Cardinal Newman: Cafeteria Catholics Aren't Real Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Brad

Guest
Found this interesting from John Henry Cardinal Newman’s “On the Inspiration of Scripture”:

I allow, then, that the Church, certainly, does ‘insist,’ when she speaks dogmatically, nay or rather she more than insists, she obliges; she obliges us to an internal assent to that which she proposes to us. So far I admit, or rather maintain. And I admit that she obliges us in a most forcible and effective manner, that is, by the penalty of forfeiting communion with her, if we refuse our internal assent to her word. We cannot be real Catholics, if we do not from our heart accept the matters which she puts forward as divine and true. This is plain.
 
I don’t have a problem with that. To my way of thinking it is the promise of the Father, the Holy Spirit, who guides the Church into all truth. Not truth about the stock market but in matters of faith and morals.
In his book A Popular History of the Catholic Church Fr. Philip Hughes wrote, “*the Faith is not a thing to be refashioned by any human intelligence, but something to be safeguarded by the Church’s authority against any such refashioning.” *
 
40.png
Brad:
Found this interesting from John Henry Cardinal Newman’s “On the Inspiration of Scripture”:

I allow, then, that the Church, certainly, does ‘insist,’ when she speaks dogmatically, nay or rather she more than insists, she obliges; she obliges us to an internal assent to that which she proposes to us. So far I admit, or rather maintain. And I admit that she obliges us in a most forcible and effective manner, that is, by the penalty of forfeiting communion with her, if we refuse our internal assent to her word. We cannot be real Catholics, if we do not from our heart accept the matters which she puts forward as divine and true. This is plain.
Click to expand...
Brad,

Thanks for the quote. If only it was that clear to many in the clergy. Part of the problem has been the ability to shop around for a priest or Bishop who agrees with an individual catholic’s interpretation of Church dogma and doctrines. In the late 60s and early 70s when contraception was more readily promoted and available due to scientific ( I hesitate to use the word advances) and societal acceptance, you could talk to 10 priests and 8 would give you the nod about contraception. If that was occuring openly, who is to blame for the trend to pick and choose which rule(s) to obey and which one that your conscience told you you could ignore? From my prespective, I blame the clergy for not upholding Church dogma and doctrine. Now 30+ years later, with an entire generation wrongly indoctrinated by cafeteria Catholic clergy, how do we put the genie back in the bottle and, at the same time, provide correct Catholic training that is not constantly derided by the cafeteria Catholic led organizations established since that time, ie. Voice of the Faithful and their ilk?
 
40.png
emsvetich:
Brad,

Thanks for the quote. If only it was that clear to many in the clergy. Part of the problem has been the ability to shop around for a priest or Bishop who agrees with an individual catholic’s interpretation of Church dogma and doctrines. In the late 60s and early 70s when contraception was more readily promoted and available due to scientific ( I hesitate to use the word advances) and societal acceptance, you could talk to 10 priests and 8 would give you the nod about contraception. If that was occuring openly, who is to blame for the trend to pick and choose which rule(s) to obey and which one that your conscience told you you could ignore? From my prespective, I blame the clergy for not upholding Church dogma and doctrine. Now 30+ years later, with an entire generation wrongly indoctrinated by cafeteria Catholic clergy, how do we put the genie back in the bottle and, at the same time, provide correct Catholic training that is not constantly derided by the cafeteria Catholic led organizations established since that time, ie. Voice of the Faithful and their ilk?
Click to expand...
I agree with you and I think there is only one solution. Teach the truth. In spots where clergy will not do it and no other religous are or will, then the laity must inform themselves and teach it.
 
quote=Penny Plain This again?
[/quote]

You knew that Cardinal Newman said this in the 1800s or is it that whether or not someone is in communion with God (which, of course impacts their state for eternity) is a boring topic?
 
I heard Father Corapi speak to this issue several months ago when I was listening to his Catechism series on EWTN. I liked the way that he put it because it made sense to me, a ‘re-vert’ (as much as I dislike that term) who struggles (at time) not so much with teachings but with the manner in which lay members of the Church often presented those teachings…very aggressively and in an almost hurtful way.

I heard Father Corapi say (and I am paraphrasing, so please forgive me) something to the affect that to be a member of the Holy Mother Church requires, at time, that one practice the virture of obedience. That this may mean that we say, “I will accept that, and I will obey that…I do not understand it, however, so will you please explain to me why the Church teaches that”.

It helped me tremendously, because I so wanted to be in communion with all of you…but was afraid that if I asked a question in the wrong way I would be villified.
 
40.png
LSK:
I heard Father Corapi speak to this issue several months ago when I was listening to his Catechism series on EWTN. I liked the way that he put it because it made sense to me, a ‘re-vert’ (as much as I dislike that term) who struggles (at time) not so much with teachings but with the manner in which lay members of the Church often presented those teachings…very aggressively and in an almost hurtful way.

I heard Father Corapi say (and I am paraphrasing, so please forgive me) something to the affect that to be a member of the Holy Mother Church requires, at time, that one practice the virture of obedience. That this may mean that we say, “I will accept that, and I will obey that…I do not understand it, however, so will you please explain to me why the Church teaches that”.

It helped me tremendously, because I so wanted to be in communion with all of you…but was afraid that if I asked a question in the wrong way I would be villified.
Click to expand...
Yes. Father has a great way of putting things.

Actually, I am reading an unrelated article about Cardinal Newman on obedience and how he stated that it is a foundational virtue - one that is required to practice the other virtues correctly AND one that is required for us to have true freedom.

Cardinal Newman said:

"to all those who are perplexed in any way soever, who wish for light but cannot find it, one precept must be given - obey. It is obedience which brings a man into the right path; it is obedience which keeps him there and strengthens him in it. Under all circumstances, whatever be the cause of the distress- obey. In the words of the text, ‘Wait on the Lord, and keep His way, and He shall exalt thee.’ "

Obedience is the price of freedom. A small price to pay for being exalted. It is indeed liberating to practice obedience to the marvelous ways of the Lord.

Many shy away from the word obedience because it implies some kind of claustrophobic restriction. But the fact is we are being obedient to the morals and doctrine of the Creator Himself. Not being obedient is a form of stumbling over ourselves and I’ve never felt free tripping over my feet.
 
Cardinal Newman:
*I allow, then, that the Church, certainly, does ‘insist,’ when she speaks dogmatically, nay or rather she more than insists, she obliges; she obliges us to an internal assent to that which she proposes to us. *
Click to expand...
The question remains, though, “Which of the teachings of the Church are ‘dogmatic’”?
 
40.png
Ahimsa:
The question remains, though, “Which of the teachings of the Church are ‘dogmatic’”?
Click to expand...
Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
 
40.png
Ahimsa:
The question remains, though, “Which of the teachings of the Church are ‘dogmatic’”?
Click to expand...
A quick rule of thumb is if a Pope teaches something through an encyclical letter or a Bishop’s council teaches (i.e. Vatican I, Vatican II, Nicea, Trent etc.)
 
This sums it up nicely (from the Catechism)

**The teaching office **

888 Bishops, with priests as co-workers, have as their first task “to preach the Gospel of God to all men,” in keeping with the Lord’s command.415 They are “heralds of faith, who draw new disciples to Christ; they are authentic teachers” of the apostolic faith "endowed with the authority of Christ."416

889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a “supernatural sense of faith” the People of God, under the guidance of the Church’s living Magisterium, "unfailingly adheres to this faith."417

890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms:

891 “The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful - who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. . . . The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium,” above all in an Ecumenical Council.418 When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine "for belief as being divinely revealed,"419 and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions "must be adhered to with the obedience of faith."420 This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.421

892 Divine assistance is also given to the successors of the apostles, teaching in communion with the successor of Peter, and, in a particular way, to the bishop of Rome, pastor of the whole Church, when, without arriving at an infallible definition and without pronouncing in a “definitive manner,” they propose in the exercise of the ordinary Magisterium a teaching that leads to better understanding of Revelation in matters of faith and morals. To this ordinary teaching the faithful "are to adhere to it with religious assent"422 which, though distinct from the assent of faith, is nonetheless an extension of it.
 
40.png
Brad:
.

Cardinal Newman said:

"to all those who are perplexed in any way soever, who wish for light but cannot find it, one precept must be given - obey. It is obedience which brings a man into the right path; it is obedience which keeps him there and strengthens him in it. Under all circumstances, whatever be the cause of the distress- obey. In the words of the text, ‘Wait on the Lord, and keep His way, and He shall exalt thee.’ "

Obedience is the price of freedom. A small price to pay for being exalted. It is indeed liberating to practice obedience to the marvelous ways of the Lord.

Many shy away from the word obedience because it implies some kind of claustrophobic restriction. But the fact is we are being obedient to the morals and doctrine of the Creator Himself. Not being obedient is a form of stumbling over ourselves and I’ve never felt free tripping over my feet.
Click to expand...
Amen! When we cannot understand or encompass something the Church requires of us, this is the only answer: obey.
 
40.png
Ahimsa:
The question remains, though, “Which of the teachings of the Church are ‘dogmatic’”?
Click to expand...
The Sources of Catholic Dogma; Denzinger; Loreto Publications
 
When I was a Protestant, I could not understand why the Church forbade contraception. It didn’t make sense to me.

When I was led by the Spirit to become a Catholic (back in June), I decided to accept her teachings. I trusted her to have a good reason for her stance on contraception. So I researched it.

Now I have a whole new perspective on marriage and love, better than anything I ever dreamed of. (And I’ve been blissfully married to Mr. Right for almost 8 years!)

Was it St, Augustine who said something like, “I believe in order to understand; I understand in order to believe” ?

As for dogma, Dr. Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma is a great resource. I treat it like an encyclopedia - I look things up in it. If I sat down to read it end to end, I’d probably give up after 50 pages… kinda like Leviticus!
 
Ruthie,
Amen to everything you said…including my favorite Saint Augustine quote!

Before coming into communion with the church…I not only struggled with its teaching on artificial b.c., but with its teaching on Original Sin, Purgatory, the infallibility of the Magisterium & the Pope on Faith and Morals, and more. Now its those VERY things that I struggled with that I now realize, (after first being obedient, and being open to really trying to understand) are causing me to embrace the Church even more! Not only that, I realize that they are some of the very things that are bringing others lost in the fog of sin and poor teaching, back into the loving arms of Christ. Thank God He established the Church to help us get home to Him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top