Bound to believe.....?

[peso73]

I am posting this on this forum 'cos I don’t really want the advice of non-believers…well you all know the church requires us to believe certain things. How can we believe certain things if we just don’t believe them? For example, NFP not being sinful, but contracepting a mortal sin that would send one to H-E-double hockey sticks if not repented of…I know the arguements…I understand the church’s teaching on the sex act and it’s proper and holy expression and why, etc, but truly I feel people using NFP are doing so for the same reason as folks contracept, to control the number of kids they have, for a plethora of very very good reasons…I know because of the church’s teaching, some may reiterate the points as a response, I know the arguments and appreciate their validity if I were a millionaire, but I don’t know… I don’t think it is a sin to not end every sex act with one’s wife in a way facilitaing baby making…I just think it’s crazy to expect everyone to have as many babies as God gives them. I know myself, I’d have to move to the ghetto or something to afford a truckload of kids, nevermind feeding them healthy food, etc…I don’t mean the topic of this thread to be NFP or contraception related specifically, that was just an example.
Another might be, oh, I don’t know…ok, I am not really pro-gay by any means, but I just don’t buy that all gay people choose to be gay from some deep perverse urge or even that they really should have to be eternally condemned for doing the same things we do, I know it is disturbing to think about to most of us straight people, but what if you just weren’t attracted to the opposite sex? You have to go throught life celibate or go to hell. Great choices…I don’t know if those are good examples or not, and I try to follow the church’s teachings, even if I don’t agree, but what are we supposed do if we really don’t believe in certain teachings or whatnot? One cannot FORCE one’s self to believe something.
One can choose to follow the teaching for fear of Judgement because that is what the church teaches, but that is not enough, is it? Aren’t we REQUIRED to believe certain things? What if we can’t? Are we damned?

 

[cam100]

… I don’t think it is a sin to not end every sex act with one’s wife in a way facilitaing baby making…I just think it’s crazy to expect everyone to have as many babies as God gives them.

I just don’t buy that all gay people choose to be gay from some deep perverse urge…

First, it seems you have some misunderstandings about what the Church teaches on these matters. As you said, this thread is not about those topics specifically, but I urge to research what the Church actually teaches about these.

One cannot FORCE one’s self to believe something.

Why not? Belief is not an emotion. It is an act of the will. If you trust the source, you can certainly force yourself to believe what the source tells you – it is only logical. It seems your issue is that you don’t trust the source. If you trust the source, you believe what it tells you, right?

One can choose to follow the teaching for fear of Judgement because that is what the church teaches, but that is not enough, is it? Aren’t we REQUIRED to believe certain things? What if we can’t? Are we damned?

If you believe that God came to earth and founded a Church and gave it the authority to interpret and explain His word, then why wouldn’t you believe what the Church teaches? You are presumably trying to get to God’s heaven. God gave us the Church to guide us to His heaven. We may not understand everything that comes from God through His Church, but we can certainly believe it. You don’t have to understand something to believe. How many scientific theories do you believe but not fully understand?

 

[richardwy]

How can we believe certain things if we just don’t believe them?

2 things: faith and reason. Few people I know reason well. They’re off on the facts and their conclusions don’t follow.

Facts are easy to run down compared to learning to reason well. St. Thomas Aquinas is my friend on that score. And I’m willing to do whatever necessary to learn to reason aright.

Regarding faith, reason doesn’t cover all the bases because mysteries exist. I ask for faith. God has never denied me. It’s what I asked from God’s Church when I joined. Holy Mother Church has never denied me either.

 

[FrRJBoyd]

This was subject actually a large part of my homily a couple of weeks ago. What do you do if you just can’t see why a certain Church teaching is right? I mentioned the two issues you brought up --artificial birth control and homosexuality-- but there are many more, including divorce and re-marriage, and reserving Ordination to men alone. I think the answer is humility. We have to acknowledge that, because of the effects of original sin and our own sins, our intellects are all clouded to some degree; that is, we do not always see the truth as clearly as we should. We are fallible and finite creatures. We know, however, that God sees things as they really are, and that he has infallibly communicated certain truths to Holy Mother Church for the sake of our salvation. We don’t have to necessarily have great feeling for accepting a teaching of the Church that is irreformable and part of the infallible teachings of the ordinary magisterium (and all of these issues fall into this category). Rather, we have to assent intellectually to the fact that the Church can see something that we may not personally see, because She sees with the eyes of Christ, and therefore, we accept it and seek to follow it in our moral lives.

BTW, the Church does not teach that NFP can be used without grave reason, such as health or the spacing of children. If used without such a grave reason, it, too, is sinful.

God bless,

Fr. Boyd

 

[HelenRose]

One can choose to follow the teaching for fear of Judgement because that is what the church teaches, but that is not enough, is it? Aren’t we REQUIRED to believe certain things? What if we can’t? Are we damned?

I believe that we are required to search for truth in integrity and love (deliberate ignorance is not an excuse.) Before you can believe you have to know what is taught and why. One can not believe or disbelieve something they know nothing about.

My advice is to begin a thorough study of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. This will answer many of your questions. Underline the precepts in the CCC that you do agree with. You may be surprised at how much you do believe.

 

[peso73]

Thanks everyone for your thoughtful answers. I know the church teaching re: gays and contraception, and it’s true that if one is gay they are called to total celibacy, and while I just thank God I am straight so I don’t have to deal with that one personally, it seems pretty cruel. It’s not so much I don’t understand these teachings, but if one thinks about that fact that NFP is for the purpose to “plan” one’s “family” and any married catholic couple utilizing NFP is trying to be able to have sex with each other while at the same time, not be forced into food stamps and ghettos, or whatnot, by having big ole families, which despite the statistic of 99% effectiveness when done correctly, everyone knows is not as effective as artificial contraception, and if there are some pills that are abortifacient (?spelling?) and perhaps some not, as I have read, thought I can’t cite sources, it seems the goal being the same, to not have baby upon baby like that scene in Monty Python’s “The Meaning Of Life”, is quite reasonable. That being said, I do see the point of Fr. Boyd’s response, and the wisdom of it, it’s kind of like when I was younger and first decided to consider what our faith had to say, against the teen and early twenties opinion I held of “thinking for yourself”, I realized that “thinking for myself” had got me nowhere fast and perhaps thousands of years of wisdom, (including the O.T. years) may have realized a better way with the help of GOD, as opposed to my little 20 whatever years of tiny life experiance…I still don’t see how one can force one’s self to intellectually believe something by an act of the will or by a decision, and I guess perhaps that is the real issue, trust in the source. (see my poll of doubters post) I guess I’ll just keep praying…

 

[LilyM]

Thanks everyone for your thoughtful answers. I know the church teaching re: gays and contraception, and it’s true that if one is gay they are called to total celibacy, and while I just thank God I am straight so I don’t have to deal with that one personally, it seems pretty cruel. It’s not so much I don’t understand these teachings, but if one thinks about that fact that NFP is for the purpose to “plan” one’s “family” and any married catholic couple utilizing NFP is trying to be able to have sex with each other while at the same time, not be forced into food stamps and ghettos, or whatnot, by having big ole families, which despite the statistic of 99% effectiveness when done correctly, everyone knows is not as effective as artificial contraception, and if there are some pills that are abortifacient (?spelling?) and perhaps some not, as I have read, thought I can’t cite sources, it seems the goal being the same, to not have baby upon baby like that scene in Monty Python’s “The Meaning Of Life”, is quite reasonable. That being said, I do see the point of Fr. Boyd’s response, and the wisdom of it, it’s kind of like when I was younger and first decided to consider what our faith had to say, against the teen and early twenties opinion I held of “thinking for yourself”, I realized that “thinking for myself” had got me nowhere fast and perhaps thousands of years of wisdom, (including the O.T. years) may have realized a better way with the help of GOD, as opposed to my little 20 whatever years of tiny life experiance…I still don’t see how one can force one’s self to intellectually believe something by an act of the will or by a decision, and I guess perhaps that is the real issue, trust in the source. (see my poll of doubters post) I guess I’ll just keep praying…

Firstly - it’s entirely possible, the church itself teaches us, to use NFP selfishly and for the wrong reasons and to do so is just as sinful as using ABC. Sometimes, however, it’s the way you go about doing something that counts as much as the end of those actions. Family planning is one of the cases where the means matter as much as the ends.

As an example of what I mean, I need money to live, pay my bills, etc. The ethical way to achieve this is by working at an honest job and getting paid. The unethical way is by an unethical job (ie prostitution or drug dealing) or crime such as robbing banks or killing people for their money. In these cases the end of obtaining money to pay my bills is just fine, it’s the way I achieve that end that is the problem.

Same with Family planning. Spacing children out, if you’ve got good reason to do so, isn’t the problem. It’s employing means that are outside of God’s natural design that is the no-no. Since He made women naturally infertile for certain periods of time and yet still able to have sex, merely restricting sex to those infertile times isn’t in itself the problem. It’s because ABC goes well above and beyond how God intended us to control fertility that it is an issue.

 

[peso73]

…yes, I understand that using the man-made device (the means outside God’s natural design) as opposed to not is the reason the church’s teaching, but the purpose is the same, or at least could be for those married couples trying to space out births for good reasons, right, so why is that the case when it comes to family planning, but not for any other medical stuff? If someone was born let’s say, with a physical abnormality that caused them great emotional and psychological damage, I believe the church does not say it is a sin to correct the abnormality, right? But there are a very large amount of folks born with abnormalities that would fit into this catagory, aparently part of God’s natural design for whatever reason. I don’t know if that is a perfect analogy, but in a sense it could be as both having too many babies for one’s financial or emotional capabilites could be greatly emotionally and psychologically damaging as well, and yet the man-made method of birth control is deemed sinful, yet taking advantage of modern day technology regarding other things perhaps like my example, is allowed…but I understand the idea behind the rule, the two purposes of sex within marriage, unitive and procreative, and how if they are separated, it can lead to, or becomes, a disordered expression of God’s gift of sexuality to us humans and all, but you know, all that was kind of a tangent from the original question of how one has to believe certain teachings and what does one do if one really doesn’t believe them, but wants to, I guess.

 

[LilyM]

…yes, I understand that using the man-made device (the means outside God’s natural design) as opposed to not is the reason the church’s teaching, but the purpose is the same, or at least could be for those married couples trying to space out births for good reasons, right, so why is that the case when it comes to family planning, but not for any other medical stuff? If someone was born let’s say, with a physical abnormality that caused them great emotional and psychological damage, I believe the church does not say it is a sin to correct the abnormality, right? But there are a very large amount of folks born with abnormalities that would fit into this catagory, aparently part of God’s natural design for whatever reason. I don’t know if that is a perfect analogy, but in a sense it could be as both having too many babies for one’s financial or emotional capabilites could be greatly emotionally and psychologically damaging as well, and yet the man-made method of birth control is deemed sinful, yet taking advantage of modern day technology regarding other things perhaps like my example, is allowed…but I understand the idea behind the rule, the two purposes of sex within marriage, unitive and procreative, and how if they are separated, it can lead to, or becomes, a disordered expression of God’s gift of sexuality to us humans and all, but you know, all that was kind of a tangent from the original question of how one has to believe certain teachings and what does one do if one really doesn’t believe them, but wants to, I guess.

No it appears you don’t understand … as per the other example I gave, I could rob a bank or deal drugs for exactly the same purpose that I currently work honestly - namely to get money for bills. Immorality can attach to the way in which things are done, separate from the end result, separate from your reasons for doing them.

And your analogy doesn’t hold true - the purpose of surgery is to preserve life, not to take it, not under any circumstances. It used to be everywhere, and still is in some places, enshrined in the Hippocratic Oath which all doctors swear, that they swear never to assist at or procure an abortion. Even without it being a matter of religious belief, since Hippocrates who wrote it was a pagan Greek, doctors instinctively, until very recently, knew that life was valuable in and of itself and must be preserved wherever possible.

Let’s look at your logic here. If a child was five years old, and suddenly developed massive health problems, or its parents suddenly went into physical/emotional/financial meltdown and could no longer look after their child, you wouldn’t advocate that they kill the child, would you? Instead you would simply do everythign possible to make sure the child was looked after, if necessary taken away from the parents if they couldn’t look after it. Why should that child be treated as any less important while it’s in the womb?

Not that people haven’t tried - Hitler certainly tried to physically eliminate the physically or mentally disabled people of Europe as well as Jews and gypsies. And it was morally repugnant.

 

[peso73]

No it appears you don’t understand … as per the other example I gave, I could rob a bank or deal drugs for exactly the same purpose that I currently work honestly - namely to get money for bills. Immorality can attach to the way in which things are done, separate from the end result, separate from your reasons for doing them.

And your analogy doesn’t hold true - the purpose of surgery is to preserve life, not to take it, not under any circumstances. It used to be everywhere, and still is in some places, enshrined in the Hippocratic Oath which all doctors swear, that they swear never to assist at or procure an abortion. Even without it being a matter of religious belief, since Hippocrates who wrote it was a pagan Greek, doctors instinctively, until very recently, knew that life was valuable in and of itself and must be preserved wherever possible.

Let’s look at your logic here. If a child was five years old, and suddenly developed massive health problems, or its parents suddenly went into physical/emotional/financial meltdown and could no longer look after their child, you wouldn’t advocate that they kill the child, would you? Instead you would simply do everythign possible to make sure the child was looked after, if necessary taken away from the parents if they couldn’t look after it. Why should that child be treated as any less important while it’s in the womb?

Not that people haven’t tried - Hitler certainly tried to physically eliminate the physically or mentally disabled people of Europe as well as Jews and gypsies. And it was morally repugnant.

no, I am not saying anyone should be treated less important while in the womb, once that eggy is fertilized, I figure it’s inarguabley human life, and sacred, I’m just saying is hard to swallow that it is wrong to arificially contracept using a non-abortifacient pill, or condom just because it’s an invention of mankind using God given smarts, as a method of family planning, but ok to try and plan your family as long as you don’t use modern “unnatural” methods, but it’s ok to utilize unnatural procedures to minimize other non life threating conditions…I know there doesn’t seem to be a perfect analogy for this…I do understand that evil is never permissable even if the result is good, however, that’s the problem, convincing myself that non-NFP methods are EVIL, while NFP, being used for the same reason, is OK…

 

[jcoldc]

To answer your first question, I don’t think the church requires you to believe some things that you are having troubles with, just to follow them. In the case of NFP (I hear your pain), I think what is important is that you learn about the topic and follow it, even though you have your doubts. In some ways that shows more faith, I think.

But I hear you, when you have concerns that you have a hard time with. I’m still trying to do a lot of growing. I just pray that the Lord helps me realize what is right.

 

[Windmill]

peso,

I think I understand what point you are concerned about.

In your analogy of a deformed child undergoing surgery to correct the abnormality, you are right in that it would be justified. It is justified because you are correcting a defect. There is normality and then there is abnormality. To be resigned to the fact that all things are God’s will/design simply because it happens is a fatalism that gives human reason/action no purpose. We were given our intellects to reason out normalcy/morality/prudence/etc… When something is “wrong”, we should correct it if possible. Pope Paul VI even went as far as to tell plastic surgeons that they have a medical duty to try to correct severe defects, or even ones that cause serious inferiority complexes.

In the case of conception, there is nothing inherently wrong with it. In fact, it is a good thing that logically follows from the marital act (not every time, to be sure). Pregnancy, too, is a normal thing, even though our society treats it as a disease.

So, in one case, technological intervention is being utilized for a good purpose - correcting a deformation. In the case of birth control, it is being used to suppress a good and wholesome process - conception. Though a couple may need to space children for serious reasons, it does not follow that the ends justify the means. If it were so, they would be justified in aborting a child once conceived. Whatever it takes to get rid of the baby, right? Wrong, and I can tell that you already grasp that concept.

 

[peso73]

…yup, well, I’m not goin’ anywhere regardless, I figured it was either Universalist Unitarianism of some kind, or the Universal Church Christ founded, so…although perhaps the former may have it’s appeals to one’s desire to do whatever one wants as long as it feels ok, the latter has the distinct advantage of being true! or if not, I figure whatever God really is, He’d understand why we little humans might try and follow the Lord, and not eternally punish His children…YIPES!
thanks to everyone
and God bless you all :byzsoc:

 

[Nita]

…, and I try to follow the church’s teachings, even if I don’t agree, but what are we supposed do if we really don’t believe in certain teachings or whatnot? One cannot FORCE one’s self to believe something.
One can choose to follow the teaching for fear of Judgement because that is what the church teaches, but that is not enough, is it? Aren’t we REQUIRED to believe certain things? What if we can’t? Are we damned?

If I’m understanding your post, you don’t consider contraception to be morally wrong, but out of “fear of Judgement” you obey the Church’s teaching about not using contraception.

First, you’re wise to love yourself properly - that is, to care about your immortal soul and where you’ll spend eternity.

Second, your very obedience because of fear of judgement actually shows you do believe in some way that contraception must be wrong or you wouldn’t fear God’s judgment. You recognize that it is against God’s revealed will; you just don’t understand why it is.

It is enough to follow the Church’s teaching out of fear of judgment.
For most, that is Step 1. *Psalm 111:10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; a good understanding have all those who practice it. His praise endures for ever! *
Step 2 is when you follow the Church’s teaching because you know it’s the truth and you love the truth.
Step 3 is when you follow it because you know it’s true, love the truth, AND understand why it’s true.

 

[peary]

I am posting this on this forum 'cos I don’t really want the advice of non-believers…well you all know the church requires us to believe certain things. How can we believe certain things if we just don’t believe them? For example, NFP not being sinful, but contracepting a mortal sin that would send one to H-E-double hockey sticks if not repented of…I know the arguements…I understand the church’s teaching on the sex act and it’s proper and holy expression and why, etc, but truly I feel people using NFP are doing so for the same reason as folks contracept, to control the number of kids they have, for a plethora of very very good reasons…I know because of the church’s teaching, some may reiterate the points as a response, I know the arguments and appreciate their validity if I were a millionaire, but I don’t know… I don’t think it is a sin to not end every sex act with one’s wife in a way facilitaing baby making…I just think it’s crazy to expect everyone to have as many babies as God gives them. I know myself, I’d have to move to the ghetto or something to afford a truckload of kids, nevermind feeding them healthy food, etc…I don’t mean the topic of this thread to be NFP or contraception related specifically, that was just an example.
Another might be, oh, I don’t know…ok, I am not really pro-gay by any means, but I just don’t buy that all gay people choose to be gay from some deep perverse urge or even that they really should have to be eternally condemned for doing the same things we do, I know it is disturbing to think about to most of us straight people, but what if you just weren’t attracted to the opposite sex? You have to go throught life celibate or go to hell. Great choices…I don’t know if those are good examples or not, and I try to follow the church’s teachings, even if I don’t agree, but what are we supposed do if we really don’t believe in certain teachings or whatnot? One cannot FORCE one’s self to believe something.
One can choose to follow the teaching for fear of Judgement because that is what the church teaches, but that is not enough, is it? Aren’t we REQUIRED to believe certain things? What if we can’t? Are we damned?

**There is only a certain time of a month in which a woman can get pregnant and is open to conception; a few days, actually, and that out of 30 or so days. Natural Family Planning is a method being sensitive to this reality without resorting to artificial birth control which chemically changes a woman’s time for gestation. Please read articles on John Paul II’s Theology of the Body which is being implemented at all levels now.

The Church does not condemn a person with homosexual tendencies (or same-sex attraction), but it recognizes that homosexual acts are sinful, just as is fornication among heterosexual couples without the benefit of marriage. Also, homosexuality is not open to the transmission of children which is a divine gift given to humanity to share in the creation of a soul with God. The Church does not condemn anyone to hell, and it offers the sacrament of reconciliation for sins to be forgiven.

We are required to believe, as a basis to our Faith, what is outlined in the creeds (Apostles Creed, Nicene Creed, etc.), as well as what the Church teaches in the areas of both Faith and morals. Faith is a gift. You cannot ‘get’ Faith and you cannot ‘do’ Faith. Keep your prayer life going and, as Peter, ask the Lord, “Help me in my unbelief!”**

 

[peso73]

…oh, that I do…

 

[rwoehmke]

When someone comes into the catholic Church, they swear an oath or make a promise to accept and believe all that the Church holds and teaches. I dare say there is not a person alive who actually knows, let alone understands all that the Church holds and teaches.

Now that being the case, it is obvious that we as Catholics accept and believe because the Church teaches what God has taught, a God who can neither deceive or be deceived. We accept and hold those things as being true, not because we understand them or because they seem reasonable to us, but because it is God who is the teacher. We accept and hold even those truths about which we know not a whit.

Now there are those who teach in the name of the Lord who are false or mistaken teachers. Our Pope and our Councils in union with the Pope are protected from doing that by the Holy Spirit. Jesus said so. Anyone of lesser stature is not necessarily protected, so it pays to also use our reason and intellect to try to understand things, but when we reach a point where reason and intellect will not carry us any further and we know it is taught by the Pope and Bishops in union we accept it and act accordingly.

Humility and obedience are important virtues to cultivate. Do we “believe” because we always understand? No we accept and say to ourselves,“Well I don’t get it, but because of the source it must be true.” There are lots of things that we will live with and not understand until we stand before Our Lord in heaven. We may not even “feel” that they are true.

I think believe may not be descriptive enough a word to carry the full meaning of what’s involved. It implies to most of us that based on our own reason and intellect we have determined something to be true. We must bring in that virtue called Faith, which helps us to say “Lord, I just don’t get it, but you teach it so it must be true.”

 

[peary]

When someone comes into the catholic Church, they swear an oath or make a promise to accept and believe all that the Church holds and teaches. I dare say there is not a person alive who actually knows, let alone understands all that the Church holds and teaches.

We don’t “swear oaths”

Now that being the case, it is obvious that we as Catholics accept and believe because the Church teaches what God has taught, a God who can neither deceive or be deceived. We accept and hold those things as being true, not because we understand them or because they seem reasonable to us, but because it is God who is the teacher. We accept and hold even those truths about which we know not a whit.

Now there are those who teach in the name of the Lord who are false or mistaken teachers. Our Pope and our Councils in union with the Pope are protected from doing that by the Holy Spirit. Jesus said so. Anyone of lesser stature is not necessarily protected, so it pays to also use our reason and intellect to try to understand things, but when we reach a point where reason and intellect will not carry us any further and we know it is taught by the Pope and Bishops in union we accept it and act accordingly.

Humility and obedience are important virtues to cultivate. Do we “believe” because we always understand? No we accept and say to ourselves,“Well I don’t get it, but because of the source it must be true.” There are lots of things that we will live with and not understand until we stand before Our Lord in heaven. We may not even “feel” that they are true.

I think believe may not be descriptive enough a word to carry the full meaning of what’s involved. It implies to most of us that based on our own reason and intellect we have determined something to be true. We must bring in that virtue called Faith, which helps us to say “Lord, I just don’t get it, but you teach it so it must be true.”

But I agree with everything else said.

 

[peso73]

…well, we don’t swear an oath as such, but I was baptised Easter Vigil 2001, and I do recall the series of questions which we answered with an “I do” or “we do”, I can’t recall, but it was similar to wedding vows in that sence, and aren’t vows and oaths pretty much the same thing?
( I know the bible says let your yes mean yes and no mean no, I’m just sayin’…vows are very oathlike, aren’t they?)

 

[peary]

…well, we don’t swear an oath as such, but I was baptised Easter Vigil 2001, and I do recall the series of questions which we answered with an “I do” or “we do”, I can’t recall, but it was similar to wedding vows in that sence, and aren’t vows and oaths pretty much the same thing?
( I know the bible says let your yes mean yes and no mean no, I’m just sayin’…vows are very oathlike, aren’t they?)

**No, not at all. A ‘vow’ is a sacred spiritual covenant between you and God & the Church.

An ‘oath’ is something sworn to or promised. It’s a bit different, even though the dictionary kind of makes it sound the same, but in reality it isn’t. **