How certain are you about Catholicism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MichaelLewis
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
MichaelLewis:
Good enough. That is in line with what I had thought; that it was a matter of FAITH that the Pope or the Magisterium WOULD NOT contradict themselves, not that it was logically impossible for it to do so. From a non-Catholic’s perspective, the more the Church is willing to ‘stick its neck out’ in this way, the more credible its claims are if it doesn’t lose its head. I’d be very interested in a list of doctrinal claims that the Church has rested its entire reputation on, such that if any are contradicted or don’t hold, the Church is thereby disproved. Could anyone tell me if there is a list like that out there on the Internet (or elsewhere)?
Click to expand...
ML: I’d be interested in a list myself. Anti-Catholics like to pull out this quotation or that, and claim that the Church has contradicted itself in “infallible” teachings that oppose one another.

The Church formally “defined” papal infallibility in 1870. I have no doubt that those involved in the first Vatican Council knew how far they were “sticking their necks out,” and that 1800+ years of papal history would be scrutinized, misconstrued and twisted by the enemies of the Faith.

If you can find teachings which meet the prerequisites defined by the council, they would have to be infallible, and consistent. One noted historian (and convert to Catholicism) comments on the remarkable consistency at this link:

ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/INFALLIB.HTM

If you want to read the definition of Vatican I, you can scroll down to the very bottom of the council’s decrees here:

geocities.com/Heartland/Valley/8920/churchcouncils/Ecum20.htm#SESSION%204%20:%2018%20July%201870

The Catholic Encyclopedia on the New Advent website also has a very informative article on infallibility:

newadvent.org/cathen/07790a.htm

As for me, I couldn’t say it better than St. Augustine, “I would not believe the Gospel unless moved thereto by the Church.”

There exists a “fullness” of Truth…if you don’t have it, you’re left to fill in the gaps for yourself. How big those gaps are determine how far you are from THE TRUTH, which is God. I want to be as close as I can get.

Many blessings,
jb
 
40.png
MichaelLewis:
Tuopaolo:
As I indicated, I understand that there are some problems with that definition of knowledge. I am unaware, however, of any satisfactory substitute. Would you please give me your definition of knowledge?
Michael
Click to expand...
There are not just some problems with that definition. That definition is a demonstrably false definition. End of story. Relying on that which is false in an argument does not make for a good argument regardless of whether there are satisfactory substitutes or not.

But, in fact, there are a wide variety of definitions for knowledge that have been proposed. One of them is as follows:

A person C knows that P just in case C believes that P and if P were not true, C would not believe that P.

The fact that C believes that P taken together with the fact that if P were not true C would not believe that P, entail that P is true so adding the condition that P is true to the definition would be a redundancy. This definition does not fall prey to Gettier counterexamples.

Another definition of knowledge is as follows:

Knowledge is belief arising out of acts of intellectual virtue.

Linda Zagzebski has proposed this definition and you can read about it in The Blackwell Guide to Epistemology edited by John Greco & Ernest Sosa. Her article What is Knowledge is the third article and begins on page 92. She explicates the meaning of an act of virtue as:

“An act is an act of virtue A if and only if it arises from the motivational component of A, is an act that persons with virtue A characterstically do in the circumstances, and is successful in bringing about the end of virtue A because of these features of the act.” (p. 108)
 
Well, I know that being a fallen Catholic would also fit in to the poll. I would vote for More or as certain as I am that 1+1=2.
 
40.png
AlanFromWichita:
In part, you are right. She is a social institution. I am still trying to decide what I believe about a lot of what she teaches, but I am willing to go along with it on the surface, and even use her teachings as a basis of discussion of spiritual matters. The Church, then, could also be a language – a language of spirit and love.

As far as Christianity, I am much more interested in the healing and transformational effects that it can bring – both Catholic and non-Catholic – than in arguing over details. To that end, whether Jesus actually did walk the earth, suffered, and was raised, is irrelevant. He spoke wisdom that turned the world on its head and showed them a better way. Jesus is truly the way, the truth, and the light – or at least that’s what I think I believe.

Alan
Click to expand...

Just now, that is pretty close to what I believe 🙂​

 
40.png
MichaelLewis:
Well, isn’t it at least possible that Protestant interpretations of “on this rock” and other verses that seem to support Catholicism are correct? After all, as Cathoics often point out, scripture is not self-interpreting. I’m not trying to argue that Catholicism is false, just that if it were Christianity might not be hopeless.

I wonder how many Catholics see Catholicism as absolutly inseperable from Christianity, such that if they were to come to believe that the Church was false, they would give up Christianity completely.
Click to expand...

I don’t believe that a total failure of Catholicism would invalidate Christianity.​

 
40.png
mommy:
Last spring I was 100% sure I wanted to be Catholic.

After going through RCIA - with a GREAT orthodox teacher, and reading absolutely EVERYTHING I can get my hands on, it all just makes total sense to me. If I am never certain of anything else again, I will always believe that this is the one true way to Jesus.
Click to expand...
I agree, recent convert myself '04, I loved my protestant church but there is no way I would ever go back to that mess of confusion. There are so many posts I would like to answer on this thread but I’ll just some it up here. First in regards to being saved outside the CC, if I understand the teaching on this correctly(please tell me if I am wrong) you can be saved outside the church by way of invencible ignorance. If you never knew the teachings of the True church. However if you had the teachings of the True church and rejected them you might want to be concerned. As far as being Christian, Catholics were the first Christian and have the full truth. I believe that if you believe in Jesus as you lord and savior then you are technically christian, however without all the truth. I also believe that the protestant churches all hold bits and peices of the truth, but none of them can agree with each other on what they are. I voted for option 1. And one of the main reasons I came home to the Church, besides Jesus in the Eucharist, is because there is that central teaching system of interpreting the bible and so on. Without that how do we know what the truth is, just as some churches say infant baptism is correct and some don’t, as well as it washes away sin or it doesn’t. How do you know if there is only my authority. No God is a God of order not a God of choas, I really don’t think he would tell one person something about scripture and someone else something different. Not unless he has a twisted sense of humor(which isn’t the case). 😃
 
posted by Shari

First in regards to being saved outside the CC, if I understand the teaching on this correctly(please tell me if I am wrong) you can be saved outside the church by way of invencible ignorance.
Click to expand...
No. This is not correct.

One still MUST be a member of the Catholic Chuch to be saved. There is no salvation outside the Church.

What has developed is the understanding of who MAY be a member of the Church. Someone who is invincibly ignorant MAY be saved but they will be saved through the Church, through Christ. They will be a member of the Church even if they didn’t know it.

Others have explained this better. Let me see if I can find it and link it here.

Have not found the thread but did find this: catholic.com/library/Salvation_Outside_the_Church.asp
The following quotations from the Church Fathers give the straight story. They show that the early Church held the same position on this as the contemporary Church does—that is, while it is normatively necessary to be a Catholic to be saved (see CCC846; Vatican II, Lumen Gentium 14), there are exceptions, and it is possible in some circumstances for people to be saved who have not been fully initiated into the Catholic Church (CCC847).
Click to expand...
Notice that the same Fathers who declare the normative necessity of being Catholic also declare the possibility of salvation for some who are not Catholics.
Click to expand...
God Bless,
Maria
 
Still could not find the thread that had such a good explanation. Sorry. I hope mine was understandable.

God Bless,

Maria
 
40.png
MariaG:
One still MUST be a member of the Catholic Chuch to be saved. There is no salvation outside the Church.

What has developed is the understanding of who MAY be a member of the Church. Someone who is invincibly ignorant MAY be saved but they will be saved through the Church, through Christ. They will be a member of the Church even if they didn’t know it.
Click to expand...
I believe Shari was a bit more subtle on that point. She is correct that people outside the Church MAY be saved…through the Church. The Catholic Church is both a physical body, and a mystical body. By virtue of their baptism, all baptized Christians have been baptized into Christ’s mystical Church.

Not everyone in the Catholic Church will be saved, and others outside the Catholic Church still may be saved…yet everyone is saved through Christ’s Church.
 
40.png
Shari:
I agree, recent convert myself '04, I loved my protestant church but there is no way I would ever go back to that mess of confusion.
Click to expand...
Amen, Shari! I am a Catholic convert and Catholic for life!! 😃

MichaelLewis,

I am not sure what you are looking for but this might be it. The Catholic Church would prove herself to be wrong if she ever officially ordained women to the priesthood or allowed homosexual “marriage”. This would be a self-contradiction since both of these things are infallibly impossible.

Is that what you were looking for?

If somehow I found out that the Catholic Church was wrong (something I believe impossible), then I would probably either leave Christianity or join Eastern Orthodoxy. I’m not going back to Protestantism though, because it just doesn’t make sense. I would be really difficult to give up on the Christian God, especially Jesus. I guess I would try to find another religion that had meaning and made sense and spoke to me to change my life. However I don’t see anything else coming near to what Catholicism means to me.

I admire your desire for knowledge and seeking truth. That question about the universe only existing for five minutes really got me thinking… :hmmm:

You will be in my prayers in your search for truth.
Lily628
 
Just a quick note on the survey post: 1 + 1 doesn’t always equal 2. Technically, in relativistic physics, which governs reality, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Instead, it always adds up to something less than 2, under a rule called the Lorenz Transformation. The physicists reading this (please don’t nitpick my language) will understand what I am saying, here.

The failure of 1 + 1 to equal 2 except in mathematical systems which accommodate, but do not completely comform to, physical reality actually accentuates the absolute need for faith empowered by God’s grace.

Re the actual issue, here, my study of Biblical typology convinced me more than ever of the truth of Catholic theology.
 
hi, im new, simple catholic, just share my ideas too.

im 100% certain of its teachings, because Jesus founded it and not by ordinary person like me and promised that it’s indistructible( cannot fall into error ) Mat 16:18, because it’s guided by the Holy Spirit the Protector of Truth Jn 20:22 that’s why it is called the Pillar and the Foundation of Truth 1Tim 3:15 and Jesus said " he who hears you, hears me and he who despise you despise me and he who despise me despise the one who sent me " Luke 10:16 thats why its the church that will guide Mat 18:17 " and if he who refuses to hear them tell it to the church…"
 
Hello All

If the doctrines were not true then like the others I would not belong to the Catholic Church.

God Bless
Saint Andrew.
 
Michael,

As an Agnostic and a Graduate Student/Teaching Assistant; is your question in search of your own sole? Or was it to “stir the pot” for the purpose of a paragraph or two in a thesis?

Puerile joy maybe? I’m curious.
 
40.png
jburgherr:
Michael,

As an Agnostic and a Graduate Student/Teaching Assistant; is your question in search of your own sole? Or was it to “stir the pot” for the purpose of a paragraph or two in a thesis?

Puerile joy maybe? I’m curious.
Click to expand...
I’m just interested in religion and haunted by Christianity. Far from being contributive to any of my past or current academic projects, participation in this forum has been a (welcome) distraction from them. I’m to far from believing in Christianity to say that I asked this question for the sake of my soul (as conceived by Christians), but I am interested in seeing if Catholicism can be disconfirmed, and why Catholics believe in the Church. I’m not sure where my investigations will lead me ultimately; but I pursue them for personal, not (primarily) professional reasons.

(To all participants: I’ll be online only occasionally this summer, so my participation in this forum will be very sporadic.)
 
40.png
BibleReader:
Just a quick note on the survey post: 1 + 1 doesn’t always equal 2. Technically, in relativistic physics, which governs reality, 1 + 1 never equals 2. Instead, it always adds up to something less than 2, under a rule called the Lorenz Transformation. The physicists reading this (please don’t nitpick my language) will understand what I am saying, here.

The failure of 1 + 1 to equal 2 except in mathematical systems which accommodate, but do not completely comform to, physical reality actually accentuates the absolute need for faith empowered by God’s grace.

Re the actual issue, here, my study of Biblical typology convinced me more than ever of the truth of Catholic theology.
Click to expand...
I think most people interpret “1+1=2” in terms of the abstract, formal system of conventional mathematics in which it is always true. That is how I intended it. No one can contract this expression without contradicting herself, unless she is using unconventional meanings for some of the terms. I think that it would be uncharitable to interpret the expression as you have suggested, considering the context of the poll.
 
40.png
lily628:
Amen, Shari! I am a Catholic convert and Catholic for life!! 😃

MichaelLewis,

I am not sure what you are looking for but this might be it. The Catholic Church would prove herself to be wrong if she ever officially ordained women to the priesthood or allowed homosexual “marriage”. This would be a self-contradiction since both of these things are infallibly impossible.

Is that what you were looking for?
Lily628
Click to expand...
Yes, things like that. I’d like an exhaustive list of such doctrines.
You will be in my prayers in your search for truth.
Click to expand...
Well, thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top