Complexity of Catholic Social Teaching?

[Onegin]

Another question for you all.

Do you consider Catholic social teaching up to and including Vatican II to be:

A. Generally easy to understand overall.

B. Generally easy to understand in light of Vatican II.

C. Generally difficult to understand in light of Vatican II.

D. Generally difficult to understand overall.

Example subjects of Catholic Social Teaching:

The role of the Church in the modern world
The permissibility of the use of Natural Family Planning (NFP).
The role of the Family in the modern world
The role of non-Catholic religions in the modern world
Care for God’s creation/Environmental issues
Preferential option for the poor
Dignity of the human person/Dignity of workers.

 

[diggerdomer]

Another question for you all.

Do you consider Catholic social teaching up to and including Vatican II to be:

A. Generally easy to understand overall.

B. Generally easy to understand in light of Vatican II.

C. Generally difficult to understand in light of Vatican II.

D. Generally difficult to understand overall.

Example subjects of Catholic Social Teaching:

The role of the Church in the modern world
The permissibility of the use of Natural Family Planning (NFP).
The role of the Family in the modern world
The role of non-Catholic religions in the modern world
Care for God’s creation/Environmental issues
Preferential option for the poor
Dignity of the human person/Dignity of workers.

I don’t understand the difference in choices a and b.

 

[4elise]

Catholic Social Teaching is a great gift to people of faith - and to the world!
[SIGN]We are SO blessed! [/SIGN]

 

[Ridgerunner]

I voted generally easy to understand overall.

However, on second thought, I will say that while the concepts are not at all difficult to understand, the language in which they are expressed is sometimes difficult.

 

[passus]

Another question for you all.

Do you consider Catholic social teaching up to and including Vatican II to be:

A. Generally easy to understand overall.

B. Generally easy to understand in light of Vatican II.

C. Generally difficult to understand in light of Vatican II.

D. Generally difficult to understand overall.

Example subjects of Catholic Social Teaching:

The role of the Church in the modern world
The permissibility of the use of Natural Family Planning (NFP).
The role of the Family in the modern world
The role of non-Catholic religions in the modern world
Care for God’s creation/Environmental issues
Preferential option for the poor
Dignity of the human person/Dignity of workers.

Well, err, Catholic social teaching meant something different before Vatican II than it does right now because before Vatican II, the social situation obviously wasn’t the same as the one we find ourselves in today and the social concerns addressed by the Church’s particular social teaching may or may not be different. Of course, the principals of the Catholic social teaching have and will always be applicable, so far as we can tell at least with regard to the future.

I think you’re going to have to explain Catholic social teaching in light of the second Vatican Council if you want us to answer letters B and C.

You’re asking something that’s really quite broad.

 

[Onegin]

I don’t understand the difference in choices a and b.

Choice A is asking whether, as a whole, you’ve always considered the Church’s teaching on social matters to be fairly easy to understand.

Choice B is asking you whether you find that the documents of Vatican II have made it easier for you to understand the Church’s position on social issues.

I think you’re going to have to explain Catholic social teaching in light of the second Vatican Council if you want us to answer letters B and C.

You’re asking something that’s really quite broad.

I’ll use a really brief example:

Casti Connubii is a pre-Vatican II encyclical written by Pope Pius XII that, amongst other things, addresses the unitive and procreative aspects of the conjugal act and also expressly prohibits Catholics from using any form of artificial birth control. However, it does not expressly address the use of the Natural Family Planning method.

Humane Vitae is a Vatican II encyclical that, amongst other things, reaffirms the unitive and procreative functions as well as reaffirms the ban on artificial birth control. Additionally, it expressly addresses the conditions under which the use of Natural Family Planning would be acceptable.

So, as regards the Church’s position on the issue of Natural Family Planning, the poll question would be asking you whether Catholic teaching on using this method was (a) always easy to understand, (b) easier to understand in light of Humane Vitae, (c) more difficult to understand in light of Humane Vitae or (d) has always been difficult to understand.

The poll applies in the same way to other social issues and, therefore, is purposefully broad.

Additionally, I’d be interested to hear responses if some people find some social teachings easy to understand and others difficult (and why).

 

[diggerdomer]

Choice A is asking whether, as a whole, you’ve always considered the Church’s teaching on social matters to be fairly easy to understand.

Choice B is asking you whether you find that the documents of Vatican II have made it easier for you to understand the Church’s position on social issues.

Then I’d choose both a and b. Thanks.

 

[Claire_from_DE]

I think dividing this by Vatican II isn’t helpful. Catholic social teaching is constantly expanding to address issues as they arise. Pre-Vat II there were “new” social teachings regarding, for instance, labor unions. The very effective NFP methods that exist today had not been developed 30 years ago. Cloning etc. are newer issues. But the church applies basic ideas of justice or human sexuality to new developments in society. I choose A and B.

Some things still aren’t clear and require personal judgement. Like the idea of when a war is a ‘just war’.

 

[Onegin]

I think dividing this by Vatican II isn’t helpful. Catholic social teaching is constantly expanding to address issues as they arise. Pre-Vat II there were “new” social teachings regarding, for instance, labor unions. The very effective NFP methods that exist today had not been developed 30 years ago. Cloning etc. are newer issues. But the church applies basic ideas of justice or human sexuality to new developments in society. I choose A and B.

Some things still aren’t clear and require personal judgement. Like the idea of when a war is a ‘just war’.

I think it’s a fair division since some catholics feel that Vatican II greatly clarified the Church’s teaching on a number of social issues while some felt that the council muddied the waters.

Yet still, there are some that would feel that the teaching has always been easy (before and after Vatican II) to understand and still more yet who have problems understanding the Church’s position on social issues generally.

Needless to say, if the poll is any measure of accuracy, there’s a decent spread.

 

[Mimi]

Some things are fairly easy to understand, such as the concept of “subsidiarity” which makes sense. However, I can see where some well-meaning people could interpret encyclicals to support socialist ideals or govt (where supposedly everyone is taken care of).
But freedom is important, too, so that conflicts with the above.

A book I found helpful is Citizens of the Heavenly City: A Catechism of Catholic Social Teaching by Arthur Hippler. It has an imprimatur by then Archbishop Ray Burke. $15.95 plus shipping.
ISBN 0-9763098-2-3
borromeobooks.com/

My first 2 copies came with an answer guide; there are questions at the end of each short chapter. But the one which arrived just recently did not include the answer key, so it may be good to mention that when you order.

Also available at The St. John Fischer Catholic Forum bookstore:
stjohnfisherforum.org/product_detail.cfm?ID=12830

It’s only 154 pp, paperback, and lists relevant papal encyclicals in the back as well as a glossary.

I would like to have a course on this in our parish with this book as the guide. It’s clear, each ch is short, and is recommended for use as a high school text.

Please let me know if anyone gets this & reads it! Thanks in advance.

Mimi

 

[2HunnyBuns]

I think it’s easy to understand. Of course, it’s not always worded in a way that is easy for a lay person to understand. Once it’s spelled out in simple terms and language I’d say it’s pretty straightforward.

 

[StillWondering]

I think the teachings are clear and well illustrated.

However, it may or may not be easy to understand. That is dependant on the wording, the grace of God, the dedication of the members, and many other things. So I will have difficulty answer that question.

But a multiple choice is great, because I do not have to think as much. It is either A or B. Since I am young, I do not know A without already having heard tidbits of B. But before and after Vatican, I do not see the difference really. The Church is consistent in what it teaches since the early days to now as far as I can see. The wording maybe complicated but they are there to be exact, which is great for me who nitpicks.

One thing I do love is the use of vernacular and the closest of the laity and the ordained. Is that from Vatican II? Did that not exist before than?

I’m Vietnamese, and while I have not always been active in church, having Vietnamese Mass was extremely helpful to my family and is still extremely helpful.