Church Teaching

[clem456]

It’s all the same. The Church’s teaching on “social issues” are rooted in theological ideas concerning the truth about what marriage is, who God is, who we are, etc. The truth about the Trinity, for example, is very closely tied to the Church’s teaching about what marriage is. There isn’t a separate “social issues” category.

There is no disconnect between theology and social justice teaching, or family life issues. If Catholics better understood this we could possible establish some sense that is common, aka “common sense”.

 

[Churchman25]

As for you eachelbaum that statement you made was extremely judgemental and , also the fact that if someone tells you something that they believe is true but is really not they can’t be commiting grave sin. Because to commit grave sin you have to do something that you know is deliberately wrong, and do it any ways.
That is a fact

 

[LethalMouse]

In order to be “speaking out” against actual church teaching you have to be coming from the opposite end in “truth”. You can ask questions and pose ideas, it is that you arent’t supposed to be running your own side version of the Catholic Church gaining converts and preaching…

Now one may be ostracized in a less official way and those kinds of things create confusion vs people. For example I believe the statistics are 80% of clergy including the current pope are generally anti-gun as well as some 60% of Catholic lay people. So in some circles as pro-gun guy I might gain the ire of some Catholic people who have “personal” issue with me. HOWEVER, the stance of the 80/60%ers is not a CHURCH teaching and therefore any negativity is not of the Church, but of faulty humans who don’t like someone.

I would wager with many issues whether they be smoking cigs, tattoos, or belief in uncommon ideas within Church teaching you will see social faulty human isolation and rarely if ever Church excommunication or such.

In fact look at eastern vs latin Catholics… all catholic but there are some wiggleroom details we are allowed to hold differently that do not alter church teaching. Let’s say a latin catholic spoke out among peers of beliefs like that were like the easterns… his latin peers might point and whisper, and he might have no parish friends. But those pointing and whispering are really the ones who probably should not be taking communion

I actually think learning the difference between Church teaching and the thoughts of random people is highly important. Many who might come embrace the church cannot because they think the weirdness of humans is the church teaching…tis not

 

[Vico]

Why is it that anyone who publically speaks out against the church on church teach, pretty much goes to the chopping block with an excommunication? I just dont get it why the Church does not allow freedom of speech when comes to church teaching. If the Church is trying to come up with some new teaching why can’t people be allowed to try and speak out against it. So the Church can prove that it is right.

It is sinful to lead another into error or to risk loss of your faith by serious considerations of what is contrary to the faith. We are obliged to give witness to the faith.

 

[Churchman25]

Iv already been to confession about this and mentioned it to the priest and he gave me the real definition of heresy. The real definition is an idea or idea opinion that is contrary to revealed dogmas or Church teaching.

The example that the priest gave me was he said that if someone left the Holy Spirit out of the trinity. Then that would be a heresy.

 

[JM3]

Not if all the bishops disagree…just some of them. If some of the bishops disagree with the Pope, does that mean they’re not part of the teaching authority of the Church? If some bishops are not in communion with the Pope on a given issue or idea, who has the teaching authority?

I’m not trying to be difficult, it’s just that I’ve been looking for an answer to this question for decades, and I’ve found none. It’s not even that I’ve only found bad or dissatisfactory answers. I’ve only found non-answers.

Perhaps, research into the reaction to Humanae Vitae would help to answer this. As far as I understand, it would depend on the point of disagreement, as some would say that a bishops teaching authority comes from and through the Pope.

 

[Churchman25]

I always thought that for someone to commit a grave sin they had to know what they were doing is wrong, or immoral.

 

[Vico]

I always thought that for someone to commit a grave sin they had to know what they were doing is wrong, or immoral.

Catechism

IV. ERRONEOUS JUDGMENT

1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time "from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith."60

The more a correct conscience prevails, the more do persons and groups turn aside from blind choice and try to be guided by objective standards of moral conduct.61​

 

[Churchman25]

I already went to confession over this thing.

 

[Louman127]

What i meant was that a heretic is someone who speaks out against church teaching. So why are we never allowed to speak our minds publically if we dont agree on something that the church teaches.

As for the chopping block statement that was completely not literal obviously the the church is not going to kill someone for commiting a heresy. They will be excommunicated though.

Here’s the thing… all Church teaching must be accepted or yes, you will be a heretic. We must keep our minds and opinions in order. If you have an idea that is contrary to the faith then reject it.

But what if it seems logical and I feel it may be right? At this point create a “work area” of the brain so to speak. Accept the truth of the Church by saying a prayer to God you accept it. But also ask for understanding because you are frustrated. God loves honesty. The work area of your brain, place the issue you are struggling with in it. Then using Catholic research show yourself why the Catholic way is right.

See what happens with arrogance is that we feel we are right and we feel we may be onto something the Church has never thought of. Rebuke this pride satan is enticing you with. Because this is not correct if the Church had already declared it doctrine or dogma. If something goes against doctrine or dogma it is a “no no”. But if your idea is contrary to possible corrupted pastoral advice it may not be a “no no”.

You can still sort out these questions you have in an objective manner in your own mind but also still remain loyal to the faith. But while you are doing so you do not want to go shouting at the rooftops with something you may or may not be accurate on because you could be a detrimental force to an innocent soul.