An embarrassing question

[packermann]

What about all the brilliant non-Catholic thinkers? What about Einstein, Socrates, Adam Smith, Bohr, Locke, Kant, Fleming, Darwin, CS Lewis, and Feynman just to name a few?

CS Lewis was anglo-Catholic. And the writer who most influenced him was GK Chesteron, a Catholic.

I never said that there no brilliant non-Catholic thinkers. But frankly, I cannot be impressed with many on your list. Einstein was brilliant in science but a terrible ethicist. He wrote to the President to build the atom bomb, which he later regreted. Adam Smith is considered the “father of economics”, but economics was actually practiced in the Middle Ages by Catholic monks. Anyway, whereas Smith saw no pitfalls with capitalism, the Catholic Church correctly does. Read Darwin’s The Descent of Man to see how “brilliant” he was. He taught the survival of the fittest, and taught along with his cousin that we should let the unfit die off so that man would would evolve into a superman. Locke was an anti-Catholic during the Enlightenment, which influenced the bloodbath during the French Revolution. Kant was the ultimate skeptic, questioning even the validity of science.

Socrates was brilliant, I give you that. But he believed in absolute truth. Anway, he lived before Christ, and the early Church Fathers taught that God in His mercy revealed some of His truth to the pre-Christian philosphers.

I don’t want to hijack this thread, but I will say that being Catholic doesn’t mean that you cease to think for yourself. It’s blind obedience to religion that leads to things like the Crusades.

Of course we still think. But we do not think on whether or not we will accept the Church’s teaching. Instead, we think on how to implement the Church’s teachings.

The Crusades were mostly defensive. They were organized for the purpose of defending Christians doing pilgrimages to the holy land. True, the Crusader did sack Constantaninople, but this was condemned by the pope as soon he heard of it. So the problem with Crusaders was that they did not not blindly obey the pope. Ig they had blindly obeyed the pope, they would have left Constantaninople alone.

Even the Catechism states that “(Man) must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.”

There is a difference between “blind obedience” and “force obedience”. Blind obedience can still be voluntary. The Catechism
in this text is condemning only forced obedience.

Catholic philosophy and theology is constantly being refined. (Not changed, but refined). If everyone had the view that one shouldn’t question or think about Catholic teaching at all, than our understanding of God would be stagnant.

Sure, we can refine and question things. But when the Catholic Church officially defines a dogma or a point of morality, it should no longer be open to discussion for the obedient Catholic, unless the discussion is merely to understand the Church’s position and not to question whether the Church is right.

Anniegirl is doing the right thing: she has a different view than the church does, so she is questioning and investigating the Church’s teaching so that she can hopefully refine her view and understanding of the issue.

Anniegirl should question this one thing - is the Catholic Church the pillar and foundation of truth? Is this the entity that Christ promised that the Holy Spirit will guide into all the truth? She should ask these questions with her eyes fully opened. But if she comes to the conclusion that, yes, the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ to be the pillar and foundation of truth, then anything that the Church officially teaches should be obeyed without question. If she comes to the conclusion that no, the Church is not the pillar and foundation of truth. Then she should be true to herself and become a Protestant.

 

[Awake]

CS Lewis was anglo-Catholic. And the writer who most influenced him was GK Chesteron, a Catholic.

Well, he still wasn’t a Roman Catholic.

I never said that there no brilliant non-Catholic thinkers. But frankly, I cannot be impressed with many on your list. Einstein was brilliant in science but a terrible ethicist. He wrote to the President to build the atom bomb, which he later regreted. Adam Smith is considered the “father of economics”, but economics was actually practiced in the Middle Ages by Catholic monks. Anyway, whereas Smith saw no pitfalls with capitalism, the Catholic Church correctly does. Read Darwin’s The Descent of Man to see how “brilliant” he was. He taught the survival of the fittest, and taught along with his cousin that we should let the unfit die off so that man would would evolve into a superman. Locke was an anti-Catholic during the Enlightenment, which influenced the bloodbath during the French Revolution. Kant was the ultimate skeptic, questioning even the validity of science.

Socrates was brilliant, I give you that. But he believed in absolute truth. Anway, he lived before Christ, and the early Church Fathers taught that God in His mercy revealed some of His truth to the pre-Christian philosphers.

I find it sad that so many Catholics have the view that if something isn’t Catholic, it isn’t any good. All of the people I listed were brilliant thinkers, even if you don’t agree with what they had to say. You seem to be too busy picking apart their lives than appreciating the contributions they have made.

Of course we still think. But we do not think on whether or not we will accept the Church’s teaching. Instead, we think on how to implement the Church’s teachings.

The Crusades were mostly defensive. They were organized for the purpose of defending Christians doing pilgrimages to the holy land. True, the Crusader did sack Constantaninople, but this was condemned by the pope as soon he heard of it. So the problem with Crusaders was that they did not not blindly obey the pope. Ig they had blindly obeyed the pope, they would have left Constantaninople alone.

There is a difference between “blind obedience” and “force obedience”. Blind obedience can still be voluntary. The Catechism
in this text is condemning only forced obedience.

Sure, we can refine and question things. But when the Catholic Church officially defines a dogma or a point of morality, it should no longer be open to discussion for the obedient Catholic, unless the discussion is merely to understand the Church’s position and not to question whether the Church is right.

Packerman, do you actually believe all of this?

Anniegirl should question this one thing - is the Catholic Church the pillar and foundation of truth? Is this the entity that Christ promised that the Holy Spirit will guide into all the truth? She should ask these questions with her eyes fully opened. But if she comes to the conclusion that, yes, the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ to be the pillar and foundation of truth, then anything that the Church officially teaches should be obeyed without question. If she comes to the conclusion that no, the Church is not the pillar and foundation of truth. Then she should be true to herself and become a Protestant.

Not everybody is at that point yet. Even those faithful to the church question the church’s teachings in order to get a better understanding.

 

[Awake]

Anniegirl, sorry I’ve hijacked this thread. I hope this gets back on track to your original question.

 

[onetimeposter]

It’s a mortal sin because that’s what Holy Mother Church teaches. Leave the thinking to the spiritual fathers, doctors and intellectuals. Your opinion is hardly better than two thousand years of sacred tradition. Stop rationalizing your sin and obey the truth as it has been revealed.

That’s a great explanation!

Your a Catholic, thinking is not allowed and do what your told!

 

[jmcrae]

Is masturbation a mortal sin? If so, why? I’m confused because I know one of the criteria for a sin to be mortal is that it involves grave matter. While I think it is one of the worse venial sins, I really don’t see how it involves grave matter. Can someone explain?

Annie, you are very, very precious. You were created in the image and likeness of God. (See Genesis 1:26-27)

Not only is your soul precious, and your spirit, but also your body. Your body was lovingly created by God in all its details. (See Psalm 139)

God gave you your sexuality as a gift to be shared with a husband some day in the future, or else to give back to Him in the gift of yourself to the religious life (in a convent) or the single life (in the world).

Masturbation is a misuse of God’s gift to you of your sexuality. Instead of being an act of sharing, it’s an act of selfishness. Furthermore, it injures your ability to share love and friendship with others.

Indeed, often people who have this bad habit have a difficult time forming friendships, because of the damage that this habit does to their ability to love others. Sometimes, it is also a sign that something has gone wrong in the past - for example, maybe the person was sexually abused at a young age. No matter what the reason is, the person will not begin to get well again, until they stop the habit of masturbation.

 

[Archus]

well, from my experience, being a Catholic doesn’t make you a saint, it simply says “I am a sinner, and I don’t want to be anymore.”

All in all, masturbation is something we cannot ignore. What we must do however, is love each other, as we love ourselves. The golden rule of Christianity, of any denomination, is to do unto others, as they would do unto you. This above all means respect, and respect is a form of love.

We must respect ourselves. We are a people of love, and in so doing any act can be made holy and sex is made holy by the intimate union of a married couple. But masturbation degrades that sanctity, that love that must be shared. Masturbation, by its very nature is a solitary act, and is not giving of others. In fact, it does the opposite. It draws us away from others and draws us inward, ourselves being focused on fantasies and versions of people that do not exist. We degrade those people to mere objects and if we were to encounter them in the street, our view of them may interrupt the truth of who they are, and that is insulting to their person.

Yes, masturbation is pleasurable. It is designed to be. Such… releases, are meant to give us pleasure. It is not wrong that they do. However, they must be given freely with our spouse and they must be built upon in love. It is thus that in the midst of this giving pleasure, of this uniting love that the greatest gift is given: life itself.

Masturbation prohibits these things from occuring. It negates the gift of life, and it negates a responsibility that is given to the married couple.

There’s my two cents, at any rate.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I totally disagree. Please read my previous post. The Catholic Church has historical transended above the fads of certain times to give us timeless truths. When the whole world was into slavery in the 1800’s, Church condemned slavery as sin. When all the Europeans were excited about entering Word War I, the Church was against it. When eugenics (forcing certain people to be sterilized in order to build a master race) was popular before Word War II, the Church condemned it. The Church go against the trend of the world, and history would then show that the Church was right and the world was wrong.

You missed my point. The biological urges of a twenty year old, are driven by hormones, not fad, or culture. This is a biological reality and the sooner you understand it, the better you can handle it.

At 57 years of age, I can assure all you young Catholic males, that over coming the temptation to masturbate, gets easier with age. It has little to do with being more holy, more wise, or having a better understanding of the explanation given by the Church, on why it is evil. It has more than anything else to do with biology. Old men by nature, do not need to create new life and therefor, sexual urges diminish. Its the reality of life.

That being said, it doesn’t take away that the ideal path to holiness,which includes living a chaste life. Living a chaste life also requires a healthy understanding on sex, and avoiding those things which trigger hormones to go into action. In other words, stay away from the things that bring sexual desires to a point that you can’t control them.

If you have the chance, talk to a priest about what is the most often confessed sin among young males.

Jim