Dissenters: Why do you call yourself a Catholic?

[minimom]

minimom:
Hmmm…but how hard is everyone trying? I see too often people tend to take the ‘wide way’ and ignore the ‘narrow way’ which the Lord tells us to take. That takes intensive spiritual work and a constant goal of remaining faithful, learning as much as you can about Church related issues, a strong prayer life, turning ‘out’ worldliness as much as possible, etc. Those of us who try to do this daily are not saints, but we are merely doing what the Lord asks. We are deeply concerned about those Catholics who seem more involved in worldliness than in their faith. Some of them tend to listen to political leaders, news sources, etc. and somehow believe they have more credence than the magisterium of the Church. Pretty scary. It’s difficult to follow the Church, but once you start really digging into Catholic truth, you want more, and you want to spread that faith to all the world so they can see what you found. We have to be very careful not to be duped by ideals in this world which have elements which SEEM good; satan is devious and uses many ways to trick us. Complete faithfulness to the Church is really THE way to go. Please pray to continually deepen your faith. God bless you.

 

[vz71]

Hmmm…but how hard is everyone trying? I see too often people tend to take the ‘wide way’ and ignore the ‘narrow way’ which the Lord tells us to take. That takes intensive spiritual work and a constant goal of remaining faithful, learning as much as you can about Church related issues, a strong prayer life, turning ‘out’ worldliness as much as possible, etc. Those of us who try to do this daily are not saints, but we are merely doing what the Lord asks. We are deeply concerned about those Catholics who seem more involved in worldliness than in their faith. Some of them tend to listen to political leaders, news sources, etc. and somehow believe they have more credence than the magisterium of the Church. Pretty scary. It’s difficult to follow the Church, but once you start really digging into Catholic truth, you want more, and you want to spread that faith to all the world so they can see what you found. We have to be very careful not to be duped by ideals in this world which have elements which SEEM good; satan is devious and uses many ways to trick us. Complete faithfulness to the Church is really THE way to go. Please pray to continually deepen your faith. God bless you.

 

[Ender]

It is stated in black and white and has been in the CCC,. and both both popes at various times. No one can EVER give up their responsibility to individually discern truth,

Each of us has to individually search for the truth but there is only one truth, not one for you and a different one for me.

They are to be guided in every respect by church teaching, but we are not allowed to simply allow the Church to think for us.

If you understand and accept what the Church says about herself then you would realize that it is not “the Church” who is telling us what to believe but God.

To say otherwise means no conscience can be properly formed unless in agreement with the Church.

Yep, pretty much.

We’ve been through this a hundred pages of posts before and I don’t intend to engage in it again. We disagree. Nothing more to be said.

Not to you perhaps, but there are others out there who might be tempted to believe as you do and I wouldn’t want them misled into accepting your flawed understanding of ones rights and responsibilities as regards the conscience.

It is this opinion - that right and wrong are somehow dependent on what an individual believes - that accounts for most of the dissent in the Church. This is an area where better catechesis would be extremely useful.

Ender

 

[Fitswimmer]

Wouldn’t questioning the legitimacy of the faith of others still be an intentional failure?

Look at the Catechism:

Consider even infallible teachings. Estesbob has frequently identified abortion as a critical issue. He has even identified it as a litmus test for determining who is, and who is not, (in his words) a “real” Catholic. But, with regards to voting, he endorses an application of “proportionate reasons”. That is, he argues that even abortion must be compromised on in political life.

Personally, I disagree with this thinking. I am prone to agree with Rome:

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html

Abortion is the first of nine examples listed. If I compromise on these principles, even for laudable goals, then I would see myself as undermining them. Attacking the Faith and the “essence of the moral law”.

But being more rigid in my application of Church teaching does not entitle me to question Estesbob’s intent and motives. I can belief that his actions are counter productive, just as I believe that Catholics who disagree on teachings like contraception and the death penalty are propogating a culture of death. But I cannot look into his heart or hear the exact call of his moral conscience. So I cannot judge his Christianity.

This is such an important point, and I think it got lost.

I can’t imagine how it would NOT be sinful for me to cast doubts on the faith of another person, or to decide for myself whether someone was a “real” Catholic or not. It’s tempting to want to believe that I’m a “better” Catholic than someone I disagree with, but I would think that it is not something that Jesus would want me to do.

 

[estesbob]

Not to you perhaps, but there are others out there who might be tempted to believe as you do and I wouldn’t want them misled into accepting your flawed understanding of ones rights and responsibilities as regards the conscience.

It is this opinion - that right and wrong are somehow dependent on what an individual believes - that accounts for most of the dissent in the Church. This is an area where better catechesis would be extremely useful.

Ender

Exactly-which is why many of get involved in the same discussions over and over-making sure that Church teaching is not disorted and thus mislead any lurker who passes by.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

With all due respect, you seem a bit defensive, and I’m wondering why. You speak of anyone who defends traditional and non-negotiable Church teachings as ‘self righteous’ but are they really? No, they’re just following Church teachings and being faithful. No sincere Catholic should be making any decisions on key issues until they know what the Church (and hence, Jesus) teaches. Did you never learn that? Please reflect on this a bit and pray. Time spent in adoration is awesome for sorting things out. God bless.

No I’m not defensive, and I can’t imagine what I would have to be defensive about. I did not say all, I said many. And when it comes down to it, it often is interpretation. Many interepret the Church as basically saying that capital punishment is no longer to be supported, but some split hairs to the finest point to still find a way wherein they can support it. It is certainly against the tenor of both the vatican and the US bishops. So then I am told it’s not officially taught, so they don’t have to obey it. I agree that one should consult the church’s teachings on important issues, but some here, claim to have no opinion on a subject but simply ask what the Church requires and they will believe that. That is pure laziness and not at all what is required. Thank you for your spiritual guidance, but i generally follow the dictates of my spritual director in such matters.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Not me. Most of us conservatives here follow the magesterium 100%. I’ve only seen a couple of people who for conservative ideological reasons ignore church social teaching. You should do a poll

Yes, you follow the magisterium as you understand it. The key word is understand. that is not necessarily what is actually taught. In your case, you may be perfect, but many are not, and refuse to read or discuss documents that clearly are against what they PERCEIVE to be correct teaching.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Do you realize that you have just compared the Catholic Church to Nazi Germany? Do you really think that there is a moral equivalency between following the orders to exterminate Jews(the Nuremberg defense) and following the teachings of the Catholic Church.

If conscious is king why do we need a Church?

Been there done that Bob, No I have not compared the Church to Nazi Germany. I have claimed that some people who claim to be Catholic do use the Nuremberg defense…And I think it’s wrong as did the court. And I would argue the Church also would agree that such a claim is wrong. I’m not getting into another primacy of conscience argument again. I’ve had my fill of folks ignoring the actual black and white words of popes and the Church itself.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Each of us has to individually search for the truth but there is only one truth, not one for you and a different one for me.
If you understand and accept what the Church says about herself then you would realize that it is not “the Church” who is telling us what to believe but God.

That is but a game to get back to the Church being perfect and error free and therefore I need not think, just leave it to the Church to tell me. The Church also claimed that a capybara was a fish and not a rodent. i suppose in that they were also errorless.

Not to you perhaps, but there are others out there who might be tempted to believe as you do and I wouldn’t want them misled into accepting your flawed understanding of ones rights and responsibilities as regards the conscience.

But I claim that your understanding is flawed, so there we have it.

It is this opinion - that right and wrong are somehow dependent on what an individual believes - that accounts for most of the dissent in the Church. This is an area where better catechesis would be extremely useful.

Ender

Your way leads to a church of automotons who simply receive what the Church hands out.I have no desire to stand before God and and use as my defense, the Church told me to believe this and so I inquired no further. To do so is madness. While the Church is more often right than wrong, to be sure She has been greviously wrong on things in the past. I was created with a mind, and it is a heinous act to ignore it and follow cultlike anything without a thorough examination of all the facts. There has and God willing will always be dissent in the Church, that is how errors are corrected.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Exactly-which is why many of get involved in the same discussions over and over-making sure that Church teaching is not disorted and thus mislead any lurker who passes by.

You betcha, that is why we stay too.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Yes, you follow the magisterium as you understand it. The key word is understand. that is not necessarily what is actually taught. In your case, you may be perfect, but many are not, and refuse to read or discuss documents that clearly are against what they PERCEIVE to be correct teaching.

We don’t have to be perfect, there is a range of viewpoints which are acceptable.

And yes you have to follow your conscience. But if your conscience tells you to believe in Buddhism, and you become a Buddhist, you can’t claim to still be a good Catholic just because you are following your conscience.

 

[estesbob]

Been there done that Bob, No I have not compared the Church to Nazi Germany. I have claimed that some people who claim to be Catholic do use the Nuremberg defense…And I think it’s wrong as did the court. And I would argue the Church also would agree that such a claim is wrong. I’m not getting into another primacy of conscience argument again. I’ve had my fill of folks ignoring the actual black and white words of popes and the Church itself.

You wont get into a primacy of conscience discussion becasue as has been shown repeatedly you cant defend your position. Your "anything goes as long as your conscience says its all right "is not supported in any way by the Church-either in black and white or technicolor.

You said people who ahhere to the Teachings of the Church are using the Nuremburg defense. That defense was used by Nazis who said they couldnt be held accountable for their actions because they were acting under orders. It appears you are indeed comapring us to Nazis-comparing our obedience to the Chruch to the obedience of the Nazis to Hitler. Perhaps you can explain what you meant if this is not so.

What i find interesting is that whenvever someone talks about primacy of concience 99% of the time they use it either to justify homosexual behavior or contraception. Why is that?

 

[minimom]

That is but a game to get back to the Church being perfect and error free and therefore I need not think, just leave it to the Church to tell me. The Church also claimed that a capybara was a fish and not a rodent. i suppose in that they were also errorless.

But I claim that your understanding is flawed, so there we have it.

Your way leads to a church of automotons who simply receive what the Church hands out.I have no desire to stand before God and and use as my defense, the Church told me to believe this and so I inquired no further. To do so is madness. While the Church is more often right than wrong, to be sure She has been greviously wrong on things in the past. I was created with a mind, and it is a heinous act to ignore it and follow cultlike anything without a thorough examination of all the facts. There has and God willing will always be dissent in the Church, that is how errors are corrected.

People get confused sometimes re. what the Church teaches. It is infallible re faith and morals.

 

[St_Aloysius]

Petrus:

While I don’t support gay marriage, I’m glad the California Supreme Court ruled as it did last week. Some gay and lesbian couples have children, and these children need legal protection. The state has no business marrying anyone as it can’t sanctify marriages; a better solution would be for the state to guarantee protection for all couples and their children by granting civil unions to all. The churches would then be free to sanctify relationships or not, as they see theologically fit.

Excellent point.

 

[drpmjhess]

Excellent point.

Thanks.

 

[Icarus]

**Quotes by Petrus **

While I don’t support gay marriage, I’m glad the California Supreme Court ruled as it did last week.

Juxtapose the 2 halves of the quote; at the comma. It sounds to me like you do support gay marriage… although you prefer the guise of sitting on the fence, where you think it’s safe. Sounds like Self preservation my Darwinian friend.

Some gay and lesbian couples have children, and these children need legal protection.

Why? Are they extra special than Hetero people’s children – ALL CHILDREN NEED PROTECTION

The **state has no business marrying anyone **as it can’t sanctify marriages;

This latently contradicts your first and second to last quotes.(although you’ll explain it away) …And up to a few years back before the gay agenda, nobody had a problem with this! What’s changed Petrus?

a better solution would be for the state to **guarantee protection for all couples and their children **by granting civil unions to all.

What special Protection do you want- above and beyond any other children (every situation has its own specific set of circumstances? - I thought the law covered all children)

The churches would then be free to sanctify relationships or not, as they see theologically fit

I thought the Church is already free from government or anyone’s intervention – to do as it see’s fit…. But further to this… if you approve of “churches” doing there own thing (and you consider it sanctifying) this goes to show how you are against the sovereign word of God –and it appears that you’d prefer to see schism after schism occur, until the church resembles humpty-D, except this time microscopic pieces. Divide and conquer hey!

Bottom line is you are dissenting from God’s word …if you approve of it (gay unions) in any form.
So…Dissenters: Why do you call yourself a Catholic?

 

[drpmjhess]

**Why? Are they extra special than Hetero people’s children – ALL CHILDREN NEED PROTECTION
**

Of course all children need legal protection. The gay couples in our parish and school who have children want the same legal protection for their children as I have for mine.

 

[estesbob]

Of course all children need legal protection. The gay couples in our parish and school who have children want the same legal protection for their children as I have for mine.

What protections are available to the children of homosexuals that are not available to married couples?

I am curious as to how you know there are homosexual “couples” in your parish? Does your pastor know? Do they take communion?

 

[drpmjhess]

What protections are available to the children of homosexuals that are not available to married couples?

I am curious as to how you know there are homosexual “couples” in your parish? Does your pastor know? Do they take communion?

(1) I haven’t studied the legal dimensions. Perhaps there aren’t any that still need protecting.

(2) They are our friends.

(3) Yes.

(4) Yes.

 

[estesbob]

(1) I haven’t studied the legal dimensions. Perhaps there aren’t any that still need protecting.

(2) They are our friends.

(3) Yes.

(4) Yes.

So your pastor gives communion to people who are in open defiance of the teachings of the Church. Or am I mistaken that you are Catholic??