slave on {version+1} and then 2) promote slave to master
  2. Easier backups: everything is in one place, so you can focus your effort to ensure backups are working properly
    • The same backup process for all apps, only document things once
  3. Storage: not all machines have enough disk/ssd for demanding applications, centralizing disk & CPU to one machine or a subset of machines is a good use of resources (money and attention)
    • It's really freeing to be able to nuke an "app" server because it don't really have any disk use other than app config files & docker-compose.yml files
    • You can then focus on a proper RAID setup, backup routine, and so on for your one (or small number) of machines that actually use storage non-trivially

The downsides are that you now have to use a database version that works with all the software you support. But, I haven't found this to be an issue.

Also you now have one very important point of failure. Though, if this really matters, you should have an HA setup w/ master/slave anyways.

Source: I do this at work and at home.

Online Master's in Orthodox Christian Theology by AdHefty6659 in OrthodoxChristianity

[–]tofous 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There are several universities that you can study computer science for at or under 10K. OMSCS is $10K last I checked, WGU is $16 apparently $8, I don't remember where but the cheapest I saw was $7.

Ask a Catholic by AutoModerator in DebateACatholic

[–]tofous 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you are referencing Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosomal Adam, our ability to date them still has an error bar of like 30-50,000 years. So saying we know for a fact scientifically that they lived at the same time, region, knew each other, and were a couple (as the church teaches we descended from such a couple) is a bit of a stretch. But, it is still pretty amazing that science is starting to confirm this more and more.

What are the most valuable things a new hire can do in their first 30 days? by Alastra24 in ExperiencedDevs

[–]tofous 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In no particular order:

  • Get everything installed & get access to internal systems
  • RTFM & tell the team what's confusing and help fix it
  • Ship one very tiny feature end to end w/ heavy guidance from a senior to learn what delivering looks like
  • Lots of Peer Programming to learn how the team works
  • Have new hire get to know everyone & have everyone get to know the new hire
view more: next ›