The one thing I would say is that perhaps this isn’t the best place to really gain an understanding of the dissenting position (dissenters, interestingly, was an early name for Presbyterians!). There are not a lot of them here. And they tend not to be very open about their position (the thread which sparked this one disappeared). Not a single one has posted on this thread.
Yeh, you’re right. Soooo, I guess I will have to read that book!
So to say, as a group of Conservative Catholics, ‘this is our conclusion on the dissenting position’ would be a little like a Presbyterian saying ‘this is my view of Catholicism’ having only listened to other Presbyterian’s views, the views of Presbyterians who’ve met a few Catholics, and a few Presbyterians who’ve converted from Catholicism. You’d probably recommend that to REALLY understand Catholicism, it might be an idea to really spend some time among Catholics.
Yep, good point.
Why do you think they’re missing? I can completely understand “questioning” the Church and to fully admit that that is where someone finds themselves - I can respect that. But it is difficult to engage in a conversation with someone who says this “organization” is wrong on xyz without backing up their position. I say “Please give me something other than sentiments to establish your position.”
I’m a teacher and one of my “pets” is critical thinking (the other is media literacy). So, when I encourage someone to “back up their statement,” I ask for reasons why their statement is correct. Is it based on fact or emotion. For example, if someone says “same-sex marriage is wrong” - is it because they feel it should be because…well because “it just is?” or do they have proof that harm is being caused, do they have information about what the Word of God has to say about it (from a Christian persepctive), do they have resources about what the Catholic Church says (from a Catholic perspective). And if you agree with same-sex marriage and identify yourself Catholic, well then prove to me where the Catholic Church supports you in your position.
For all intents and purposes, this thread was really meant to create a dialogue about thinking about how we think and why we think what we do. In teaching, we use a process called metacognition (very roughly stated “knowing how we know/learn/think”). So often people (other than for reasons of ignorance or apathy) dissent without really thinking
why they believe what they do.
Whenever I’m in a conversation with someone and someone challenges me, it forces me to think how I came to that conclusion. I love that kind of deductive thinking.
Down through history we have people who dissented to one authority, because of being obedient to a higher authority - Bonhoeffer for example, or Martin Luther King.
But in the case of Luther, look at the** fruits** of his dissent. Hundreds of demoninations and many who are no longer even faithful to Luther’s vision. I think one really has to think, does my willful and vocal dissent really build up the Church that Christ left.
The question is, disobedient to what?
Obedient to who? Really good question. I’m going to save that one for another post. Gotta run…
We often compare our relationship with God to parent and child, and rightly so! However, when we enter into a relationship with God, we also enter into a covenant (like marriage), one that requires fidelity (as one example). God always upholds his end of the covenant, and He, through the Church (- which “binds” and “looses”, interprets scripture, etc.) has left us a pretty good framework of what is required of us. Thankfully, when we fail (sin), He forgives us.