Faith is a Two-Edged Sword

[Bubba_Switzler]

Quid est veritas?

That’s what separates Catholic evangelization from non-Catholic evangelization.

The non-Catholic persuades by minimalizing the WHYS necessary to believe the minimal set of TRUTHS they deem “sufficient to believe” to be “saved”.

The Catholic persuades by showing that believing the WHOLE TRUTH (the Deposit of Faith), because it’s FROM GOD, is only possible by coming to believe the WHYS within the framework of Magisterial Authority after believing that the Deposit of Faith IS the WHOLE TRUTH.

If you can’t persuade someone that the whole Deposit of Faith is given to us by the God given authority of the Magisterium as truth regardless of whether they understand it, then that person is not (at that time) convert-able.

So, that’s what needs to be “pounded into their heads” (so to speak ) instead of the usual protestant, “Just say ‘I believe!’, hold as true this minimal set of beliefs, and you’re saved!” routine, which tactic can’t possibly convert anyone to being Catholic.

So what do Catholics say? Catholics just say ‘I believe whatever the Church says’ regardless of whether or not they understand it.

What does it mean to say you believe in something you don’t understand?

This is faith ad absurdum.

How is it that a Catholic baby can be saved but a Protestant who has a child’s level of understanding of dogma can’t?

If dogma is important then isn’t it important to understand? And if it’s not important, why bother with it?

Protestants have faith in sola scriptura. Catholics try to reason them out of this with logical arguments. But it’s logic vs. faith. Catholics have faith in Magisterial Authority but where is the argument for this?

Yes, Protestants can be very dim witted but that doesn’t make Catholic dogma true.

The fundamental problem occurs whenever faith is used as a substitute for reason. Yes, faith is necessary, as I like to educate atheists on, but faith can be an impediment to truth.

 

[pete_29]

I believe in God. I can’t say I understand Him.

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by CatsAndDogs
That’s what separates Catholic evangelization from non-Catholic evangelization.

I dare say there are a great many things that I believe in that I don’t understand. I don’t understand gravity, I don’t understand cars (much) and a host of other things. Plus I do not have the time or energy to go into them all and understand them. Yet I count on them, and use them everyday.
The same can be said for the Church.
One of the advantages of the Catholic Church is her loooonngg history of consistant study and teaching. This means that when she comes out with some doctrine, encyclical, or other document or teaching we can have greeat confidence in it even though we don’t have the time, education etc to study the matter ourselves. We trust Christ’s Church.

How is it that a Catholic baby can be saved but a Protestant who has a child’s level of understanding of dogma can’t?

Actually I don’t think the Church teaches this, that someone outside of the Church cannot be saved.
However, the question becomes one of culpability. Is the person intelligent? Have they been exposed to Catholic Truth? Have they investigated and rejected Catholic Truth? These types of things factor into God’s judgement and not ours.

If dogma is important then isn’t it important to understand? And if it’s not important, why bother with it?

Actually I would say it is important to understand dogma in so far as we are able. I say this knowing that I am woefully deficient in this department myself. Much depends upon ones personal abilities and station in life. How much time and ability do they have to study. Like I said before, the magisterium is a great advantage to the faithful and not, as some believe, a hinderance.

Protestants have faith in sola scriptura. Catholics try to reason them out of this with logical arguments. But it’s logic vs. faith.

All we can do is plant the seed. It is the Holy Spirit who must lead them.

Catholics have faith in Magisterial Authority but where is the argument for this?

Not sure I understand this.
Are you asking how we justify following the magisterium?

Yes, Protestants can be very dim witted but that doesn’t make Catholic dogma true.

individual intellect has no bearing one way or another on Truth.

The fundamental problem occurs whenever faith is used as a substitute for reason. Yes, faith is necessary, as I like to educate atheists on, but faith can be an impediment to truth.

It has been my exprerience that it is faith (in ss) coupled with misinformation about the Church that is the biggest impediment.

Peace
James

 

[Teflon93]

We see with eyes of faith. Plato had it quite right when he noted that man’s perceptivity of truth is as people watching shadows dance on a wall.

The trouble with man’s rather feeble reasoning ability is that when married with overweening pride it leads to the dimmest among us claiming that the universe is in fact shadows on the wall, never daring to question what is casting the shadows.

 

[FCEGM]

St. Anselm offers some wisdom on this:

“I do not seek to understand that I may believe, but I believe that I may understand: for this I also believe, that unless I believe I will not understand.”

A step in faith (the ASSENT of Faith) is what the Lord asks, and not an ability to cross every ‘t’ or dot ever ‘i’ through our own human reasoning. That’s not to say that He doesn’t want us to employ our human reasoning, but that a simple trust in what He teaches through His Church often accomplishes a deeper understanding than all our struggle to understand according to our particular limitations.

We believe there is objective Truth to be known and embraced re what is to believed and what is to be practiced because Christ has come from the Father to reveal Himself and how we should live in Him in this life and the next, and that Christ has given the authority to His Church to preserve and teach these truths for our salvation. So those who do embrace Christ in and through His Church DO have a deeper spiritual insight than those who prefer the a la carte approach to religious belief and practice.

 

[06convert]

Well sense the Catholic teachings are 100% correct, I suppose if people want to follow them without knowing why, they are still in good shape. It’s actually probably alot less work to simply believe without needing an understanding.

 

[JRKH]

Well sense the Catholic teachings are 100% correct, I suppose if people want to follow them without knowing why, they are still in good shape. It’s actually probably alot less work to simply believe without needing an understanding.

Not to toss cold water on your argument, I think that your middle statement about being in good shape is dangerous.
The reason I say this is because of how and what Jesus taught us. Too many people, like the pharasees, think that “following the rules” and “performing the rituals” is sufficient. It is not.
WE MUST BELIEVE. We must REPENT and turn toward God with our Whole Heart Mind and Soul. We must SEEK greater depth of spirituality and union with God Through Christ. We must never be satisfied that we have arrived at our salvation simply because we go to mass, or follow the rules and teachings of the church. This is not, “working out our salvation with fear and trembling”, as St Paul says.

OK I’m finished ranting…
What you say is true in the sense that we cannot understand all things and can/must rely on the good offices and protected judgements of Holy Mother Church.
Praise God for Her. For Her Love, and Her Discipline, and Her Tireless efforts in teaching God’s Children.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Well sense the Catholic teachings are 100% correct, I suppose if people want to follow them without knowing why, they are still in good shape. It’s actually probably alot less work to simply believe without needing an understanding.

Not to toss cold water on your argument, I think that your middle statement about being in good shape is dangerous. It is an attitude that bespeaks of lethergy and sloth in spiritual matters.
The reason I say this is because of how and what Jesus taught us. Too many people, like the pharasees, think that “following the rules” and “performing the rituals” is sufficient. It is not.
WE MUST BELIEVE. We must REPENT and turn toward God with our Whole Heart Mind and Soul. We must SEEK greater depth of spirituality and union with God Through Christ. We must never be satisfied that we have arrived at our salvation simply because we go to mass, or follow the rules and teachings of the church. This is not, “working out our salvation with fear and trembling”, as St Paul says.

OK I’m finished ranting…
What you say is true in the sense that we cannot understand all things and can/must rely on the good offices and protected judgements of Holy Mother Church.
Praise God for Her. For Her Love, and Her Discipline, and Her Tireless efforts in teaching God’s Children.

Peace
James

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

It is an attitude that bespeaks of lethergy and sloth in spiritual matters. The reason I say this is because of how and what Jesus taught us. Too many people, like the pharasees, think that “following the rules” and “performing the rituals” is sufficient. It is not.

Indeed, Jesus engaged those who listened to think which is one reason he spoke in parables instead of issueing a new set of commandments.

But there are other practical issues as well. The first and foremost is that if you simply say “I believe whatever the Church tells me to believe” you’re going to be a pretty pathetic evangilist. And, indeed, Catholics are generally ineffective on that score.

The other problem is that if you don’t understand what you belive, how can you possibly apply it? To some extent you might be able to distinguish the reasons why from the how but real life has a habbit of throwing us curves and making us think on our feet.

Finally, and I don’t expect a lot of sympathy for this argument here, but leaving the theological heavy lifting to others is, as James noted, slothful. And, I suspect, it is this Catholic habit that leads to dictatorships in Latin America.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

Actually I don’t think the Church teaches this, that someone outside of the Church cannot be saved.

In fact, there are more than a few who take this view. (I am not one of them.)

See forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=300911

Not sure I understand this. Are you asking how we justify following the magisterium?

One of the questions I posed in another thread was this: what is the Catholic argument for Magisterial Authority? Nobody could offer any. And if it is merely a matter of faith then how do you argue for it with people who don’t share the faith? (Evangilism problem again.)

It has been my exprerience that it is faith (in ss) coupled with misinformation about the Church that is the biggest impediment.

Misinformation can be corrected, although it can take time. But when its faith vs. faith, there is not much room for argument and persuasion.

 

[Teflon93]

In fact, there are more than a few who take this view. (I am not one of them.)

One of the questions I posed in another thread was this: what is the Catholic argument for Magisterial Authority? Nobody could offer any. And if it is merely a matter of faith then how do you argue for it with people who don’t share the faith? (Evangilism problem again.)

We have plenty of threads in support of the Magisterium—perhaps you missed them?

Read St Augustine’s “City of God.”

Misinformation can be corrected, although it can take time. But when its faith vs. faith, there is not much room for argument and persuasion.

And yet that’s all Protestantism has to offer.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

We have plenty of threads in support of the Magisterium—perhaps you missed them?

Could you point me to one.

Read St Augustine’s “City of God.”

Excellent work but doesn’t really provide what I’m looking for.

And yet that’s all Protestantism has to offer.

This really is my key point: Why are Catholics so willing and eager to lower Catholicism to the level of Protestantism?

(I realize not every Catholic can be an expert of apologetics but very few even bother to try. Virtually every Catholic outreach effort I’ve ever seen has been directed at getting former Catholics to return to the Church.)

 

[davidv]

Could you point me to one.

Excellent work but doesn’t really provide what I’m looking for.

This really is my key point: Why are Catholics so willing and eager to lower Catholicism to the level of Protestantism?

(I realize not every Catholic can be an expert of apologetics but very few even bother to try. Virtually every Catholic outreach effort I’ve ever seen has been directed at getting former Catholics to return to the Church.)

Re: highlighted statement: And given the very large number in this group why is that surprising? In fact, “re-evangelizing” of the Church was a papal priority in the recent past.

 

[Teflon93]

Could you point me to one.

Sure—note Randy’s response in this thread.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=302675

Excellent work but doesn’t really provide what I’m looking for.

But it does. St Augustine describes the constitution of the Church, which bridges Heaven and Earth.

This really is my key point: Why are Catholics so willing and eager to lower Catholicism to the level of Protestantism?

I don’t think most Catholics are. Just as one cannot explain calculus to a toddler except through gross analogy, one cannot explain the Church to a Protestant but at their level. They simply are not prepared to go any deeper.

(I realize not every Catholic can be an expert of apologetics but very few even bother to try. Virtually every Catholic outreach effort I’ve ever seen has been directed at getting former Catholics to return to the Church.)

I think this is true. I don’t necessarily think it is wrong to do so, given Church teaching on invincible ignorance. Catholics who do not return are very likely to go to hell; Protestants may or may not depending on what they know of the Church and how well they avail themselves of the vestigial sacraments their communities offer. Bringing the prodigals home tends to be a higher priority than adopting new sons and daughters.

 

[Teflon93]

Re: highlighted statement: And given the very large number in this group why is that surprising? In fact, “re-evangelizing” of the Church was a papal priority in the recent past.

And for the forseeable future, I’m sure.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

In fact, “re-evangelizing” of the Church was a papal priority in the recent past.

It’s one thing to declare a prioirty, another to actually put it into effect. Catholics are too often their own worst enemies.

 

[davidv]

It’s one thing to declare a prioirty, another to actually put it into effect. Catholics are too often their own worst enemies.

So true, for everyone, not just Catholics.

“We have met the enemy… and he is us” Pogo

Fortunately we have a Holy Spirit guided Church to lead in the right direction.

 

[Teflon93]

Oh, I think the Catholic Church has plenty of non-Catholic enemies.

All one has to do to find the Church is to look where the hypocrites are pointing.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

But it does. St Augustine describes the constitution of the Church, which bridges Heaven and Earth.

I understand that. But that’s poetry, not argument.

I don’t think most Catholics are. Just as one cannot explain calculus to a toddler except through gross analogy, one cannot explain the Church to a Protestant but at their level. They simply are not prepared to go any deeper.

I forget who it was that said that all technology appears as magic to the ignorant. If person A knows more math than person B then it should be trivial to find examples on the margin that demonstrate to B that A knows more math and thus to lead.

I think this is true. I don’t necessarily think it is wrong to do so, given Church teaching on invincible ignorance. Catholics who do not return are very likely to go to hell; Protestants may or may not depending on what they know of the Church and how well they avail themselves of the vestigial sacraments their communities offer. Bringing the prodigals home tends to be a higher priority than adopting new sons and daughters.

Interestingly, I was trashed in another thread for arguing for such “gaming” of salvation economics. There are intereesting arguments to be had around this but my point is not that former Catholics should be abandoned but that this seems should not be the entire focus as it seems to be today.

 

[Teflon93]

I understand that. But that’s poetry, not argument.

I have less space than St Augustine.

I forget who it was that said that all technology appears as magic to the ignorant. If person A knows more math than person B then it should be trivial to find examples on the margin that demonstrate to B that A knows more math and thus to lead.

It is always possible to make reliable predictions beyond someone else’s experience if you know more than they do. This is why I can predict that every Protestant community with a popular new youth minister will split within 5 years.

Interestingly, I was trashed in another thread for arguing for such “gaming” of salvation economics. There are intereesting arguments to be had around this but my point is not that former Catholics should be abandoned but that this seems should not be the entire focus as it seems to be today.

It’s not the entire focus—see the ongoing discussions with the Anglican Church for example, or the continuing dialogue with the Orthodox.

And keep an eye on the Freedom of Choice Act debate, where the Church will once again be front and center while reaching out to pro-life Christians.