2

How do we deal with problematic questions going forward?

In this question, How does the Catholic Church explain their belief that Jesus picked faulty Peter to build upon?, I found some issues (which may not have been necessarily what others had):

  1. Clarity:

    a. Title does not match Body.
    b. The 3 questions do not match, and only the second one can be answered for a Catholic Perspective.

  2. Title presents an erroneous understanding of the Catholic belief: there is no Catholic Belief And Jesus picked faulty Peter upon which to build the Church.

How do we deal with problematic questions going forward?

If one answers, and the answer perceived incorrect, it may cause flags to be raised, the answer deleted/locked, etc.

In this case, I chose to answer after raising the difficulties from my end, and proceeding to answer the question that I could draw from the post.

  • Of course the question you are referring to is from a non-Catholic perspective on 'peter the rock',..still i think title and questions do match up from a non-Catholic perspective, and this is implied in the 'way' the question is worded do you see what I mean? – Hello Dec 22 '14 at 0:42
  • There definitely is a Catholic belief about Peter that christians who are non-Catholic do not share about him, only Catholics believe that Jesus built the church on Peter, non-Catholic christians believe Jesus built the Church on the revelation given to Peter and on Jesus Himself, who is a non-faulty rock, and also called rock, cornerstone, and was the rock of the OT too, who followed the Israelites in the wilderness, scripture claims. – Hello Dec 22 '14 at 0:46
5

The basic issue is deciding whether you understand what a question is getting at and whether it is an appropriate question for the site.

  • If yes to both, then consider answering. You can clear up any apparent difficulties is the course of addressing the main issue that was raised in the question.

  • In no to either question, then vote to close. If you're not sure through all the issue with the question what exactly is being asked, vote to close as "unclear what you are asking". If the scope is too broad, is a truth question, or otherwise falls outside the scope of the site, use the appropriate close reason.

Optionally in either case, you can help improve the question. Poorly worded questions can be worded better if you are sure about what is being asked (and what is being asked is on topic for the site). Ones that are out of scope can use pointers in comments to what they need to do to ask a question that is in-scope.

  • Thank you! This is good stuff. So a case to case basis and practice makes perfect? – user13992 Dec 17 '14 at 20:39
6

Generally, if the question is coherent, but slightly confused, it's worth answering straight up. Please don't spend time challenging the frame of the question in answers.

If you do have questions about the intent of the author, ask them in the comments, but don't get into long drawn out discussions (if you feel like it's going to be long, take it to chat).

As far as this question in particular, while the question is not a great one. It's still a legitimate one that can be answered.

I find your complaints about the question to be overwrought though. The question is asking how the Catholic Church explains the fact that Jesus chose an apparently faulty instrument for his work. The question then becomes why is this important isn't everyone broken? That's something to ask the OP in a comment. Maybe they'll clarify.

The title's presentation is a bit off. But only in that they are trying to cram too much into one sentence. It's fundamentally 2 parts:

  1. The Catholic church believes God chose Peter on which to build his church (and that the office should remain in perpetuity)
  2. It's clear from scripture that Peter is faulty.

The question asks for a Catholic reconciliation of the two ideas. It does not explain why there is an inherent or apparent conflict between the two ideas. And that's what I feel is missing here. Why are those two things in conflict (is it an erroneous understanding of the Papacy? Is it something else?).

A good answer here explains both why Peter was chosen, why God choses to use flawed vessels, and finally, addresses why there is no conflict between these two ideas. And does so in a presentation that presents sources that a Catholic driving by would consider authoritative (likely a concert of Church writings and their scriptural sources where applicable).

  • I'll consider this. Looks like my answer could use some improving :-) – Matt Gutting Dec 17 '14 at 18:53
  • @waxeagle MattGutting's comment + Flimzy's (under OP)are informative and so is a Mod explaining for the original poster. Please, I am not arguing here. PS your post above is to me a "minefield". I can be tripped up at any point following guidance and instructions. – user13992 Dec 17 '14 at 19:21

You must log in to answer this question.