B
benidict
Guest
Thank you for your comforting words. And you raise some fascinating points. I really appreciate them and shall give them deeper thought. Especially the last sentence. That is a very good question. Peace
- Status
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
Benidict,This is the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Thick book huh? I agree with everything in this book. With the exeption of 2 issues. Should I change my religious affiliation and leave the Church? One of the issues is moral, the other is socialogical. Your thoughts. Peace
You’ve asked a very important question and one that I have been dealing with in considering Catholicism over the last two years. It’s difficult to understand exactly which teachings are actually infallible and must be accepted. It’s not as simple as saying one must only submit to the ex cathedra teachings. It goes way beyond that as Lumen Gentium from Vatican II demonstrates. Lumen Gentium should be read in its entirety; this is the part that causes me the most concern:
DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
LUMEN GENTIUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964
“. . . . .This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking. . . . .”
Link: vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html
I did find an interesting commentary on Non-Infallibility: The Papacy And Rahner, by Rev. Regis Scanlon, O.F.M. Cap., at the Catholic Culture Library. Many of my concerns about Lumen Gentium are discussed, there. So, I’m not the only one who has questions about "submission of mind and will to the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra. The article does speak of non-infallible propositions of the Vatican congregations as “speculative judgments.”
Non-Infallibility: The Papacy And Rahner, by Rev. Regis Scanlon, O.F.M. Cap., at the Catholic Culture Library.
Link: catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=4210
"Karl Rahner, however, stated that this teaching in No. 25 of Lumen Gentium " . . . is not to be propounded in such a way that in practice an absolute assent is still demanded or that there were no instance in which one might withhold assent."3 "
"Now, John Paul II has stated: "With regard to the non-infallible expressions of the authentic magisterium of the church, these should be received with religious submission of mind and will (cf. Lumen Gentium, 25).“15 Again, in the absence of anything to the contrary, one must interpret John Paul II’s above statement consistent with the interpretation given to this matter by Pius IX and Pius X. This would mean that theologians and laity are bound by these Pontifical congregation statements merely with regard to writing and teaching.”
"So, this religious submission of will and mind, which John Paul II says must be given to non-infallible statements of the papal magisterium means, first of all, that the theologian must submit his will and mind (assent) to the decisions of the Vatican congregations “conformably with his (the pope’s) manifest mind and intention.” But, since it is the expressed intention of the papal magisterium that these propositions of the Vatican congregations are non-infallible, as speculative judgments in themselves, one must assume that the pope does not intend that Catholics and theologians be bound to give a submission of will and mind (an assent) to the propositions, themselves, as speculative judgments. He only intends Catholics and theologians to give a submission of will and mind (an assent) to these proposals as the practical judgment of the Pontifical congregations. "
“So, while external or public questioning and dissent in verbal or written form is never permitted, internal questioning, along with further investigation and discussion of the matter with a Vatican congregation, is permitted. Otherwise, possible error or discrepancies on either side would never be discovered and rectified.18”
I’ve also found it very difficult to get concrete answers regarding which teachings actually fall under the category of “Faith and Morals.”
As my friend gurneyhalleck1 has said, Catholicism is an all or nothing package (paraphrased.) I still haven’t figured out what the whole package is; but I’m still here.
Peace,
Anna
O
Owlpride
Guest
Honestly not. I’m real busy with work and stuff. Do I need to in order to be Catholic?
O
OrangeOwl
Guest
I believe there’s something in the Catechism about how a person’s mental illness would be taken into consideration when judging a person’s moral culpability. I think that certainly would come into play with some of those who have committed suicide.
I also wonder if the same would apply to women who have abortions because their doctors tell them that they will die if they don’t. Some women are strong enough to say, “No, my child’s life is more important.” But I can’t help but think that maybe the stress of thinking you’re going to die (basically your life being threatened) might – in some cases – come into play when deciding if that woman committed a mortal sin by having an abortion.
I don’t know. It’s just a thought that’s not even relevant to the original discussion.
Benidict, although I am certain that you are well familar with this part of the Catechism, I think you should think about it again:
CCC 2088:
I think what you have to ask yourself is what kind of doubt you are having. Are you willing to assent to something you have difficulty in believing. Or are you closing your heart to what the Church has to say about the subject.
Also, remember, Catholics fail their obligations all the time. The difference is whether you decide to get up and try again.
L
LilyM
Guest
But they weren’t wrong about suicide.
The facts and teaching are and always have been that a) wilfully taking one’s own life is a grave sin and that b) if one freely consents to do so knowing the gravity of the act then one has comitted mortal sin.
That hasn’t changed and won’t change and the Church hasn’t been wrong in teaching thus.
What has changed is that huge advances in the science of psychology have occurred, resulting in greater understanding of the immense psychological pressures that lead most people who take their own lives to make that decision. As a result it seems, as far as can be discerned, that a percentage of suicides, possibly all of them, aren’t in a condition to freely consent to the sin, and so are not in mortal sin.
So it’s not a change in the teaching, it’s a change in the practical reflection of that teaching.
There is no such possibility with certain teachings. An example is the teaching on homosexuality. Homosexual sex is something that has consistently, from Apostolic times onwards, been taught to be inherently gravely disordered. ‘Inherent’ means in and of itself. So no surrounding circumstances, no future knowledge about how and why people choose to have homosexual sex, will make it anything other than gravely disordered.
The most that can happen, as with suicide, is that future advances in psychology may lead us to understand that those who choose to have homosexual sex may be under a fantastic amount of psychological or biological compulsion to do so, for reasons we don’t yet perceive. If that ever is the case, then the same accommodation will be made as with the teachings on suicide - that we entrust those who indulge in this disordered behaviour to God’s mercy.
L
LilyM
Guest
Well, imagine you absolutely loathe and despise your biological parents and want nothing to do with them. You might deny any relationship with them, move halfway around the world to get away from them, never tell anyone who they are, and adopt a new last name.
None of which means that you’re no longer the child of those parents you so dislike. Of course you are and will always be their child. Their DNA which you carry and always will carry within you creates an unbreakable and undeniable relationship between you and them, whatever you might do to break the bond in other ways.
When someone is baptised into the Catholic Church, which is the Body of Christ, it creates a spiritual equivalent of this DNA bond, one that cannot be broken or severed completely.
meltzerboy
New member
My friend, I urge you to follow the advice of Beth Cecilia. It is very wise. You were drawn to Catholicism for a reason, so why not stay with it. Another poster encouraged you to consult a priest and discuss with him your doubts. That too sounds like sound advice. In my own faith, there are those who accuse me of not being a “real” Jew since I am not Orthodox even though they realize–as in your case of being baptized a Catholic–that I remain Jewish no matter what. I try not to let them upset me too much by realizing that none of us is perfect and by trying daily to improve. If all else does not change your mind about the disagreements you have with the Church–including support from priests and the Church–you can still work it out through personal prayer and conversation with G-d.Thank you for your comforting words. And you raise some fascinating points. I really appreciate them and shall give them deeper thought. Especially the last sentence. That is a very good question. Peace
P
pnewton
Guest
and
I do not wish to pick on Bob, but in the interest of answering the OP, I think I can use his posts as a starting point. The Catholic Church used to believe in a greater need for the death penalty than today. In fact, the Vatican State had a death penalty. However, as time has changed, circumstances in the application of the death penalty has changed. The Church can never deem the death penalty is a moral evil in itself. That would contradict previous teaching, and make God to be sinful. However, it can state that society no longer needs this death penalty, and has just about reached the point of making such a statement.
Now I, like Bob find this to be one of the only, actually, the only issue I disagree with in the Catechism. Unlike Bob, I disagree with the assessment of how civilized and advanced we have become. Yet as long as I disagree, I have to fully accept the burden of guilt of understanding better the mind of the Church on this issue, as does Bob from his side, and as do you, OP, on your issues. It is the heighth of hubiris not to acknowledge the likelyhood that we ourselves are mistaken on some issue.
Now, on most issues, there is an allowance for objection from our conscience, as long as we strive to understand the teaching of the Church. We have to remember that we are still the student and the Church our teacher. It is to be expected that we do not yet know it all. However, when it comes to dogma, that is the one time that the Church says, you just have to take this one on faith. Dogma is a must, however, no doctrine of the Church is to be lightly disregarded.
Sin you, OP, are taking these differences seriously, I say you are doing exactly what the Church asks. Charity is more important than always being right.
I apologize to estesbob for picking on him.
O
Owlpride
Guest
This makes alot of sense. Thank you. I’m still not sure about it, but thanks!
J
JaredM
Guest
Sure why not. If you don’t agree with the Catholicism then why be a Catholic. Nothing is wrong with a little healthy skepticism and questioning authority.This is the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Thick book huh? I agree with everything in this book. With the exeption of 2 issues. Should I change my religious affiliation and leave the Church? One of the issues is moral, the other is socialogical. Your thoughts. Peace
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
Benidict,
You’ve asked a very important question and one that I have been dealing with in considering Catholicism over the last two years. It’s difficult to understand exactly which teachings are actually infallible and must be accepted. It’s not as simple as saying one must only submit to the ex cathedra teachings. It goes way beyond that as Lumen Gentium from Vatican II demonstrates. Lumen Gentium should be read in its entirety; this is the part that causes me the most concern:
DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON THE CHURCH
LUMEN GENTIUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON NOVEMBER 21, 1964
“. . . . .This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking. . . . .”
Link: vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html
I did find an interesting commentary on Non-Infallibility: The Papacy And Rahner, by Rev. Regis Scanlon, O.F.M. Cap., at the Catholic Culture Library. Many of my concerns about Lumen Gentium are discussed, there. So, I’m not the only one who has questions about "submission of mind and will to the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra. The article does speak of non-infallible propositions of the Vatican congregations as “speculative judgments.”
Non-Infallibility: The Papacy And Rahner, by Rev. Regis Scanlon, O.F.M. Cap., at the Catholic Culture Library.
Link: catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=4210
"Karl Rahner, however, stated that this teaching in No. 25 of Lumen Gentium " . . . is not to be propounded in such a way that in practice an absolute assent is still demanded or that there were no instance in which one might withhold assent."3 "
"Now, John Paul II has stated: "With regard to the non-infallible expressions of the authentic magisterium of the church, these should be received with religious submission of mind and will (cf. Lumen Gentium, 25).“15 Again, in the absence of anything to the contrary, one must interpret John Paul II’s above statement consistent with the interpretation given to this matter by Pius IX and Pius X. This would mean that theologians and laity are bound by these Pontifical congregation statements merely with regard to writing and teaching.”
"So, this religious submission of will and mind, which John Paul II says must be given to non-infallible statements of the papal magisterium means, first of all, that the theologian must submit his will and mind (assent) to the decisions of the Vatican congregations “conformably with his (the pope’s) manifest mind and intention.” But, since it is the expressed intention of the papal magisterium that these propositions of the Vatican congregations are non-infallible, as speculative judgments in themselves, one must assume that the pope does not intend that Catholics and theologians be bound to give a submission of will and mind (an assent) to the propositions, themselves, as speculative judgments. He only intends Catholics and theologians to give a submission of will and mind (an assent) to these proposals as the practical judgment of the Pontifical congregations. "
“So, while external or public questioning and dissent in verbal or written form is never permitted, internal questioning, along with further investigation and discussion of the matter with a Vatican congregation, is permitted. Otherwise, possible error or discrepancies on either side would never be discovered and rectified.18”
I’ve also found it very difficult to get concrete answers regarding which teachings actually fall under the category of “Faith and Morals.”
As my friend gurneyhalleck1 has said, Catholicism is an all or nothing package (paraphrased.) I still haven’t figured out what the whole package is; but I’m still here.
Peace,
Anna
pnewton,
As noted in my post quoted above, it’s difficult to understand what a Catholic may question. Any thoughts on Lumen Gentium?
Anna
J
JohnMPhilomena
Guest
What other answer can I give. If I believe the church has the fullness of truth, then just because you disagree on 2 issues, do you think I should recommend that you throw it all away?
I want everyone to join the church and nobody to reject it - as did Christ. So if you are in conflict with the fullness of truth, then you are in error and you should accept the teachings based on faith and ask for forgiveness of your unbelief on whatever the 2 issues are.
J
JohnMPhilomena
Guest
Be careful. They questioned Jesus’ authority too…
J
JaredM
Guest
Why would I question love and tolerance? I think more Christians need to be more Christ like.
I
icamay
Guest
I have a dry sense of humor, so please forgive me, but I have to interject here - I think you would have just made Martin Luther proud!
T
TedDC
Guest
Jesus is God. The Church is men, just fallible men. BIG difference.
S
Spirithound
Guest
No, there is never a good reason to leave the Church. What you need to do, however, depends on what those two disagreements actually are, and what degree of assent is required.
Can. 750 §1. A person must believe with divine and Catholic faith all those things contained in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the sacred magisterium; therefore all are bound to avoid any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.
Can. 752 Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.
S
Spirithound
Guest
You don’t, but it might help you to understand that the Church is not against capitalism in itself.
The Church calls for morality to extend to business relationships, and so is against the exploitation of workers, and encourages donating money to charity.
T
Thoughtfulone
Guest
O.K., so what do you do if, despite trying your best and despite praying intensely about a certain truth proposed as divinely revealed by the UOM, you still cannot believe it? Are you automatically excommunicated? If so, what do you do?
- Status