J
JohnMPhilomena
Guest
OK - here’s how it went down:
First JaredM (an Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) said:
Then I said:
Then TedDC said:
so I said:
- Status
First JaredM (an Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) said:
T
Thoughtfulone
Guest
Thank you so much for this. I’m really trying…
P
pnewton
Guest
Ah, you reposted that. Good. It is closer. My thoughts is that for the most part we as seldom called as laity to give this assent of mind and will, but it can apply. For example, when the Holy Father John Paul II halted all speculation on the possibility of women priest, then an assent of the will would be to stop arguing the cause for women priest. When Ecclesia Dei and Summorum Pontificum were issued, all the faithful shoud assent with the will and do as instructed. We may not agree, but we should be willing to submit. When Redemptonis Sacramentum came out with specifically abroggating glass chalices and correcting other abuses, we all should willingly follow that letter, even if we just donated a thousand dollar set of crystal in loving memory of our departed great aunt.
However, most of the need for consent will fall to the clergy and theologians. Consider this. If you at work disagreed with a boss, or some corporative directive, would you be willing to follow the directive, even if you did not agree, or would you quit everytime you were asked to do something you did not understand or did not agree with. We do many things just because the decision is outside our pay grade. We are the Indian and not everyone can be the Chief. More to the point, we are the sheep. Not all can be the shepherd.
O
Owlpride
Guest
I wasn’t trying to twist antything.
S
Spirithound
Guest
No, but perhaps the person you got your information had.
L
Liraco
Guest
God bless you for that willingness to stay faithful despite being unable to assent.My dear friend. You see the complexities. God bless you. By all means. I think you and I need to resolve to stay in the Church. You, like myself, have no other place to go. There is no other refuge. Im not looking for excuses to leave. on the contrary. Im looking for a reason to stay. We can pray for each other. Peace
John 6:63-69
…The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
But there are some of you who do not believe." Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him.
And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father.”
As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.
Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?”
Simon Peter answered him, “Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.
We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God.”
Though I think it may have helped if you were open in discussing what it is you don’t agree with, I can understand not wanting to open that up because of the ensuing “battle” that may occur. Still, you’re seeking Truth instead of rejection of authority for your own. So keep praying as we’re all works in progress.
“Necessarily” hopefully implies that you aren’t closed off to the idea, just that you have your doubts. I wonder, then, what you think the Bible is and if God left no means of us knowing what He’s done for us throughout history.
Regardless, God bless you Ted.
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
pnewton,
I appreciate the examples. I just wish I had something concrete regarding specifically what falls under “Faith and Morals” and must be accepted.
I grew up in Baptist Churches, and many (not all) Baptist ministers expect more adherence and agreement with their teachings than the Pope expects from Catholics. I got into trouble saying that on a Baptist website before I formally left the Baptist Church.
It was questioning my Baptist minister’s authority and prayerfully doing my own study that led me out of the Baptist Church. I came to CAF about 2 years ago, and during that time I’ve discussed many issues such as infant Baptism, Sola Scriptura, the Real Presence in the Eucharist, once saved-always saved (OSAS), etc. After many long discussions and study, I found I could not justify my “Baptist” beliefs through Scripture or Tradition. I had to release Sola Scriptura, OSAS; and embrace infant Baptism and the Real Presence.
The irony in all of this is that Catholics condemn “private interpretation.” Yet, if I had not questioned the authority of Baptist teachings and my Baptist minister; I would not have found the truth in these issues. Prayerful study and “private interpretation,” led me to accept many Catholic teachings. Yet, if I convert to Catholicism, private interpretation is not allowed. One must submit to the teachings of the Church, even if they disagree.
I went through some difficult times asking questions in the Baptist Church. The leaders were very upset that I was asking questions, but gave me no answers. It was more of a “shame and guilt” tactic to attempt to pull me back in line with their teachings. So, the idea of “submitting religious mind and will” to the Roman Pontiff seems as spiritually risky as submitting to a Baptist minister—even though I think Catholics hold more of the truth than many Baptists do.
I realize Catholics claim Apostolic Succession, the Chair of Peter, and have 2,000 years of Tradition on their side. That’s all very appealing. However, the Eastern Orthodox also have history on their side, and they have a completely different understanding of the primacy of Peter and also claim Apostolic Succession–Anglicans do too—though Catholics claim our Priests have no authority. My intention here is not to make this an Anglican vs. Catholic vs. Orthodox debate. There have been plenty of threads on this already; and Anglicans get pounded pretty hard in these debates.
At this point, I can only submit mind and will to Christ. I need to be able to freely question what any Church teaches. This thread, alone, demonstrates the difficulty a Catholic, such as Benidict, faces when questioning or disagreeing with Catholic teaching. I’ve seen this same dynamic on multiple threads for two years.
However–and this is a big “however”–the same freedom to question, which is allowed in Anglicanism in the U.S. (TEC,) has lead to a serious departure from Christian orthodoxy by liberal factions within the Anglican Communion. So, the very freedom that I cherish can lead to serious error. The complexity of this “freedom” issue weighs heavily upon me.
My Episcopal Church is very conservative-High Church and leans heavily towards Catholicism with strong Eastern Orthodox elements. There is only a hint of Protestantism and it’s difficult to detect. It would take some serious effort to point out the Protestant elements.
So, this is a tough issue and one I take very seriously. I appreciate Benidicts honesty in openly discussing the issue of questioning Catholic teachings.
I continue to have a great respect for Catholics.
Peace,
Anna
T
Thoughtfulone
Guest
Here is something you might find helpful re: your concerns. The whole article is quite illuminating.
"Now some Bishops or Popes may, at times, state that the faithful are required to believe a particular teaching, but if that teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium is in error, no one is required to believe it. The Pope or the Bishops at times teach erroneously, because they do not yet realize the whole truth about a particular doctrine. Eventually, all such errors will fall away from the teaching of the Magisterium.
In the mean time, if an individual understands that a teachings is in error, that individual is not required to believe or adhere to that error in the least. However, such an individual can only contradict, or add significantly to, or correct a teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium if his understanding is based on Tradition, or Scripture, or other teachings of the Magisterium. Furthermore, he has a duty to the Church to express his understanding of correct doctrine on the very same question of faith or morals, and to accept the possibility that he himself may be in error. So may the teaching of even the fallible Ordinary Magisterium progress and grow in the sight of God."
catholicplanet.com/TSM/limits-magisterium.htm
B
Beth_Cecilia
Guest
It is painful to hear Catholics tell each other that they are not Catholic, or even that they are not good Catholics. We all have certain obligations and we all fail in various ways. By the grace of God, we try again and again.
If the OP framed his disagreements as doubts, not disagreements, would we be so quick to distance ourselves from him? The twelve had doubts, even as they looked at our Lord. One of my favorite stories on scripture is when Peter tries to walk on water. He has doubt and he begins to sink. Thomas is the one we always associate with doubt, since after the resurrection he needed to touch to believe. Or perhaps neither doubt nor disagreement, but lack of understanding. We can easily laugh at the story about James and John asking Jesus if they could sit on His right and Left in the Holy kingdom. We can be startled that Peter so little understood what was going on, that he attacked a soldier-cutting off his ear- in defense of Jesus- or his three denials after the death. Peter is wonderful because there are so many examples of his failings, and yet he is the rock. It is easy to find examples of people who did not understand, or who failed, or had doubt- both testaments are strewn with examples.
So as we face our pilgrimage, it is arrogance to think we will not fail. We will. It is arrogance to think we will understand everything. We cannot. It is humbling to realize our failings, but we all have them. Here Benedict, and others, bravely admit theirs. It does not make them less Catholic, it makes them human.
Clinging to error causes problems. Listening to the confusions and trying to alleviate them, as some have done, is a mercy. The question originally is framed very generally: two disagreements means I am not a Catholic? The answer is absolutely not. You are a Catholic. Being a Catholic, you are called to submit your will, recognize your failings, and be humble. Being a Catholic, you must address your ‘disagreements’ in humility before the Church, not in prideful contemplation. Being a Catholic I must acknowledge my own doubts. If I can, I must help you on your journey- which may mean alleviating doubts when I am equipped to do so. We must avoid being stumbling blocks in each others’ journeys. When a Catholic admits some doubt, it means only that he has not arrived yet. Since we are not saints yet, but we aspire to be, we have not arrived either.
I went on a pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela with some of my cousins. I was the least physically fit for the pilgrimage. I was always the one who needed a break first. It was humbling- but I see echoes of the experience all through my life. I am not fit. My fellow travelers help me with love. I hope I can help them too. We break often for prayer and we travel singing to keep our spirits up.
It was easy, on that pilgrimage and in life, to see the failings of others. It was easy to see who had the quickest temper and who was the weakest. Who was clumsy and who did not think their day through so we had to stop for them our share our water with them. It was much harder, because we were so tired, to notice who was the first to start a prayer or song. Who shared without grudge? Who noticed me too tired to walk further but to proud to announce it, and announced that they themselves wanted a water break. We are traveling together, and we all have strength- which we owe to others, and weaknesses- where we will depend on others. Expressions of doubt are perfect examples. We can condemn the questioner or we can help. We can push our fellow travelers off the path, saying that they are not Catholic at all, or we can listen to their doubts in honesty and help them stay on the path. What would you want them to do for you?
If the OP framed his disagreements as doubts, not disagreements, would we be so quick to distance ourselves from him? The twelve had doubts, even as they looked at our Lord. One of my favorite stories on scripture is when Peter tries to walk on water. He has doubt and he begins to sink. Thomas is the one we always associate with doubt, since after the resurrection he needed to touch to believe. Or perhaps neither doubt nor disagreement, but lack of understanding. We can easily laugh at the story about James and John asking Jesus if they could sit on His right and Left in the Holy kingdom. We can be startled that Peter so little understood what was going on, that he attacked a soldier-cutting off his ear- in defense of Jesus- or his three denials after the death. Peter is wonderful because there are so many examples of his failings, and yet he is the rock. It is easy to find examples of people who did not understand, or who failed, or had doubt- both testaments are strewn with examples.
So as we face our pilgrimage, it is arrogance to think we will not fail. We will. It is arrogance to think we will understand everything. We cannot. It is humbling to realize our failings, but we all have them. Here Benedict, and others, bravely admit theirs. It does not make them less Catholic, it makes them human.
Clinging to error causes problems. Listening to the confusions and trying to alleviate them, as some have done, is a mercy. The question originally is framed very generally: two disagreements means I am not a Catholic? The answer is absolutely not. You are a Catholic. Being a Catholic, you are called to submit your will, recognize your failings, and be humble. Being a Catholic, you must address your ‘disagreements’ in humility before the Church, not in prideful contemplation. Being a Catholic I must acknowledge my own doubts. If I can, I must help you on your journey- which may mean alleviating doubts when I am equipped to do so. We must avoid being stumbling blocks in each others’ journeys. When a Catholic admits some doubt, it means only that he has not arrived yet. Since we are not saints yet, but we aspire to be, we have not arrived either.
I went on a pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela with some of my cousins. I was the least physically fit for the pilgrimage. I was always the one who needed a break first. It was humbling- but I see echoes of the experience all through my life. I am not fit. My fellow travelers help me with love. I hope I can help them too. We break often for prayer and we travel singing to keep our spirits up.
It was easy, on that pilgrimage and in life, to see the failings of others. It was easy to see who had the quickest temper and who was the weakest. Who was clumsy and who did not think their day through so we had to stop for them our share our water with them. It was much harder, because we were so tired, to notice who was the first to start a prayer or song. Who shared without grudge? Who noticed me too tired to walk further but to proud to announce it, and announced that they themselves wanted a water break. We are traveling together, and we all have strength- which we owe to others, and weaknesses- where we will depend on others. Expressions of doubt are perfect examples. We can condemn the questioner or we can help. We can push our fellow travelers off the path, saying that they are not Catholic at all, or we can listen to their doubts in honesty and help them stay on the path. What would you want them to do for you?
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
Thoughtfulone,
I appreciate the link; It is an interesting article. However, some writings of the author, Ronald L. Conte Jr., are considered “schismatic” by some Catholics who have spoken against Conte’s ideas on things such as “Heresy of Magisteriumism.” See link to an article that disagrees with Ron Conte: willingcatholicmartyr.blogspot.com/2010/05/response-to-ron-contes-jrs-heresy-of.html
You probably already know that Conte has posted here on CAF.
I really need solid Catholic doctrines/teachings. Pinning down precisely what a Catholic must believe is not a simple task. Conte’s articles and the controversy he has created is proof of that. If Catholics are to submit to the Magisterium, but cannot agree on what that means; it makes it very difficult for those of us considering or questioning Catholicism.
Peace,
Anna
L
Liraco
Guest
There is only one Truth, but you saw in that church how not having it fully can lead to grave error. The Catholic Church makes the claim to possess it fully because of its Apostolic Succession that leads right down to Jesus (as opposed to those whose origin you can point to a man like Luther or Calvin).
I imagine authority can be an issue for someone who came from a protestant background, but we’d do well to Remember Jesus’ words in Luke 10:16
“He who hears you hears me; whoever rejects you rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me.”
Not necessarily depending on what you mean by private interpretation. If by private interpretation it means that you are the ultimate word on what something means despite being contrary to what the Church has always taught then that indeed would be condemned, precisely to protect from error and schism. Example: denying the divinity of Jesus (Jehova’s witnesses). If there’s no* final* word, then how will you ever know the truth with so many conflicting interpretations out there?
The Church gives a LOT of leeway when it comes to reading scripture. It has defined very few passages to mean something specific and even then it doesn’t close off to other interpretations as long as they don’t contradict.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
The Magisterium of the Church
85 “The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.” This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.
86 “Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith.”
87 Mindful of Christ’s words to his apostles: “He who hears you, hears me”, the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.
I think this article says it well: catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9806qq.asp
Exegetes and believers must not pit their private judgment against the mind of the Church or treat their methods as the ultimate arbiters of what Scripture can or cannot mean (this is what is meant by “private interpretation”). But that doesn’t mean that ordinary Catholics and Scripture scholars cannot use their intellects to probe the meaning of Scripture. Indeed, Scripture is so rich that even when a given passage has been connected authoritatively with a certain doctrine, that does not remove that passage from the sphere of scientific or devotional inquiry. We can interpret and explore Scripture, just not in a way that contradicts what has been defined concerning it.
Remember that in Catholicism you aren’t deprived of your freedom, but freedom doesn’t mean “simply do as you wish” (unless you were willing to put forth that sinning is part of what makes one free, instead of what it truly is: imprisonment, making the self a slave). “The truth will set you free”, right? (John 8:32)
I see the reason why Jesus told us that we need to be like children though, trusting of our parents as we once were, trusting that what they say is for our own good and that they know better than us. That’s what one is asked to do when assenting to mother Church’s teachings: to trust that it’s for our good in obedience to our heavenly Father.
It’s ultimately humility and obedience (Jesus) vs. pride and disobedience (Adam).
You ask for solid teaching, the Catechism is a good start on what is taught by the Church. If there was something you specifically wanted to know if it was “questionable” you could post it and we could find out or work out the kinks in love and truth, not flame wars or finger pointing.
God bless you and may the Holy Spirit continue to guide you on your journey.
B
benidict
Guest
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?God bless you for that willingness to stay faithful despite being unable to assent.
John 6:63-69
…The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
But there are some of you who do not believe." Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him.
And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father.”
As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.
Jesus then said to the Twelve, “Do you also want to leave?”
Simon Peter answered him, "Master, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.
We have come to believe and are convinced that you are the Holy One of God."
Though I think it may have helped if you were open in discussing what it is you don’t agree with, I can understand not wanting to open that up because of the ensuing “battle” that may occur. Still, you’re seeking Truth instead of rejection of authority for your own. So keep praying as we’re all works in progress.
“Necessarily” hopefully implies that you aren’t closed off to the idea, just that you have your doubts. I wonder, then, what you think the Bible is and if God left no means of us knowing what He’s done for us throughout history.
Regardless, God bless you Ted.
B
benidict
Guest
Liraco-You ask for solid teaching, the Catechism is a good start on what is taught by the Church. If there was something you specifically wanted to know if it was “questionable” you could post it and we could find out or work out the kinks in love and truth, not flame wars or finger pointing.
ME-If only that were the case. Try it. I have been cussed out by my bretheren, Had my faith called into question, and I really think that is counter productive. my feelings really have not been hurt. I really dont have any. But I think perhaps there are people reading these threads who see this stuff, and are harmed by it. I cannot leave. I have no choice but to stay. I love the Church as a whole. Its not a religion to me, its a relationship. We are family, weather we like it or not. I dont really like what the liberals in our Church are teaching, and I really dont care for the ultra right either. in my opinon they are both wrong. even if they are correct in their views, they are seriously wrong in their approach, but both are no less Catholic. I accept them all. We are either ONE people or we are no better than the protestants, who keep fracturing. and fracturing, and…well, you get it. I would really love to see unity, And stop calling eachothers faith into question. Many suffer in silence. I dont like silence, and I dont like people hiding who they really are. Hopefully this thread has helped some people. Peace
ME-If only that were the case. Try it. I have been cussed out by my bretheren, Had my faith called into question, and I really think that is counter productive. my feelings really have not been hurt. I really dont have any. But I think perhaps there are people reading these threads who see this stuff, and are harmed by it. I cannot leave. I have no choice but to stay. I love the Church as a whole. Its not a religion to me, its a relationship. We are family, weather we like it or not. I dont really like what the liberals in our Church are teaching, and I really dont care for the ultra right either. in my opinon they are both wrong. even if they are correct in their views, they are seriously wrong in their approach, but both are no less Catholic. I accept them all. We are either ONE people or we are no better than the protestants, who keep fracturing. and fracturing, and…well, you get it. I would really love to see unity, And stop calling eachothers faith into question. Many suffer in silence. I dont like silence, and I dont like people hiding who they really are. Hopefully this thread has helped some people. Peace
A
Annabelle_Marie
Guest
You went through all that and you only found 2?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
I guess it would depend on if they are any of the precepts of the Church that you disagreed with. But what other denomination are you going to agree with everything on?But where are you going to find the Eucharist?
I don’t always agree with my husband (on a lot more then 2 points
) but that doesn’t me I’m going to divorce him…What do you mean you are not a real Catholic? Are you a plastic Catholic?
I know when I started this journey…I wasn’t sure how I felt about Mary…and maybe I’m still a little unsure…for other reasons…but I’m ok with that. I have time to learn, pray, discern. Its a life long, day by day process…no?
O
OrangeOwl
Guest
You are having trouble with Catholic doctrine or dogma, correct? As I mentioned in my earlier post, is this a voluntary doubt or involuntary doubt? I’m sure you are well familar with CCC 2087 through 2089, so I won’t bother citing them.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?
If you’re asking whether you can obstinately deny a Catholic doctrine, I don’t think you can — without being considered a heretic or something similar. On the other hand, if this is something you’re really struggling with, and is something rather like an involuntary reaction, I think any sin on your part would be mitigated. If you have some involuntary reservations, are you assenting to the Church’s view on the matter?
I’m sorry if this hasn’t been any help. But I don’t really see what else can be said on the issue. As far I can tell (and I’ll readily admit I’m no theologian), it’s a packaged deal.
If I’m wrong on any of this, don’t be afraid to let me know.
No, I don’t like silence, either.
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
Liraco,There is only one Truth, but you saw in that church how not having it fully can lead to grave error. The Catholic Church makes the claim to possess it fully because of its Apostolic Succession that leads right down to Jesus (as opposed to those whose origin you can point to a man like Luther or Calvin).
I imagine authority can be an issue for someone who came from a protestant background, but we’d do well to Remember Jesus’ words in Luke 10:16
“He who hears you hears me; whoever rejects you rejects me; but whoever rejects me rejects him who sent me.”
Not necessarily depending on what you mean by private interpretation. If by private interpretation it means that you are the ultimate word on what something means despite being contrary to what the Church has always taught then that indeed would be condemned, precisely to protect from error and schism. Example: denying the divinity of Jesus (Jehova’s witnesses). If there’s no* final* word, then how will you ever know the truth with so many conflicting interpretations out there?
The Church gives a LOT of leeway when it comes to reading scripture. It has defined very few passages to mean something specific and even then it doesn’t close off to other interpretations as long as they don’t contradict.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
The Magisterium of the Church
85 “The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ.” This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.
86 “Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith.”
87 Mindful of Christ’s words to his apostles: “He who hears you, hears me”, the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.
I think this article says it well: catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9806qq.asp
Exegetes and believers must not pit their private judgment against the mind of the Church or treat their methods as the ultimate arbiters of what Scripture can or cannot mean (this is what is meant by “private interpretation”). But that doesn’t mean that ordinary Catholics and Scripture scholars cannot use their intellects to probe the meaning of Scripture. Indeed, Scripture is so rich that even when a given passage has been connected authoritatively with a certain doctrine, that does not remove that passage from the sphere of scientific or devotional inquiry. We can interpret and explore Scripture, just not in a way that contradicts what has been defined concerning it.
Remember that in Catholicism you aren’t deprived of your freedom, but freedom doesn’t mean “simply do as you wish” (unless you were willing to put forth that sinning is part of what makes one free, instead of what it truly is: imprisonment, making the self a slave). “The truth will set you free”, right? (John 8:32)
I see the reason why Jesus told us that we need to be like children though, trusting of our parents as we once were, trusting that what they say is for our own good and that they know better than us. That’s what one is asked to do when assenting to mother Church’s teachings: to trust that it’s for our good in obedience to our heavenly Father.
It’s ultimately humility and obedience (Jesus) vs. pride and disobedience (Adam).
You ask for solid teaching, the Catechism is a good start on what is taught by the Church. If there was something you specifically wanted to know if it was “questionable” you could post it and we could find out or work out the kinks in love and truth, not flame wars or finger pointing.
God bless you and may the Holy Spirit continue to guide you on your journey.
Well said and with charity.
I appreciate that. Actually, I do have the Catholic Catechism and refer to it often. That’s not to say that I have read every word. As Benidict demonstrated, it is quite a substantial book.My mention of private interpretation is certainly not an attempt to ignore or refute Christian orthodoxy, such as the Trinity. I guess my point was that if I had not questioned the authority and teachings of Baptist ministers, I’d still be there and very much in the dark. Though I will say, before I started serious study; I had a specific moment, when I realized there was more to Christianity that what I had been taught. I prayed that God would lead me to His truth and not man’s truth about Him. I didn’t realize what a tough road lay ahead. I guess it’s true: we do have to be careful what we pray for.
Thanks so much for your comments,
Anna
B
benidict
Guest
Thank you for this, It is a very big help actually. These 2 issues are not something that are voluntary. I cant change my mind on these. Its not that I wouldnt, I cannot. It is a matter of conscience. and if put in a certain position, I would disobey Church teaching and follow through. I could do not other. I also could not confess, because I do not believe I would have sinned.Yet, if known I would face excomminication. This is purely hypothetical on my part, I have never been placed in this position, but If placed, I know for a fact, I would follow my conscience in one of these. The other, is not even on my radar as anything serious. But many people are dead set its mortal sin, even thought the Catechism itself never says that. Thank you, your post was very helpful indeed.
O
OrangeOwl
Guest
As far as I can tell, this can be acceptable.
This, on the other hand… might not be acceptable. It’s hard to know without any further details on the 2 issues. But I understand why you didn’t. I mean, look at how the thread I started got hijacked into an argument over the morality of homosexuality.
As with anything else of this nature, just best to consult a priest, I suppose, and he can tell you for sure where you stand with the Church. myself.] I don’t think you’ll get any further help here.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Pope Benedict XVI on the need for a renewal of the mind in St. Paul…a “recasting”…
an important read and good for fruitful meditation (keep reading past the intro…though do not skip it…cause it is very interesting …)
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20090628_chius-anno-paolino_en.html
an important read and good for fruitful meditation (keep reading past the intro…though do not skip it…cause it is very interesting …)
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20090628_chius-anno-paolino_en.html
S
Spirithound
Guest
Sorry if I’m branching off-topic, but would one or two of these issues be stemming from a utilitarian philosophy?
- Status