Conscience

[Neil_Anthony]

Yes, I see that for some here they wish that those who don’t agree with them would simply leave the Church to them. That’s at least 3 now who have pretty much asked me to leave. But of course I have no such intention. Not a particularly good evangelistic method I would say

Well, a person has to be in the church in the first place to leave the church. If someone doesn’t believe in the Catholic faith, then leaving the church isn’t a question.

I have no desire to make people who are questioning stop going to their Catholic church. What upsets me is that they often feel the need to promote their ideas and harass and try to humiliate the people who are trying to be faithful to the church. I’ve seen it many times in person, and I see it on these forums.

I guess its part of the free-thinking mentality to attack those who accept the established ideas.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

If you truly uphold the notion (belief???) that the teaching of the Church can be evenly compared to the dictates of the Nazi government, then you might want to check in with a mental health specialist. That’s the most charitable advice I can offer you.

PS - it’s free, if unrequested, advice.

You really must learn how to read in context and to quote in context. I think any further discussion with you is not of value. You cannot seem to grasp context well at all. And you must if you wish to be a respected debater. There are many here who are excellent.

 

[catharina]

**You’re mean spiritedness is sad. Do you prefer I not pray for you? I will do as you wish ma’am. **

I welcome the prayers of any who choose to pray for me, dear.

Do you believe that you would be better off without the prayers of one who is “mean spirited” praying for you. Suit yourself.

(IMO, your riff on JFK is ridiculous and lamentable.)

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Well, a person has to be in the church in the first place to leave the church. If someone doesn’t believe in the Catholic faith, then leaving the church isn’t a question.

I have no desire to make people who are questioning stop going to their Catholic church. What upsets me is that they often feel the need to promote their ideas and harass and try to humiliate the people who are trying to be faithful to the church. I’ve seen it many times in person, and I see it on these forums.

I guess its part of the free-thinking mentality to attack those who accept the established ideas.

On most issues I prefer to allow people to believe what they wish, in fact I do that most often. What I do take objection to is those that claim their belief is what is taught by the Church. I don’t claim that I am the sole arbiter of that, but I will disagree when I find the statements not what I believe the Church teaches. You should read me in that vein. I’m not objecting to anyone following church teaching on anything I can think of. I merely disagree on how we come to decide how and why and when to.

 

[catharina]

You really must learn how to read in context and to quote in context. I think any further discussion with you is not of value. You cannot seem to grasp context well at all. And you must if you wish to be a respected debater. There are many here who are excellent.

Certainly we have had no discusssion and no debate either.

I grasp enough of your context to realize that when you are cornered regarding your rejection of the teachings of the Church, you become personally insulting and attempt to be patronizing as well. I’m also aware that no one of your ilk (mindset) can do me the slightest harm by either offending my feelings or insulting my intelligence. Again, the kindest advice I can offer to you is that you seek help with issues related to your mental health. As to your judgment of others here, again I’m not interested. (I do applaud many others for their patience with you.)

 

[Mousey]

I wish I could get rid of all postings for today.

This could be a very informative discussion without rancor.

I know the post about gut feeling was not well received and I do understand why. I didn’t take it as aimed at anyone but a generalization.

Until this thread I had taken it for granted what was meant by conscience.

Although I wouldn’t label people relying on gut feeling, I would say that people mix up thought and belief with conscience although I am still working out how.

I know I probably am bringing up that which has already been covered. So I guess I need to reread some of the fine postings.

Please everyone we are on the same boat and we are called to love. I don’t agree with everything that is posted and I loath the postings today. I think it is good that we pray for one another. Personally I don’t think you can pray for someone and be uncharitable towards them.

 

[catharina]

I wish I could get rid of all postings for today.

This could be a very informative discussion without rancor.

I know the post about gut feeling was not well received and I do understand why. I didn’t take it as aimed at anyone but a generalization.

Until this thread I had taken it for granted what was meant by conscience.

Although I wouldn’t label people relying on gut feeling, I would say that people mix up thought and belief with conscience although I am still working out how.

I know I probably am bringing up that which has already been covered. So I guess I need to reread some of the fine postings.

Please everyone we are on the same boat and we are called to love. I don’t agree with everything that is posted and I loath the postings today. I think it is good that we pray for one another. Personally I don’t think you can pray for someone and be uncharitable towards them.

I agree with that thought.

 

[Janet_S]

A faithfulCatholic politician would be a welcomed change from some of the ones we have now. HH is a good example of a faithful Catholic politician. Some of the politicians who claim they are Catholic have chosen to form their consciences by the dictates of their party, not by natural or divine law or objective truth. The only thing you can count on from them is to be the champion of every bad idea that contributes to the culture of death. You name it; abortion, Planned Parenthood, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, socialism, gay marriage–they’re on board for them all.

The faithful Catholic politician would be committed to religious freedom just like the Church is. Any talk of a Catholic setting up a theocracy is nonsense. No faithful Catholic would even think of that as that is opposed to clear Magisterial teaching.

You can’t separate a man from his religion, and even if you could, the American people wouldn’t want it. Is religious freedom for everyone but Catholics?

The Vatican II document, *Dignitatis Humanae *4 says this:

In addition, it comes within the meaning of religious freedom that religious bodies should not be prohibited from freely undertaking to show the special value of their doctrine in what concerns the organization of society and the inspiration of the whole of human activity. (footnote by John Courtney Murray, SJ–Implicitly rejected here is the outmoded notion that “religion is a purely private affair” or that “the Church belongs in the sacristy.” Religion is relevant to the life and action of society. Therefore, religious freedom includes the right to point out this social relevance of religious belief.)

*Dignitatis Humanae * (The Declaration on Religious Freedom) is a document everyone should read if he or she wants to understand conscience as a way to live your Catholic faith rather than as a way for individual Catholics to battle against the Church Magisterium. Unfortunately, too many Catholics who talk about conscience ignore the former understanding and concentrate on the latter. In other words, they ignore the responsibility of conscience while concentrating on its rights.

 

[Janet_S]

Hmmmm, it was me. Did you forget that? or just trying for some more drama? The article from The Age does not of course make any resolution of the problem, simply reporting both sides opinion in the matter. So it have zero help in explaining anything. I have no idea why it was included, except to point out that Pell’s argument is finding find opposition. Why would you think this helps you.?

This was my point:
Apparently (according to the liberal critics of Cardinal Pell) we can reject any Church teaching on the basis of conscience and remain in good standing. Unless, of course, we make the unforgiveable error of rejecting the doctrine of “primacy of conscience” (like Cardinal Pell did), then we must be reported to the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith.

Don’t you see the irony in that? What if Cardinal Pell’s conscience was telling him to reject the doctrine of “primacy of conscience?” Isn’t he automatically vindicated according to the doctrine of “primacy of conscience?”

And of course there was no resolution. I’m sure the Congregation on the Doctrine of Faith just dropped the issue because it was too absurd.

 

[Janet_S]

I wish I could get rid of all postings for today.

This could be a very informative discussion without rancor.

I know the post about gut feeling was not well received and I do understand why. I didn’t take it as aimed at anyone but a generalization.

Until this thread I had taken it for granted what was meant by conscience.

Although I wouldn’t label people relying on gut feeling, I would say that people mix up thought and belief with conscience although I am still working out how.

I know I probably am bringing up that which has already been covered. So I guess I need to reread some of the fine postings.

Please everyone we are on the same boat and we are called to love. I don’t agree with everything that is posted and I loath the postings today. I think it is good that we pray for one another. Personally I don’t think you can pray for someone and be uncharitable towards them.

Sorry, you’re right.

I do agree that people mix up thought and belief with conscience. We are warned about this in the Catechism. This is a problem especially in our time when objective truth is denied by most people.

 

[vern_humphrey]

You really must learn how to read in context and to quote in context. I think any further discussion with you is not of value. You cannot seem to grasp context well at all. And you must if you wish to be a respected debater. There are many here who are excellent.

May I suggest if one wishes to be a respected debater, one should not post snotty comments?

 

[Neil_Anthony]

You really must learn how to read in context and to quote in context. I think any further discussion with you is not of value. You cannot seem to grasp context well at all. And you must if you wish to be a respected debater. There are many here who are excellent.

So you confuse discussing faith with a contest where people compete to score points against people of opposite viewpoints. That explain a lot.

 

[dessert]

No problem, perfectly fine statement. I am always guilded by the Church’s magisterium, and I agree, all adult Catholics have such a duty to actively sincerely and thoroughly search for objective moral truth.

I’m glad to hear this I was beginning to have misgivings about you.

I was only saying that we should try to speak the truth and in a humble way and silence should not be a norm. I say this because I lived a good part of my life not saying much of anything. Subjected myself to fate. I’m learning not to play the part of the victim but also not speaking arrogantly, and the Church teachings and models of Catholics help me in this goal.
I hope you haven’t misunderstood this.

 

[catharina]

When I post in support of Church teachings, I have no intention of engaging in debate. My belief is that there is nothing to debate. One is in support of the teachings of the Church or one is in dissent. Under the best of circumstances, it’s possible to engage in dialogue with one in dissent but to engage in debate? Never.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

This was my point:
Apparently (according to the liberal critics of Cardinal Pell) we can reject any Church teaching on the basis of conscience and remain in good standing. Unless, of course, we make the unforgiveable error of rejecting the doctrine of “primacy of conscience” (like Cardinal Pell did), then we must be reported to the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith.

Don’t you see the irony in that? What if Cardinal Pell’s conscience was telling him to reject the doctrine of “primacy of conscience?” Isn’t he automatically vindicated according to the doctrine of “primacy of conscience?”

And of course there was no resolution. I’m sure the Congregation on the Doctrine of Faith just dropped the issue because it was too absurd.

It fascinating how two people read the same document and see two different things. Thanks for the discussion, but I think there is nothing more to add. Catharina seems to think I’ve been cornered…lol…Rather, I’m tired of absolutely nothing I say being reported correctly when replying. Apparently JFK did not have to make a speech and convince the American people that he was not going to have a hot line to the Vatican to get advice from the pope on every issue. Apparently that’s just a fabrication of my mind…but for the public film of the event, I guess its not at all true.
Fair minded people know the truth.

Jayne, no one is absolutely vindicated by anything…Don’t you see that? You taunt, and make sarcasm of everything, yes i retaliate and I’m not proud of it, but for goodness sake, how can you conclude that primacy of conscience is some kind of escape clause? It’s undoubtedly the riskiest position one can ever take. i would not recommend ANYONE to go down that road unless there is no other resort.

You have made plain your real concerns here. I understand and accept that they are valid. Strangely you made no reply whatsoever to that post. You could not find anything to criticize I guess, so skipped it and looked for something else you could attack on. That is what distresses me, every time I think we have reached a place of peaceful coexistence if nothing else, you attack again, with the same distorted picture I’ve been complaining about.

I don’t have unlimited time to answer 4-6 people at a time for long. To have to restate, re correct nearly every statement that is made takes up so much more time than simply discussing the real issues. I just feel it fruitless to continue with you or Catharina.

I have addressed your serious and well founded concerns in a way that I thought might lead to a rapprochement of sorts, but this seems unlikey. There appears too much ranchor. I apoligize for my sarcasm. Most of it was motivated by being pressed for time as I said, and having to correct so many tangential issues that were incorrect statements. But that is hardly an excuse.

 

[vern_humphrey]

It fascinating how two people read the same document and see two different things. Thanks for the discussion, but I think there is nothing more to add. Catharina seems to think I’ve been cornered…lol…Rather, I’m tired of absolutely nothing I say being reported correctly when replying.

It’s a conspiracy – the whole world is against you. Nobody else is challenged like you are.

Hint, google up “Harry Truman” and “kitchen.”

 

[catharina]

It’s a conspiracy – the whole world is against you. Nobody else is challenged like you are.

Hint, google up “Harry Truman” and “kitchen.”

Pehaps she’s found new kitchens where the heat is more to her liking. I fail to understand how anyone who is “retired” is too busy to make reasonable statements that all of us should be easily able to understand. If “no one understands” then perhaps the speaker is at fault. (?)

 

[vern_humphrey]

Pehaps she’s found new kitchens where the heat is more to her liking. I fail to understand how anyone who is “retired” is too busy to make reasonable statements that all of us should be easily able to understand. If “no one understands” then perhaps the speaker is at fault. (?)

I’ve been through this before – when my daughters were in their teens: “Nobody understaaaaands me!” “You’re twisting everything I say!” “Nobody looooooves me!”

But they grew out of it.

 

[catharina]

I’ve been through this before – when my daughters were in their teens: “Nobody understaaaaands me!” “You’re twisting everything I say!” “Nobody looooooves me!”

But they grew out of it.

I worked with emotionally unhinged teens (boys and girls) for many years. Yes, with the grace of God and some humility, many (maybe most?) outgrow such thinking.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is closed. Thank you all.