2 disagreements so im not a real Catholic?

[Elizabeth502]

When I hear people in CAF decrying folks as “Cafeteria Catholics” while they exalt themselves for perfectly following the Catholic lifestyle, I smell Pharisees. I read that stuff day in day out in here. It’s unhealthy to constantly feel the need to measure up to someone and feel people are “below” you not living up to the rules. There is so much judgemental stuff in here some days, it’s very Pharisaic. Some obsess about the lack of full Catholic obedience in some that it makes me wonder…

I agree that it’s easy to blur the line between reinforcing what the teaching is, and coming off as one who supposedly Has It All Figured Out. It’s easy for any of us to do that, including myself. But I really think that most posters do not feel that way, including those who reinforce teachings. No one here is a model of holiness, and I doubt most have deluded themselves into believing that.

I think the reason, gurney, that one sees so much of what you call Phariseeism, is a reaction. (And remember, the Pharisees of Jesus’ time were there merely to represent what authentic Torah-living was, to “hold the line.” It’s just that in their laudable attempt to hold the line, they sometimes artificially looked only at the line, and not what also was beneath the line.) Jesus didn’t want to discard the line; he wanted the line more deeply drawn, to be more inclusive and comprehensive, and he made that clear.

The situation we have in the Catholic Church, reinforced recently by Pope Benedict himself, is a long-standing neglect of catechesis. That is often reflected directly on CAF. The “judgment” that you see is not usually a judgment of spirituality or morality, but a correction of catechesis. Lots of Catholics, today, are mistaken on the teachings themselves. That has nothing to do with how responders claim or do not claim to be living those teachings themselves. There is a certain rigor in defense of knowledge that may be unfortunately translated into ‘self-righteousness,’ but for the most part, the intent is with regard to the information, not to insight into degree of personal righteousness – self or others.

Or at least, that’s how I see it.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

In either case I don’t think it’s our place to dwell on those who fall short and constantly talk about it. I don’t think we’re ever in a position to label everybody…

There is a huge difference between believing in 100% of what the Church teaches and following it 100% of the time. I am used to being called a Pharisee, mainly by those who have subjugated their faith to either their political or their secular beliefs.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Thanks for your thoughtful post, Elizabeth Happiest of Easters to you!!

I agree that it’s easy to blur the line between reinforcing what the teaching is, and coming off as one who supposedly Has It All Figured Out. It’s easy for any of us to do that, including myself. But I really think that most posters do not feel that way, including those who reinforce teachings. No one here is a model of holiness, and I doubt most have deluded themselves into believing that.

I think the reason, gurney, that one sees so much of what you call Phariseeism, is a reaction. (And remember, the Pharisees of Jesus’ time were there merely to represent what authentic Torah-living was, to “hold the line.” It’s just that in their laudable attempt to hold the line, they sometimes artificially looked only at the line, and not what also was beneath the line.) Jesus didn’t want to discard the line; he wanted the line more deeply drawn, to be more inclusive and comprehensive, and he made that clear.

The situation we have in the Catholic Church, reinforced recently by Pope Benedict himself, is a long-standing neglect of catechesis. That is often reflected directly on CAF. The “judgment” that you see is not usually a judgment of spirituality or morality, but a correction of catechesis. Lots of Catholics, today, are mistaken on the teachings themselves. That has nothing to do with how responders claim or do not claim to be living those teachings themselves. There is a certain rigor in defense of knowledge that may be unfortunately translated into ‘self-righteousness,’ but for the most part, the intent is with regard to the information, not to insight into degree of personal righteousness – self or others.

Or at least, that’s how I see it.

 

[Peepers]

Actually, priests with more experience are sometimes quite compassionate because they have been through the fires of pastoral experience and are able to see with a balanced eye, despite not having been married. They have witnessed many live biographies in their own parishes, which have taught them that life, including married life, is complex. They have themselves lived long enough to suffer and therefore to develop compassion for others. It is true that levels of empathy do vary, but with no more pattern as to age of entry into priesthood than there are patterns of empathy among non-priests.

Usually, when Catholics seek out priestly advice, they choose priests they are already somewhat acquainted with through some connection, and therefore have an idea about the priest’s listening skills, and/or have observed a sensitive ear in that priest by listening to many of his homilies, etc. Occasionally there can be the disconnect of a priest who is very warm and perceptive in his homilies (& delivery) but extraordinarily cold and non-receptive in person, but that is a great exception.

In any case, probably the OP won’t be approaching a random stranger priest to get his questions answered.

Every priest is different. I don’t know how serious the OP’s difference with the Catechism is, but I know one priest, anyway, who is now a former priest because he believed that the Church’s teachings in some areas are actually immoral. He had left the Catholic Church and was a priest in the “Liberal Catholic Church” when I met him. I have lost track of him, now. It is not always so easy as simply submitting to a higher authority, if the issue is heartfelt and is issue of conscience. Life experience come in all forms, and I appreciate the benefit of advice from those who have experienced more than I. I am also wary of those who have simply lived a long time, and have not continued to grow and gain insight in that time, but think that gray hair gives them gravitas and authority. I have met all types.

 

[benidict]

Abortion
Tubal ligation
Being silent in church??
How many women’s issues are there?
Are you aware of the principle of double effect?

I wont lie my dear friend. Im dumber than a box of rocks! I dont have a college degree. I graduated from the schools of hard knocks and common sense. Please enlighten me on the principle of double effect. I love to learn. Ive learned some new terms and avenues of approach since this thread started. even some differrent forms of philosophy to start studying. I rely on those lie you and Elizabeth who are educated to educate me on quite a number of areas. I appreciate your time and efforts. God bless all of you and Happy Easter! He is Risen!

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

You are NOT dumber than a box of rocks. Not all college graduates are intellectual titans. I work with some teachers that have a serious IQ and common sense deficit that you can’t believe! I work with a guy so lacking in IQ, you’d be surprised he has a pulse and he has a Master’s Degree!

Don’t be so hard on yourself…

I wont lie my dear friend. Im dumber than a box of rocks! I dont have a college degree. I graduated from the schools of hard knocks and common sense. Please enlighten me on the principle of double effect. I love to learn. Ive learned some new terms and avenues of approach since this thread started. even some differrent forms of philosophy to start studying. I rely on those lie you and Elizabeth who are educated to educate me on quite a number of areas. I appreciate your time and efforts. God bless all of you and Happy Easter! He is Risen!

 

[benidict]

You are NOT dumber than a box of rocks. Not all college graduates are intellectual titans. I work with some teachers that have a serious IQ and common sense deficit that you can’t believe! I work with a guy so lacking in IQ, you’d be surprised he has a pulse and he has a Master’s Degree!

Don’t be so hard on yourself…

Its funny my brother, but for a series of Strange unexplained events and visions, Id be Jewish right now. I get their thought process much better than the western mind set. I was heading that way, until I was hijacked by the Blessed Mother… I stil seem to have retained more their way of looking at things. They in many areas make much more sense. I love my Jewish Brothers and Sisters! Im a gentile with more of a Middle Eastern mind set! How does that happen? I have not only not shed it since my conversion to Catholicism, It has been an intrigal part of my processing morality, and the Christian faith. It has drawn me closer and given me more understanding of my faith in Christ. He is after all, Jewish. So were the apostles for that matter. I guess sometimes that thought process conflicts with the Churches teachings. Possible?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

gurney

When I hear people in CAF decrying folks as “Cafeteria Catholics” while they exalt themselves for perfectly following the Catholic lifestyle, I smell Pharisees. I read that stuff day in day out in here. It’s unhealthy to constantly feel the need to measure up to someone and feel people are “below” you not living up to the rules. There is so much judgemental stuff in here some days, it’s very Pharisaic. Some obsess about the lack of full Catholic obedience in some that it makes me wonder…

Here’s the paradox I wonder about:

How does one take Pharisees to task for being judgmental without being a Pharisee?

 

[benidict]

gurney

When I hear people in CAF decrying folks as “Cafeteria Catholics” while they exalt themselves for perfectly following the Catholic lifestyle, I smell Pharisees. I read that stuff day in day out in here. It’s unhealthy to constantly feel the need to measure up to someone and feel people are “below” you not living up to the rules. There is so much judgemental stuff in here some days, it’s very Pharisaic. Some obsess about the lack of full Catholic obedience in some that it makes me wonder…

Here’s the paradox I wonder about:

How does one take Pharisees to task for being judgmental without being a Pharisee?

Paul had no problems calling them out. He saved his harshest critisisms for those that wanted to mandate circumcision. Again, if the shoe fits wear it. If not toss it back in the closet. Happy Easter my Friend!

 

[Peepers]

Paul had no problems calling them out. He saved his harshest critisisms for those that wanted to mandate circumcision. Again, if the shoe fits wear it. If not toss it back in the closet. Happy Easter my Friend!

Paul… Yes, he had a lot to say about other people. If I could go fishing with one of them, it would be John.

 

[Elizabeth502]

It is not always so easy as simply submitting to a higher authority, if the issue is heartfelt and is issue of conscience.

Why would you think that anyone such as myself, or the many others here who are also lifelong Catholics – would think that “submitting to a higher authority” is “easy”?

I don’t understand where some of your assumptions arise (Catholics believe that struggles with conscience are “easy” to resolve; priests who entered the priesthood before a lot of lay experience lack empathy, etc.)

Most priests actually do get it. Most have either listened to those struggles, and not just in the confessional, but among brother priests who struggle with a number of personal issues and teachings. Or they have suffered through struggles with conscience themselves, or struggles pastorally – such as having to explain a difficult teaching, regardless of how vigorously they do or do not support such teaching, to a lay person who feels very burdened by that.

You talk as if the priesthood were just an isolated, sheltered, protected walk in the park. It very much is not, and certainly not these days. (The active priesthood, especially the diocesan priesthood.) A priest who has committed deeply to his pastoral responsibilities tends to see much more in the way of negativity & struggle (i.e., The Cross) than the average layperson does. Fr. Mark Riccardo (I forget which diocese) said on EWTN that priests refer to themselves as The Garbage Men because of everything that gets dumped on them, but which just comes with the job.

That said, it certainly is not necessarily easy to find a priest, or more than one, with whom a real rapport is there – but OTOH, we have to give each priest an opportunity to know us. The casual & brief encounters we tend to have with parish priests are not a foundation for a real relationship, and like other people, they can be stand-offish until some real communication is allowed to happen. I know that at one parish I attend, the priests really, really want to know the parishioners. They want to know names; they want to know background & current concerns, so that they can relate well.

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

Paul… Yes, he had a lot to say about other people. If I could go fishing with one of them, it would be John.

Wouldn’t Peter be the better fisherman? He could give you pointers.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

It’s downright paradoxical dang it!

gurney

When I hear people in CAF decrying folks as “Cafeteria Catholics” while they exalt themselves for perfectly following the Catholic lifestyle, I smell Pharisees. I read that stuff day in day out in here. It’s unhealthy to constantly feel the need to measure up to someone and feel people are “below” you not living up to the rules. There is so much judgemental stuff in here some days, it’s very Pharisaic. Some obsess about the lack of full Catholic obedience in some that it makes me wonder…

Here’s the paradox I wonder about:

How does one take Pharisees to task for being judgmental without being a Pharisee?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

I would also have picked Peter. I’d really want to know the lowdown about Paul!

 

[estesbob]

gurney

When I hear people in CAF decrying folks as “Cafeteria Catholics” while they exalt themselves for perfectly following the Catholic lifestyle, I smell Pharisees. I read that stuff day in day out in here. It’s unhealthy to constantly feel the need to measure up to someone and feel people are “below” you not living up to the rules. There is so much judgemental stuff in here some days, it’s very Pharisaic. Some obsess about the lack of full Catholic obedience in some that it makes me wonder…

Here’s the paradox I wonder about:

How does one take Pharisees to task for being judgmental without being a Pharisee?

In CAF the term Pharisee is like the term “hompophobe” or “Politically Correct” Its sole function is to try and shut the discussion down or at least derail the thread. It is used almost axclusively by those who have rejected Church teaching and resent perople pointing it out to them. I am always very pleased to be called a Pharisee-it means i have made them think.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

That’s not true, bob. Some people just don’t think it’s our job, any of ours, to critique a person’s Catholicity and desgrees of being “okay.” It’s not an attempt to derail a thread but perhaps a disagreement with you or other poster. People disagree. It happens. And I have said and will continue to say that I don’t think it’s healthy for us to behave as a committee that analyzes with a litmus test how Catholic someone is. It’s not my job. That doesn’t make one a derailer or a person who has rejected the Church.

I’m sure in Jesus’s time the Pharisees saw him as a derailer. He healed and preached on the Sabbath. By the litmus test of his day, he was considered a bum by the Pharisees. That is why the term comes up. Jesus didn’t like them doing it. I’m sure He wouldn’t enjoy us doing it. Maybe we should leave it up to God to decide in the end. The first will be last and the last will be first…

In CAF the term Pharisee is like the term “hompophobe” or “Politically Correct” Its sole function is to try and shut the discussion down or at least derail the thread. It is used almost axclusively by those who have rejected Church teaching and resent perople pointing it out to them. I am always very pleased to be called a Pharisee-it means i have made them think.

 

[Spirithound]

I wont lie my dear friend. Im dumber than a box of rocks! I dont have a college degree. I graduated from the schools of hard knocks and common sense. Please enlighten me on the principle of double effect. I love to learn. Ive learned some new terms and avenues of approach since this thread started. even some differrent forms of philosophy to start studying. I rely on those lie you and Elizabeth who are educated to educate me on quite a number of areas. I appreciate your time and efforts. God bless all of you and Happy Easter! He is Risen!

Alleluia! He is Risen as He said He would!!
I also cannot believe that you are dumber than a box of rocks. As I have perceived, you are quite articulate, which takes intelligence.

The Principle of Double Effect can be invoked to allow an action that has a foreseen, but unintended bad effect, provided several criteria are met.

1. A good effect must also occur.
   An action which only has bad effects is a bad action.
2. The nature of the act itself must be either good or neutral.
   An action which is in itself immoral is always immoral, regardless of intention or circumstances or effects.
3. The bad effect must not be the means by which the good effect occurs.
   The ends do not justify the means.
4. The agent’s intention must be only to cause the good effect.
   This is an important philosophical point. Even though the bad effect is foreseen, it is not actually intended. The agent must have as his mindset that if it were possible to avoid the bad effect, he would.
5. The good effect must be at least equal in importance to the bad effect.
   Prudence is required.

An application: sterilization.

A woman has ovarian cancer, so her doctor tells her the only cure is to remove her ovaries. This would sterilize her, which seems to be against Church teaching.

But first, a good thing will result, namely that the woman will have a better chance of overcoming the disease.

Second, the act itself is surgery, which is neutral (surgery can be misused, so it’s not inherently good).

In the third criterion, it may at first seem that the cause of her surviving is her sterilization, but no; sterilization is in fact a result of removing the diseased body part, which just happens to be the ovaries.

Fourth, it must be both the doctor’s and the woman’s intention to be rid of the cancer, not to become sterile.

Fifth, a life without ovaries is certainly better than death by cancer.

Through this process, the Principle of Double Effect allows the removal of the ovaries to beat cancer.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Pretty tough to argue against that logic…

Fifth, a life without ovaries is certainly better than death by cancer.

 

[benedictus2]

First and formost. Rome holds the truth. I would not leave Rome. Or the Catholic Church. I will keep my mouth shut. I love the Holy Church. I love Rome. There is a huge difference from me, and those that would start their own denominations. Im not a rebel, and I would not start another group. If Rome is false, then Chrsitianity is false, and I would convert to Judaism in a heartbeat. There is no in between. Peace Oh, and we are not floundering. We are winning. I know. I live around the globe. Catholicism is the truth. and the world knows this.

:clapping::clapping::clapping:

Hi B1,

I think it is good that you stuck to the question of this thread.

From what you have written, you struggle with two questions about Church teaching and wonder whether disagreeing with them makes you not Catholic. Since you love the Church so much, then I would say that the only way is to accept her teaching with your will even if you cannot accept it with your intellect.

I mean, take for example the Eucharist which you love. I don’t think that intellectually you can really explain how that bread is suddenly Jesus when it appears to remain just that - bread. That is a harder thing to apprehend mentally than whatever else you may be struggling with. Since you say that the Church is the true Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, then she would have been guided toward this two teachings as well.

For your peace of mind though and to get some clarity about these two things that you are disagreeing with, I would suggest starting two different threads on these and perhaps other can help shed some light on the matter for you.

Happy Easter! May the Peace and Joy of the Risen Christ be with you, your family, friends and those with you in the battlefield. [sign]Alleluia[/sign]

**B2 **

 

[E.E.N.S]

In CAF the term Pharisee is like the term “hompophobe” or “Politically Correct” Its sole function is to try and shut the discussion down or at least derail the thread. It is used almost exclusively by those who have rejected Church teaching and resent people pointing it out to them. I am always very pleased to be called a Pharisee-it means i have made them think.

People seem to forget that instructing the ignorant and admonishing the sinner are both works of mercy.

Benedict, you have admitted that the Church is who she says she is, so you should know that she has the authority to bind and loose. Also, by your own admission, one of the issues you have is a “biggy”…so given that it is something that the Church would say is necessary to be believed and assented to, then you should know that in the very least you tread on dangerous ground by not giving your assent to [insert “biggy” issue here]. Now, having your brothers and sisters in Christ admonishing you on this issue is not to be taken as an insult, or an “I holier than thou” approach, but rather as a work of mercy, like a doctor telling you to cut back on the sodium when you have high cholesterol.

Side note: If you think the Church is wrong on this issue, then perhaps you don’t fully understand/believe who the Church actually is, no? That would make the most sense to me anyway, for if Jesus was standing in front of you telling you that you must assent to [insert “biggy” issue here], I am assuming you would, correct?