B
bandmember
Guest
I have some serious disagreements with the church. I am learning that God gives us a conscience for a reason. We don’t have to be spoon fed our entire lives.
- Status
B
benidict
Guest
You will have to forgive me, my dear friend. Im dumber than a box of rocks.
Whats a Utilitarian Philosophy? Peace. and thanks in advace. I always love learning new things. 
BTW Id like to help bunny on his way to world domination. How do you make him.
B
benidict
Guest
Is your disagreements with Protestant teaching or Catholic. I could not tell by your affiliation. You dont have to answer. Im just curious. Peace
B
Bob_Crowley
Guest
I’m a former Protestant who became Catholic around 1996 or 97. Like you I also have 2 main disagreements, mainly on artificial contraception and papal infallibility. My attitude is that the Catholic Church is “**closest **to the truth”. I’ve been accused by a few hardliners of not being “Catholic”, but they can go jump.Exactly! Good question. These issues never came up in my conversion because they were never really an issue for me. I really paid them no mind until I came to the moral theology forums. It may be that all my defenses of Catholic doctrine have been in vain, on the non Catholic religions forums. Why? because I refuse to agree with two beliefs based on my own reasoning and conscience. I however cannot give up the 99.9999999 percent of the teachings I agree with. I will have really nowhere to go, if I do this. I believe the Catholic Church has all truth in terms of theology, in terms of doctrine. but there are 2 issues, I cannot in good conscience accept. Peace and prayers for you.
That’s my attitude.
As a matter of fact, I once had my old Protestant pastor turn up in a vision one night, and he was the one who made the comment, “The Catholic Church is closest to the truth”. That was after he died, and he was Protestant. However since that’s private revelation, you can make of it what you like.
So when I say “closest to the truth”, I’m not being entirely original.
S
Spirithound
Guest
Utilitarianism says that the action that causes the most happiness/pleasure for the most number of people is the most moral choice.You will have to forgive me, my dear friend. Im dumber than a box of rocks.
BTW Id like to help bunny on his way to world domination. How do you make him.
The Church proposes another way to gauge morality. This proposal is that the act itself, the intention of the acter, and the circumstances must all be good or neutral for the action to be good or neutral. If the act is intrinsically evil, it can never be a moral action. If a person does an otherwise good act with a bad intention, the action is immoral. If a person does an otherwise good act with a good intention, but in a bad place, it is immoral.
The Church disagrees with utilitarianism because worldly pleasure is not the greatest good; eternal salvation is the greatest good. Utilitarianism would allow you to act against your own eternal salvation for the benefit of someone else’s worldly pleasure. Note here that there is no such thing as “Christian utilitarianism.” There is no circumstance when you can effect someone else’s eternal salvation.
Bunny is pretty easy. I just copied and pasted him from another poster
L
Link0126
Guest
That’s basically what I was going to say. Who are you (or me, or any lay person) to disagree with the 2000 year old traditions of the Church? The doctrines are all grounded in the original teachings from the apostles. And we have no connection with them if not through the Church.
J
JimG
Guest
Just a thought, but it seems to me that many of our opinions and actions in everyday life stem from a utilitarian philosophy. My own inclination is to alway try to make people happy with an outcome, for example. That’s utilitarian, because it operates on how everyone is going to be affected by the outcome, without respect to underlying moral principles. (Who can think about moral principles all the time?)
Someone once said that “compassion leads to the gas chamber.” Compassion for an unwed pregnant woman can lead to the death of her child. Compassion for a sick and elderly person can lead to active euthanasia. Compassion for a sinner can lead to advocating the sin. Sometimes the best of intentions can produce the worst of results.
But the OP said that his disagreements had to do with preserving life. I would just note that while the current debate on life issues would seem to make the preservation of physical life paramount, from the Church’s point of view, physical life is not ever the most important thing. Eternal life is. Attaining heaven is more important than preserving life. So, assuming the issues concern the greatest good for an individual’s life in this world, one has to realize that for the Church, the condition of one’s life in this world is merely temporary; eternal life is paramount.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Yes, I agree with every single thing (it is a big volume, I totally agree, but taken over a reasonable amount of time perfectly comprehensible.)Hi I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut. My disagreements are not really the issue here. That would start a whole debate that has been taken care of ad nausium on other threads. The point is if we disagree, no matter what the issue, with one thing in this big thick book, then can we in good faith be considered a good Catholic. I think in many ways, we are missing something in the relational aspect of the Church and what its really all about. A Real Relationship with Christ, and with eachother. If I disagree with my parents view points do I have to leave my family? Am I not considered part of that family. Im a conservative, my parents are liberal. I am diametrically opposed to some of their beliefs? Do I give up my last name? In the same way. I am diametrically opposed to 2 teachings in the Church, that have nothing to do with the sacrements, Mary, or the Bible. Can anyone honestly state, that having read this huge thick volume, they agree with every single thing in it? Ideally yes. realistically I say no. unless we somehow, have become, like the fundamentalist, and do not have the ability to use our God given reason. Can we desent on any part?
It seems to me that you are equating acceptance of ‘all’ these many items (there are a lot, true) with somebody 'not using reason."
May I ask why it is that my reasoned ACCEPTANCE of all of these shows my ‘stupidity’. . .but my dissent on one or two would show intelligence? If they are all true, and I believed all, wouldn’t that be good? If I answer 100 questions correctly, isn’t that better than answering 98 correctly and 2 incorrectly? I don’t think the teacher would buy into the idea that my ‘dissent’ from the truth of the two answers in favor of what I ‘thought’ was correct should earn me marks on those AS correct, right?
What’s the cutoff? What’s the minimum we have to ‘reject’ in order to look smart enough to 'think for ourselves?"
If we can’t accept it ‘all’ lest we be thought too credulous to ‘think for ourselves’, why is the one way we demonstrate ‘thinking for ourselves’ only DISSENT? IOW, why is it good to go for the WRONG answer, or a falsehood, instead of going for truth?It doesn’t make sense to me. . .
S
Spirithound
Guest
Utilitarianism can be a licit second-tier decision-making tool, but it must always be subordinate to the Church’s teaching on intrinsic morality.
J
JimG
Guest
I agree. I was thinking that perhaps some variety of utilitarian thinking was influencing the OP’s disagreements with the Church in these matters.
B
benidict
Guest
Ok. then my philosophy is not utilitarian. I could care less about pleasure. I am a soldier, and pretty much live not much different than our cloistered monks. Except, I carry guns and I hunt terrorist. I also could care less about the common good. I believe in the rule of law. And in doing what is right, reguardless of my personal feelings and beliefs. Sometimes this gets me into trouble. I may not like what my government has me do at times, but as long as the order is not illegal. I will do it. If the order is illegal. i.e. firing on unarmed civilians, I will not obey the orders of my superiors, and will do all in my power to prevent the order from being carried out by others. Does this help in clarifying my philosophy? I am finding this interesting, and a way to know my self better. I thank God for those of you who are better educated. Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut and time. And also thank you for sharing bunny. I have seen him for a long time here, and never could remember to ask. PeaceUtilitarianism says that the action that causes the most happiness/pleasure for the most number of people is the most moral choice.
The Church proposes another way to gauge morality. This proposal is that the act itself, the intention of the acter, and the circumstances must all be good or neutral for the action to be good or neutral. If the act is intrinsically evil, it can never be a moral action. If a person does an otherwise good act with a bad intention, the action is immoral. If a person does an otherwise good act with a good intention, but in a bad place, it is immoral.
The Church disagrees with utilitarianism because worldly pleasure is not the greatest good; eternal salvation is the greatest good. Utilitarianism would allow you to act against your own eternal salvation for the benefit of someone else’s worldly pleasure. Note here that there is no such thing as “Christian utilitarianism.” There is no circumstance when you can effect someone else’s eternal salvation.
Bunny is pretty easy. I just copied and pasted him from another poster
B
benidict
Guest
I and you, are humans, who have a brain that God gave us for a purpose. To reason. To make decisions. He also created us with a conscience, and It is not a good idea to violate that. My stance is not one of rebellion, but of conscience. On both issues. Its not that I will not obey. Its more a matter of knowing that if put into a situation, I “could” not obey the Church. This is what is so frustrating to me. Peace
B
benidict
Guest
I wish to go more into depth with you, when I have more time. My conversion story is similar. for me it was My best friend who killed himself and had been an unchurched Christian for years, that Told me the path I must walk. Again. like you, its private revelation. We will talk about this more. I find your story, similar and fascinating. Peace and prayers for you.
And thank you.
B
benidict
Guest
Thank you. If I had not believed they had not used reason, I would have found way more than 2 items to disagree with. Again. I have to go by my conscience. If I were to follow one of the teachings I am talking about.( which again is irrelevant. since it seems alot of folks have various ones they are having trouble with.) I would not be able to remain sane, let alone lead a normal life. What Church teaching is calling for here, is something I truly believe is a huge mistake in her teaching. I can view it no other way. Some may feel this about other teachings such as birth control. I have no issues with the Church on this. Some would challenge other aspects such as the Real presence. Not me. I believe completely in it. And all other dogma associated with the Mass, with Mary, with The Communion of Saints. The question remains. are we allowed to find fault and disagree with ANY teaching, and still be a Catholic. I really thank all of you for your responses. I think we are learning alot, and perhaps have some avenues to explore on our own. I have no access to a priest at present, but Hes a good friend of mine, and I shall talk with him. PeaceYes, I agree with every single thing (it is a big volume, I totally agree, but taken over a reasonable amount of time perfectly comprehensible.)
It seems to me that you are equating acceptance of ‘all’ these many items (there are a lot, true) with somebody 'not using reason."
May I ask why it is that my reasoned ACCEPTANCE of all of these shows my ‘stupidity’. . .but my dissent on one or two would show intelligence? If they are all true, and I believed all, wouldn’t that be good? If I answer 100 questions correctly, isn’t that better than answering 98 correctly and 2 incorrectly? I don’t think the teacher would buy into the idea that my ‘dissent’ from the truth of the two answers in favor of what I ‘thought’ was correct should earn me marks on those AS correct, right?
What’s the cutoff? What’s the minimum we have to ‘reject’ in order to look smart enough to 'think for ourselves?"
It doesn’t make sense to me. . .
J
JohnMPhilomena
Guest
You sound like a good, and just man. I hope my marine sons would have the courage to stand up against an illegal order.Ok. then my philosophy is not utilitarian. I could care less about pleasure. I am a soldier, and pretty much live not much different than our cloistered monks. Except, I carry guns and I hunt terrorist. I also could care less about the common good. I believe in the rule of law. And in doing what is right, reguardless of my personal feelings and beliefs. Sometimes this gets me into trouble. I may not like what my government has me do at times, but as long as the order is not illegal. I will do it. If the order is illegal. i.e. firing on unarmed civilians, I will not obey the orders of my superiors, and will do all in my power to prevent the order from being carried out by others. Does this help in clarifying my philosophy? I am finding this interesting, and a way to know my self better. I thank God for those of you who are better educated. Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut and time. And also thank you for sharing bunny. I have seen him for a long time here, and never could remember to ask. Peace
Keep praying and don’t give up on our church. I will pray for you.
Peace,
John
B
Bob_Crowley
Guest
I take it your best friend communicated with you somehow after death? I’ve had a few ‘visions’ of ‘my old pastor’ (whom I often mention in various posts), who died in 1992. But they’re always for a specific purpose or communication.I wish to go more into depth with you, when I have more time. My conversion story is similar. for me it was My best friend who killed himself and had been an unchurched Christian for years, that Told me the path I must walk. Again. like you, its private revelation. We will talk about this more. I find your story, similar and fascinating. Peace and prayers for you.
I’ve also mentioned ad infinitum that the night my father died, he appeared in my room. A few weeks ago I went to a charismatic Catholic Group, and I found out from one of the other members that the main founder of the group also had an apparition of his father at some stage. The founder was a bloke called Brian Smith (I think), but unfortunately he himself died a few years ago, so I can’t ask him what was said, or the import of the apparition.
However it’s obvious that some of us do receive some sort of communication with the deceased. It’s not that we go looking for it, but sometimes they just come to us anyway. And I think that in most (all) cases it would be for a specific reason.
B
benidict
Guest
God Bless your sons. I love Marines! I am sure they would stand up to an illegal order. I am also sure that they, like myself, have nothing to ever worry about in this reguard. I have very good leadership. Even our officers routinely put themselves into harms way along with the lowest enlisted private. Not just Captains, or Leautenants, but Colonels as well. We have the most moral armed forces on the planet. My prayers for him. And if he is in Afghanistan, then I shall double them up. I am an Army M.P. and sometimes we get to work with the Marines. Great guys/ladies.
B
benidict
Guest
Interesting. And let me say, I believe you. My vision was a one time occurance following a year of strongly feeling his presence at various times. Im not the only one. Several of us who grew up together, and were really tight, had even more pronounced experiences and phenomena physically occur around them during the same year. We all would acknowledge him, and let him know we knew it was him. the last time I saw him or felt his presence was in this vision. I dreamed I was talking to his mother, and He just “appeared” behind her Clothed in white, and the scar on his eye he always had in life from an earlier childhood cancer, fully healed. I knew immediatley what was going on. we talked. he then told me he had something to show me, and that I needed to follow him. He led me past a statue of Christ, and the Blessed Mother, thru a Roman Catholic Chapel. We came to a door, and he told me, I could look in but not enter, This is where he would would be waiting, and to get there, I would have to walk the path he had shown me. the door opened, he dissapeared, I witnessed for a few moments paradise. I have actually discussed this with someone else who has seen it, and our recollections were identical. We can continue this later or p.m. if you wish. God Bless you. This is but One miracoulous event that led me into the Church. There are others. Needless to say, I believe Rome holds all truth. That is what makes this so darn frustrating.
Peace and prayers for all. 
S
Spirithound
Guest
Peace be with you!Ok. then my philosophy is not utilitarian. I could care less about pleasure. I am a soldier, and pretty much live not much different than our cloistered monks. Except, I carry guns and I hunt terrorist. I also could care less about the common good. I believe in the rule of law. And in doing what is right, reguardless of my personal feelings and beliefs. Sometimes this gets me into trouble. I may not like what my government has me do at times, but as long as the order is not illegal. I will do it. If the order is illegal. i.e. firing on unarmed civilians, I will not obey the orders of my superiors, and will do all in my power to prevent the order from being carried out by others. Does this help in clarifying my philosophy? I am finding this interesting, and a way to know my self better. I thank God for those of you who are better educated. Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut and time. And also thank you for sharing bunny. I have seen him for a long time here, and never could remember to ask. Peace
I forgot to mention this earlier. Utilitarianism has another side to it, that is, the least worldly harm to the least number of people. Eventually I might just come out and ask you what your particular disagreements are.
B
benidict
Guest
Peace be with you!
I forgot to mention this earlier. Utilitarianism has another side to it, that is, the least worldly harm to the least number of people. Eventually I might just come out and ask you what your particular disagreements are.
Its interesting, but no one has listed what my disagreements are. I will not list them. the main thing is, can we disagree on anything? Alot of people have listed theirs, and mine are not among them. I do however sypathize with them. These are sincere people, and I feel better knowing I am not alone. needless to say, I have no disagreements with the theological doctrines. Only 2 of the social/moral doctrines. Thats it. neither can be found in the bible, They are based soley on the Churches stand. Which in effect, makes them equal to the bible. I just in good conscience can not follow these two rules. Fortunately one issue, is one, I more than likely will never be place in a postion to make a choice on. the other, Is really kinda silly even in my view. And highly debateable. If I state them, this thread will turn into a debate that has nothing to do with the original question. believe me, Im tempted. But I know it will go all down hill from there. They are both emotionally charged disagreements. Not for me persay. But for some, it just sets their heads rotating 360 degrees. And Peace also with you.
(_/)
(
)(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination.
- Status