17. Apr, 2018


Wikipedia defines plagiarism as the "wrongful appropriation" and "stealing and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions" and the representation of them as one's own original work.[1][2]

Plagiarism is considered academic dishonesty and a breach of journalistic ethics


Plagiarism or coincidence? You decide

On the 10th. April, 2018 I wrote an article on the exhortation Gaudete et Exsultate. It was sub-titled “Opinion: Rejoice and be glad, just not so much for the gift of the Eucharist.” See the article here  http://www.johnthebaptistmoora.com/346443107/5717252/posting/hopes-of-explaining-the-sunday-obligation-dashed.

On the 15th of April, 2018 an article appeared for thecatholicthing.org. It was entitled  “A Curious Absence in ‘Gaudete et Exsultate.’” See the article here https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2018/04/15/a-curious-absence-in-gaudete-et-exsultate/ 

What was curious for me was that it contained almost identical arguments and even the same allegation of possible Pelagianism. From my original article, in comparison to the one written by The Catholic Thing, the words “gift of the” was reused three times, “source and summit of the” was reused once, “call to holiness in” was reused twice, and Pelagianism reused once as semi-Pelagianism (click on the image above).

These keywords form key arguments in my article and in the article written by The Catholic Thing. Hence, it is not unreasonable to allege that The Catholic Thing stole key ideas, quotes and insights from mine – particularly that Gaudete et Exsultate ironically may espouse Pelagianism.  

The argument within my articleThe Lord’s gift of the Eucharist is the source and summit of the Church’s actions. De-emphasising the celebration of the Eucharist when aspiring to fulfil the call to holiness reduces the significance of the Eucharist in fulfilling one’s individual vocation to holiness. Ironically, this would lead to a lived Pelagianism which Gaudete et Exultate highlights as a subtle enemy of holiness.

[My lament was reducing the significance of the Eucharist in attaining holiness represented a lost opportunity to re-present the Church’s teaching concerning the Sunday obligation.]

The Catholic Thing argument: In “reissue[ing] the Church’s… call to holiness…  relatively little attention is paid to the primary means to obtain holiness: the sacraments. The Eucharist is mentioned only five times.

… the primary results of [Vatican II] were: a) to reassert the “universal call to holiness” … and b) to exalt, once again, the Holy Eucharist as “the source and summit of the Faith.”

…What differentiates [the Church] from all other human endeavours is this Gift [of the Eucharist].

…Thus, I find it curious so little attention is paid in His Holiness’s exhortation to the pivotal role played by the sacraments [particularly the gift of the Eucharist] in attaining holiness. Indeed, to attempt holiness without them would be, well, to flirt with neo-Pelagianism, wouldn’t it?