Catholic Traditon vs Science - are we looking deep enough

[elt1956]

Cooperation is beneficial in many aspects of human interaction. Now, I’m not saying the massive humanitarian work that is done today by various organizations is the same as the small groups we evolved to work and cooperate in. Those things would be more of an empathy and compassion kind of thing. Again, you don’t need a god to feel sorry for a fellow human being and want to help them.

Thanks. I am actually completely aware of this, as I have been around here for enough time to have noticed. That is why I was questioning someone earlier in this thread about being a Sedevacantist!

But when I speak of Catholicism, I also won’t include those liberal Catholics that use birth control and want non-male priests. My mother is one of those. It is obvious to me that that is simply cafeteria-style Catholicism.

The Church clearly states that they are against these things, but these Catholics still stay in and just ignore it. I think they are deluding themselves. If they find these kind of inconsistencies in the Church, can’t they see that they can’t trust the Church 100% to define their moral system for them? Maybe they just tell themselves that they aren’t perfect enough to see it the way the Church does? Or maybe they don’t think the Magisterium is actually teaching the truth on these issues, and that the Church will at some point change their position? Why don’t they switch to a denomination that matches all their beliefs? Are they just intellectually lazy/complacent?

Okay, I’m chiming in again. And of course this is going to sound rigid, and traditionalist and all that, but the two stances the Church has with which I DO agree is their reasoning behind birth control and abortion.

 

[richardwy]

How could the Holy Spirit let us be so misguided for so long, and only now science is correcting these errors?

This bothers me not. I don’t for a minute think nor believe that what science says is necessarily true. It’s just a nonissue for me.

They weren’t there. So many conclusions are based on measuring. They’re assuming decay and the speed of light have not changed. I’ve no proof it has. Just like they have no proof it has not.

None of us were there.

 

[mulligan59]

Mr. Mulligan, something tells me were getting quite some way from the topic of science.

Petrus

As I suggested a couple of days ago…and you’re too busy to pursue it elsewhere, and frankly it keeps me up too late, and I see little hope in converting you. But I haven’t been the only culprit, in fact this little debate I didn;t even start. Did I? How’s the wine?

 

[mulligan59]

This bothers me not. I don’t for a minute think nor believe that what science says is necessarily true. It’s just a nonissue for me.

They weren’t there. So many conclusions are based on measuring. They’re assuming decay and the speed of light have not changed. I’ve no proof it has. Just like they have no proof it has not.

None of us were there.

Touche’.

 

[mulligan59]

Thanks. I am actually completely aware of this, as I have been around here for enough time to have noticed. That is why I was questioning someone earlier in this thread about being a Sedevacantist!

But when I speak of Catholicism, I also won’t include those liberal Catholics that use birth control and want non-male priests. My mother is one of those. It is obvious to me that that is simply cafeteria-style Catholicism.

The Church clearly states that they are against these things, but these Catholics still stay in and just ignore it. I think they are deluding themselves. If they find these kind of inconsistencies in the Church, can’t they see that they can’t trust the Church 100% to define their moral system for them? Maybe they just tell themselves that they aren’t perfect enough to see it the way the Church does? Or maybe they don’t think the Magisterium is actually teaching the truth on these issues, and that the Church will at some point change their position? Why don’t they switch to a denomination that matches all their beliefs? Are they just intellectually lazy/complacent?

A. Cogent observations on your part. I asked both Spirit Meadow and the Professor the same question (i.e. why do they pretend to be Catholic, being as they reject what few things (anti-abortion, homosexuality and birth control) the Novus Ordo church still at least “officially” stands up for. However, because even much of the hierarchy of the church is either actually defiant on these issues or turns a blind eye, well I am the one who answered your question affirmatively. Now we can no longer ask the “is the Pope Catholic” question to make an obvious point. We’re down to “does a bear go to the bathroom in the woods”. But this last great apostasy was all prophesized.

 

[elt1956]

A. Cogent observations on your part. I asked both Spirit Meadow and the Professor the same question (i.e. why do they pretend to be Catholic, being as they reject what few things (anti-abortion, homosexuality and birth control) the Novus Ordo church still at least “officially” stands up for. However, because even much of the hierarchy of the church is either actually defiant on these issues or turns a blind eye, well I am the one who answered your question affirmatively. Now we can no longer ask the “is the Pope Catholic” question to make an obvious point. We’re down to “does a bear go to the bathroom in the woods”. But this last great apostasy was all prophesized.

When has the Magesterium approved abortion, birth control or the acts of homosexuality? You go too far.

 

[mmortal03]

Where are goodness, care and compassion created? Oh that’s right they just exist??? Interesting.

Other animals have been shown to have these things in lesser forms, in varying cases. It isn’t a stretch to say that we have more advanced forms of these same organizational behaviors, and it also isn’t a stretch to say that these things play a part in our survival. There has actually been a lot of study into these things in science.

 

[elt1956]

Other animals have been shown to have these things in lesser forms, in varying cases. It isn’t a stretch to say that we have more advanced forms of these same organizational behaviors, and it also isn’t a stretch to say that these things play a part in our survival. There has actually been a lot of study into these things in science.

I thought compassion etc. shown in lesser mammals was only a display for procreation of the species and purely instinctual. Does this apply to the mammal human also.??? Don’t “think” so.

 

[mmortal03]

Okay, I’m chiming in again. And of course this is going to sound rigid, and traditionalist and all that, but the two stances the Church has with which I DO agree is their reasoning behind birth control and abortion.

I didn’t mention abortion, just birth control. I would be interested to hear how an “unorthodox Catholic” agrees with the Church’s position on birth control, though. What, that sex should ONLY be BOTH procreative and unitive?

 

[mmortal03]

I thought compassion etc. shown in lesser mammals was only a display for procreation of the species and purely instinctual. Does this apply to the mammal human also.??? Don’t “think” so.

It might have in the past, and now it is residual, as far as procreation is concerned. But it could also be organizational behavior that is not directly related to procreation. But how do you know that how you act as a human isn’t purely “instinctual”? Are you saying that our compassion is totally learned behavior? Therefore, I don’t think that this is the concept to focus on, so let’s try to keep separate “instinct” from, say, consciousness. I would think it would be more correct to say that lesser mammals might only feel and carry out the urge to express compassion unconsciously and unlearned. They may not be aware of their expression of compassion. However, also, animals can learn, so it could also be that there are instances of learned compassion in animals.

Remember, that we also may also feel the urge to express compassion unconsciously (possibly instinctively, even), but then be able to decide to act upon it or not rationally, by way of our consciousness. That would be the difference. Also, yes, I might be able to rationally condition myself to feel compassion, but generally, people take it to be part of their underlying emotions, and that they do not command it to be a certain way, but that the urge just arises inside of them.

But anyway, more generally speaking, just because something is “just” a certain way in other animals, cannot mean that there isn’t a separate purpose for a different iteration of it in us. The point is that we can find something similar in other species, not that we can find something exactly what we experience ourselves in another species.

 

[mulligan59]

When has the Magesterium approved abortion, birth control or the acts of homosexuality? You go too far.

I didn’t say it did. In fact I said the ostensibly it still doesn’t. But of course homosexuality runs rampant (see my Bell Dodd comment a few posts back) and nothing is done. Privately many new order priests are open to these things, ask the professor.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

SpiritMeadow,

You and the Doctor are just amazing. The fact is that you are not a Catholic, why take exception to the characterization? Contraception is a mortal sin per the Catholic church. If you disagree, then you are not a Catholic. It’s simply axiomatic. The fact that 85%, or even if it were 100%, of those calling themselves Catholics use contraception, doesn’t change the fact that the church says it is a sin. If all 85% utilize it in the belief that they are doing no wrong, it just means that those 85% are not Catholics at all (if they do it but feel guilty then they’re only sinning but may still be Catholics). This is the essence of Catholicism. It doesn’t rely on popular survey to define truth.
So why not be honest and admit that your disagreement is with Catholicism, and leave the people who are actually trying to be Catholic alone?

You know I asked the Doctor, after he openly confessed his disdain for dogma, (he is more worried about the physical environment, neo-paganism here we come), but I asked him why pretend to be Catholic at all? Why not say try Methodism; you know be honest and open in your dissent and emphasis on serving the “world” for the here and now. This he hasn’t answered. Will you?

The fact is that in every religion there are those who are in disagreement about any number of things. The fact is, that it appears that only a segment of one Church the Catholic church decides that any disagreement is tantamount to reasons for excommunication. The fact is that the Church has had dissent from its inception. Luke reports that there was dissention between those who felt adherence to Jewish laws were essential in this new sect, and others did not. What is one person’s orthodoxy is another;s heresy. The fact is that no one in our parishes claims we don’t belong, since we are largely reflecting the general feelings of most of the laity and a goodly amount of the clergy. It seems that the ultra right is so frightened of what we say that you would rather have us gone than have to contend with us. That suggests that you are fearful. The fact is that people who have this inordinate need for changelessness and rigidity within the church do so for psychological reasons that have little to do with the efficacy of any particular dogma. The fact is, that adherence to such blind acceptance is not healthy for either the church or society at large. It is i suggest a negation of your responsibiliteis as a thinking breathing creature so lovingly created by God. If God wished automotons he could certainly have created them thusly. If you suggest that God awaits the true followers who adhere blindly to the Church, then I fear you have made God into a strange and cruel creator.

I am hiding nothing. I choose the Catholic faith for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is a good and logical dogma overall. I appreciate how desperately the Church has sought to remain logically consistent, although I decry some of those decisions. It is my absolute right as a Catholic to speak my mind. I give way less right to non-Catholics. There is much I love and esteem. I am not the least intimidated by anyone’s holier than thou claim that I do not belong according to their rigid interpretation and adherence to the letter of the law. I am always shocked that the pharasidic approach is still favored by a few, though Jesus made it quite clear that such an approach often misses the real point of faith. Jesus quite clearly ignored the “law” when it impinged on the his doing the spirit of the law.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

The truth is not dependent on the number of adherents.

Let’s just change Jesus’ teachings to suit your whims or you are going to leave the Church. Amazing!!!

You may call me orthodox but not a fundie.

I may and I will since you are. Why are you so unwilling to acknowledge that? Truth of course is not dependent on the number of adherents. But in normal discourse, weight is ascribed to numbers. It causes the normal person to stop and re-examine things. To not do this is to portrary oneself with extreme arrogance as simply far superior in intelligence than most people. No one is changing Jesus’ teachings, at least not me. I suggest you are doing just that by your adherence to a dognmatic approach that simiply asks at each juncture, “What does the magisterium tell me to believe about this.” If you think that is pleasing to God and what he invisioned then, so be it. I do not. Look around this site and see the threads, how many times have you read something like this. “I do not think the Magisterium has spoken on this issue. I feel thusly. If the magisterium of course has spoken, I accept ahd believe whatever it says.” Such is not a thinking individual but a robot.

 

[Janet_S]

SpiritMeadow, your gentle take on things is so refreshing! And you are right about the fundamentalist Catholics, or “Integrists” – there is a bunker mentality at work, and I suspect they are very upset to discover there are people like us inside their bunker. This may be particularly true of recent converts from Protestantism to Catholicism, who resent that the Church isn’t the archconservative bastion they might have expected to find it.

I’ve taught thousands of students and worked with hundreds of faculty members since 1980; I’ve worshiped in and contributed to many Catholic parishes; I’ve participated in dozens of fascinating international conferences with theologians, philosophers, historians and scientists. I had never once told I was not a Catholic until coming to Catholic Answers and voicing an opinion outside the rigid framework followed by the Magisteriobots. C’est la vie.

On another note, I’m interested in the phenomenology of fundamentalism, and why it crops up in both Protestant and Catholic Christianity, in various strains of Islam, in Judaism, and in still other religious traditions. I think it has to do with people needing institutional security in a time of great social, political, and scientific upheaval. Bill Shea points out that opposition to Galileo had to do in part with a “crisis of confidence in the seventeenth-century Italian mind.” Since Rome had just lost half of Christendom to Protestants, and since the Holy Roman Emperor’s troops had besieged and sacked Rome, and since the Florentine Republic had collapsed, Rome was not in any psychological state to entertain yet another novelty (heliocentrism) that might serve as a destabilizing factor.

I suspect a similar problematic is at work today, with global warming, the rapidly approaching end of oil, growth of religious pluralism, proliferation of everything the Internet has to offer, decline of priestly vocations, plummeting of Church attendance, etc. In such a climate, the Integrists regard any dissent from the Magisterium – even on the part of faithful Catholics – as a looming threat that will destabilize the status quo, and therefore to be opposed at all costs.

I’m interested in hearing your thoughts.

Faithfully yours,
Petrus

First you say you’re a theologian; now you’re branching out into the field of psychology. Since when has conforming one’s mind to the Magisterium’s become pathological? I thought that was what conversion was all about.

Your (and Spiritmeadow’s) pseudointellectualism is a real hoot.

Tell us more, oh great ones.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

What’s wrong with you guys? Don’t you appreciate the difference between men and women? Are we to pretend it doesn’t exist? Doc, you’re a married man, do you think they’re just like us? This is one subject in which I generally find conservatives and liberals (at least those with wives and daughters) in agreement. Gee, Anne Coulter (a girl) thinks that allowing women to vote was mistake.

Spirit Meadow you have no room to complain with all of your animosity towards patrimony…

Complain about what? I’ve not addressed inclusiveness at all.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Thanks. I am actually completely aware of this, as I have been around here for enough time to have noticed. That is why I was questioning someone earlier in this thread about being a Sedevacantist!

But when I speak of Catholicism, I also won’t include those liberal Catholics that use birth control and want non-male priests. My mother is one of those. It is obvious to me that that is simply cafeteria-style Catholicism.

The Church clearly states that they are against these things, but these Catholics still stay in and just ignore it. I think they are deluding themselves. If they find these kind of inconsistencies in the Church, can’t they see that they can’t trust the Church 100% to define their moral system for them? Maybe they just tell themselves that they aren’t perfect enough to see it the way the Church does? Or maybe they don’t think the Magisterium is actually teaching the truth on these issues, and that the Church will at some point change their position? Why don’t they switch to a denomination that matches all their beliefs? Are they just intellectually lazy/complacent?

Your remedy for dissent seems to be withdrawl from the Church.That is of course one answer, and it has certainly been the prevelent response for over 2,000 years. We have in excess of 30,000 denominations of Christianty because of that. And as I said, it seems an oddity that we should be told we are not Catholic when we are the majority in the Church. Perhaps our fundamentalist friends should create a new sect. I hear tell there are two or three groups that have done so under the theory that the Church ain’t Catholic enough. This kind of absolutism must be fought. It is too dangerous to allow free reign. It has resulted in unmitigated horror as perpetrated by the far right Islamic sects. It has proved willing to break laws and kill in several Christian forms. It is not something to be allowed to run its course, but mus be actively met and argued down.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

A. Cogent observations on your part. I asked both Spirit Meadow and the Professor the same question (i.e. why do they pretend to be Catholic, being as they reject what few things (anti-abortion, homosexuality and birth control) the Novus Ordo church still at least “officially” stands up for. However, because even much of the hierarchy of the church is either actually defiant on these issues or turns a blind eye, well I am the one who answered your question affirmatively. Now we can no longer ask the “is the Pope Catholic” question to make an obvious point. We’re down to “does a bear go to the bathroom in the woods”. But this last great apostasy was all prophesized.

your words belie your agenda. Your use of the words "Novus Ordo, and “officially” stands for betray quite clearly that you are simply one who relies on pre-Vatican II as your base. Such is simply wrong by all standards, Church and otherwise.

 

[mulligan59]

The fact is that in every religion there are those who are in disagreement about any number of things. The fact is, that it appears that only a segment of one Church the Catholic church decides that any disagreement is tantamount to reasons for excommunication. The fact is that the Church has had dissent from its inception. Luke reports that there was dissention between those who felt adherence to Jewish laws were essential in this new sect, and others did not. What is one person’s orthodoxy is another;s heresy. The fact is that no one in our parishes claims we don’t belong, since we are largely reflecting the general feelings of most of the laity and a goodly amount of the clergy. It seems that the ultra right is so frightened of what we say that you would rather have us gone than have to contend with us. That suggests that you are fearful. The fact is that people who have this inordinate need for changelessness and rigidity within the church do so for psychological reasons that have little to do with the efficacy of any particular dogma. The fact is, that adherence to such blind acceptance is not healthy for either the church or society at large. It is i suggest a negation of your responsibiliteis as a thinking breathing creature so lovingly created by God. If God wished automotons he could certainly have created them thusly. If you suggest that God awaits the true followers who adhere blindly to the Church, then I fear you have made God into a strange and cruel creator.

Answer:
Most of what you say is true. Two points however. When there is confusion over following the old Jewish traditions in the early Church, such that some thought they necassary, others thought they were proscribed (a complete range of belief), the Church (from the Chair of Peter) settled the question, fairly early on (2nd century I think). And it did not settle it in a wishy washy way, it anathematized all those who would still follow it, as the Old Covenant was void, settled in full on Calvary. And this is the nature of the Church. I’m not afraid of you, why would I be, I left the Novus Ordo years ago. But I’m afraid for you, and for my wife and my kids, and many whom I love. It really bothers me when people argue adhominun. How would you know my motives? I fear God though. He is afterall the God that took away paradise and sentenced us to this life of trial, over an apple. Simple disobedience. But it is so easy to love Him, so easy to avoid His wrath. I think pride is the biggest obstacle.

I am hiding nothing. I choose the Catholic faith for a lot of reasons, not the least of which is a good and logical dogma overall. I appreciate how desperately the Church has sought to remain logically consistent, although I decry some of those decisions. It is my absolute right as a Catholic to speak my mind. I give way less right to non-Catholics. There is much I love and esteem. I am not the least intimidated by anyone’s holier than thou claim that I do not belong according to their rigid interpretation and adherence to the letter of the law. I am always shocked that the pharasidic approach is still favored by a few, though Jesus made it quite clear that such an approach often misses the real point of faith. Jesus quite clearly ignored the “law” when it impinged on the his doing the spirit of the law.

Answer: Again, you are so right in pointing to the logical consistency of the Church. The older I get, the more I’ve seen, the more mistakes I’ve made, the more I understand how perfect the Church’s understanding of our nature truly is. I suspect from some of your comments that you share my disdain for the “fundies” I think you call them. The protestants who think they know the Bible yet reject outright dogmas taken directly from Christ’s lips. They amaze me more than you! No, I do not think I’m holier than anybody. I could tell you stories, many things of which I am ashamed. But I’ve come to realize that the Church (the traditional Church, the Vatican II writings are a jumble of confusion) really makes sense. And if you are to accept it, you really have to accept all of it. We can’t pick and choose. If we don;t see the reason, with our “clouded intellect”, then we pray for understanding, from humility. It works for me anyway. And isn’t that the new idea? And look, why do I spout my ideas here? Why do you? What’s the point of this blog. It is our nature to share ideas. O, and God didn’t make us robots, though he could have, because love is what he wants, and love must be free gift, freely chosen. Women especially understand this. It is why the small gift from the heart is valued more than the expensive gift given out of obligation. It is the nature, the essence of romance.

 

[SeekingCatholic]

It really bothers me when people argue adhominun. How would you know my motives?

I quite agree. Arguing that beliefs occur only due to psychological motivations is a real cheap shot. OTOH, Catholics have been doing this to everyone else for aeons. I just do not happen to believe that turnabout is fair play.

I fear God though. He is afterall the God that took away paradise and sentenced us to this life of trial, over an apple. Simple disobedience. But it is so easy to love Him, so easy to avoid His wrath. I think pride is the biggest obstacle.

I do not agree it is easy to love God. Sentencing us to a life of trial over a silly apple seems vindictive, childish, puerile, and just plain mean, which everyone would agree if it were a mere creature doing such a thing, and there were no desire to get God “off the hook” as it were, by hook or by crook.

Answer: Again, you are so right in pointing to the logical consistency of the Church.

Which you can only sort of maintain by rejecting Vatican II and becoming a sedevacantist, which is logically inconsistent in itself.

The older I get, the more I’ve seen, the more mistakes I’ve made, the more I understand how perfect the Church’s understanding of our nature truly is.

However, the Church’s understanding of the natural world has, at times, left something to be desired.

But I’ve come to realize that the Church (the traditional Church, the Vatican II writings are a jumble of confusion) really makes sense. And if you are to accept it, you really have to accept all of it. We can’t pick and choose.

Which you yourself are doing, imagining there could be such a thing as a Church without a present and visible hierarchy.

O, and God didn’t make us robots, though he could have, because love is what he wants, and love must be free gift, freely chosen. Women especially understand this. It is why the small gift from the heart is valued more than the expensive gift given out of obligation. It is the nature, the essence of romance.

Yes, and I’m sure women really understand if a man points a gun to their head, saying love me, or else. Oh, but of course, I really desire your “free” gift of love.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

First you say you’re a theologian; now you’re branching out into the field of psychology. Since when has conforming one’s mind to the Magisterium’s become pathological? I thought that was what conversion was all about.

Your (and Spiritmeadow’s) pseudointellectualism is a real hoot.

Tell us more, oh great ones.

Well, again we go to the ad hominem attack when all else fails. If I am guilty of pseudo-intellecualism then I guess you guys are guilty of anti-intellectualism. Your answer is merely to do as your told. Worse, you accept that you should even think as you are told. That no doubt does communism one better. Not even they assumed to make their adherents believe their swill, they simply demanded unwavering adherence to the rules. You do no different. If you think that is conversion then, goodness are you confused. Fundamentalism’s major tenet is absolute belief with no shades of grey allowed. I can tell you much more, indeed, just tell me where you would like me to start. I have no intention of talking you out of Catholicism, but I sure will give it a shot to wake you up to being fully human.