How Open to the Truth is Your Religion?

[Eucharisted]

I have found that many non-Catholic religions don’t allow their believers to ask questions. Some don’t allow their believers to read certain good books. Others caution against the so-called dangers of Catholic material. More only permit their believers to understand things through their control: biased websites or new stations, feeding them misinformation, etc. And a few demand absolute obedience to their rulers, even at the expense of calling them out on their errors.

This type of behavior is a sign of deception. It is a sign that something is wrong. But the fence which the believers are kept in is arranged in such a manner that they believe it is for their own. So they do not question it. They just accept it. “It is for our good, so it is good.”

In Catholicism, Catholics are encouraged to verify everything. Think a dogma isn’t true? Ask questions. Wondering where the Catholic Church comes from? Go ahead and find out, and feel free to check out what non-Catholics say on the matter. Don’t think a priest or a Pope is correct? Disagree with him. Know a bishop who is living in sin? Call him out on it, and don’t follow his example. Is your spiritual director telling you to do something evil? Disobey him. Think the Catholic Church is wrong when it comes to interpreting Scripture? Research the Bible, its history and writers, and why the Church interprets Scripture the way she dose, and research how other people interpret the Scripture - compare and contrast the interpretations even, if you so wish. Catholics have a lot of freedom in the Church - something I don’t usually see in non-Catholic religions.

Freedom is absolutely important when it comes to the truth. No one would restrict you from the truth if they had nothing to hide. The truth allows you great freedom.

In the ancient days of the Church, a number of churches which Paul was ministring to were demanding undeniable proof for the resurrection of Jesus. They wanted all the facts, all the witnesses, all the evidence. The reason for such a demand is not only because the gentiles didn’t want to be deceived into believing something that wasn’t true, but because, in Paul’s days, a resurrection was considered literally impossible by most gentiles. Paul gave them a short account of the resurrection, told them of the witnesses, and then he encouraged them to verify everything. He didn’t tell them to go here or there, or read this or that, or understand the resurrection in such and such a manner: He just told them, “These are the facts, you are free to verify them for yourselves”. Such stark honesty and openess shows that Paul was absolutely certain that Jesus had indeed been resurrected to glory.

Sometihng you’ll constantly hear the Catholic Church telling Catholics is “Learn the Faith.” This is the Church’s call for truth. It is why the Church is one. Catholics aren’t just united in their love for God but also in their thirst for the truth. Hence, the Church always tells Catholics to know what the Church teaches, to research why the Church believes something, to verify the claims the Church makes, and to not be dumb sheep. This is also good because it allows Catholics to deal with false accusations and lies on an intellectual level, rather than an emotional level. (Granted, not all Catholics are mature in spirit, just as not all Catholics are holy in their lives)

 

[O.S.Luke]

Do you mean non-Catholic Christian faiths? Or non-Christian faiths?

I guess I usually think of Christianity, Islam, Judiasm, etc., as religions.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I have found that many non-Catholic religions don’t allow their believers to ask questions. Some don’t allow their believers to read certain good books. Others caution against the so-called dangers of Catholic material. More only permit their believers to understand things through their control: biased websites or new stations, feeding them misinformation, etc. And a few demand absolute obedience to their rulers, even at the expense of calling them out on their errors.

This type of behavior is a sign of deception. It is a sign that something is wrong. But the fence which the believers are kept in is arranged in such a manner that they believe it is for their own. So they do not question it. They just accept it. “It is for our good, so it is good.”

In Catholicism, Catholics are encouraged to verify everything. Think a dogma isn’t true? Ask questions. Wondering where the Catholic Church comes from? Go ahead and find out, and feel free to check out what non-Catholics say on the matter. Don’t think a priest or a Pope is correct? Disagree with him. Know a bishop who is living in sin? Call him out on it, and don’t follow his example. Is your spiritual director telling you to do something evil? Disobey him. Think the Catholic Church is wrong when it comes to interpreting Scripture? Research the Bible, its history and writers, and why the Church interprets Scripture the way she dose, and research how other people interpret the Scripture - compare and contrast the interpretations even, if you so wish. Catholics have a lot of freedom in the Church - something I don’t usually see in non-Catholic religions.

Freedom is absolutely important when it comes to the truth. No one would restrict you from the truth if they had nothing to hide. The truth allows you great freedom.

In the ancient days of the Church, a number of churches which Paul was ministring to were demanding undeniable proof for the resurrection of Jesus. They wanted all the facts, all the witnesses, all the evidence. The reason for such a demand is not only because the gentiles didn’t want to be deceived into believing something that wasn’t true, but because, in Paul’s days, a resurrection was considered literally impossible by most gentiles. Paul gave them a short account of the resurrection, told them of the witnesses, and then he encouraged them to verify everything. He didn’t tell them to go here or there, or read this or that, or understand the resurrection in such and such a manner: He just told them, “These are the facts, you are free to verify them for yourselves”. Such stark honesty and openess shows that Paul was absolutely certain that Jesus had indeed been resurrected to glory.

Sometihng you’ll constantly hear the Catholic Church telling Catholics is “Learn the Faith.” This is the Church’s call for truth. It is why the Church is one. Catholics aren’t just united in their love for God but also in their thirst for the truth. Hence, the Church always tells Catholics to know what the Church teaches, to research why the Church believes something, to verify the claims the Church makes, and to not be dumb sheep. This is also good because it allows Catholics to deal with false accusations and lies on an intellectual level, rather than an emotional level. (Granted, not all Catholics are mature in spirit, just as not all Catholics are holy in their lives)

Your question and answer seem to be about two different things. You seem to be saying that Catholics are told to be openly questioning of everything they are taught. Yet your actual words suggest that they are to “learn” what the church teaches by asking questions. You have been here some time, but the number of comments you’ve made.

Surely you know that there are many super orthodox RC’s who claim that "women’s ordination is “not open to discussion” the matter is settled. Homosexuality is not open to discussions, the matter is settled. Contraception is not open to discussion the matter is settled.

I have been cautioned here about reading all manner of things, such as various liberation theologies, even when written by Catholics. as they are deemed unfit by some. There is a thread here now that cautions the reading of “a course in Miracles” as somehow dangerous.

My faith tradition encourages the reading of all manner of things, Catholic, protestant, and within non-Christian traditions as well. We seek truth everywhere and have no limits whatsoever that I am aware of. We have used Catholic as well as many different Protestant writers in our bible forums for instance. We are conducting a same-sex marriage forum next Sunday in our forum series to discuss the state of Iowa law, our diocesan stand, and what we as a parish wish to know, pro or con, on the issue.

The fact that your church calls for learning the faith is not exactly the same. It merely says that you are called to learn what the church teaches, not to read anything it doesn’t teach or disagrees with. Many here at this forum would state that categorically.

If you are saying that the Church in reality teaches its adherents to question everything and read as widely as they wish, then they are to be commended. You are not going to get a lot of agreement here though, as I assume you know.

I have no clue what denominations you feel control what their followers read. I’d be interested to know. I certainly have some ideas, but I guess I should let them speak for themselves, and I’m not making the allegation in any case.

At least as to mine, you are categorically wrong. And as to your’s you are most certainly wrong as far as the super orthodox are concerned.

 

[geometer]

Well, I am not a member of the Theosophical Society, but their motto is “There is no religion higher than truth.”

They are non-dogmatic and non-political…

Philosophically I believe one would have to say that they are eclectic.

 

[rossum]

I have found that many non-Catholic religions don’t allow their believers to ask questions.

Buddhism is an exception, we are expected to question. The classic source for this is the Kalama sutta. The Kalamas were puzzled because many preachers came to their city of Kesaputta and each preacher claimed to be right and said that all the other preachers were wrong. They could not tell which preacher to follow. When the Buddha arrived in their city they questioned him:“There are some monks and brahmans, venerable sir, who visit Kesaputta. They expound and explain only their own doctrines; the doctrines of others they despise, revile, and pull to pieces. Some other monks and brahmans too, venerable sir, come to Kesaputta. They also expound and explain only their own doctrines; the doctrines of others they despise, revile, and pull to pieces. Venerable sir, there is doubt, there is uncertainty in us concerning them. Which of these reverend monks and brahmans spoke the truth and which falsehood?”
The Buddha replied:“Yes, Kalamas, it is proper that you have doubt, that you have perplexity, for a doubt has arisen in a matter which is doubtful. Now, look you Kalamas, do not be led by reports, or tradition, or hearsay. Be not led by the authority of religious texts, nor by mere logic or inference, nor by considering appearances, nor by the delight in speculative opinions, nor by seeming possibilities, nor by the idea ‘this is our teacher’. Kalamas, when you yourselves know: ‘These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,’ abandon them. … Kalamas, when you yourselves know: ‘These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness,’ enter on and abide in them.”

Kalama sutta, Anguttara Nikaya 3.65
It is notable that the Buddha did not just say “I am right and the others are wrong”, as the earlier preachers had done. He told the Kalamas how they could tell good teaching from bad teaching by testing it: not blamable, praised by the wise and leading to benefit and happiness.

rossum

 

[geometer]

“The ultimate truth is that there is no Ultimate Truth.”

I believe you will find that this is not ultimately true…

 

[BareKnuckler]

Taoism and Buddhism are both open, and very questionable. Ask questions, seek their answers.

 

[geometer]

Taoism and Buddhism are both open, and very questionable. Ask questions, seek their answers.

This is the same position held in the opening post. Catholicism is open, ask questions and seek catholic answers. Catechism was meant to stop all that…

 

[rossum]

“The ultimate truth is that there is no Ultimate Truth.”

I believe you will find that this is not ultimately true…

You are not the first person to notice my sig. The original source is Mark Siderits, “Thinking on Empty: Madhyamika Anti-Realism and Canons of Rationality” in S Biderman and B.A. Schaufstein, eds, Rationality In Question (1989). Dordrecht: Brill.

I have not read Siderits but saw the quote in a piece on Nagarjuna. The “Madhyamika” in Siderits’ title refers to the religious and philosophical school of Buddhism that Nagarjuna founded. I have seen the same quote again in other places in reference to the Madhyamika and Nagarjuna - it seems quite popular. The quote is intentionally paradoxical; paradox is necessary to remind us that words are insufficient when trying to describe the fundamental nature of reality.

For a philosophical discussion of Nagarjuna and reality see the web article Nagarjuna and the Limits of Thought. The Siderits quote is at the end of section four of the article:

There is, then, no escape. Nagarjuna’s view is contradictory. The contradiction is, clearly a paradox of expressibility. Nagarjuna succeeds in saying the unsayable, just as much as the Wittgenstein of the Tractatus. We can think (and characterize) reality only subject to language, which is conventional, so the ontology of that reality is all conventional. It follows that the conventional objects of reality do not ultimately (non-conventionally) exist. It also follows that nothing we say of them is ultimately true. That is, all things are empty of ultimate existence; and this is their ultimate nature, and is an ultimate truth about them. They hence cannot be thought to have that nature; nor can we say that they do. But we have just done so. As Mark Siderits (1989) has put it, “the ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.”

rossum

 

[LutheranDK]

I have found that many non-Catholic religions don’t allow their believers to ask questions. Some don’t allow their believers to read certain good books. Others caution against the so-called dangers of Catholic material. More only permit their believers to understand things through their control: biased websites or new stations, feeding them misinformation, etc. And a few demand absolute obedience to their rulers, even at the expense of calling them out on their errors.

…

I’m sorry, but this is just…
Most of what you accuse “non-catholic religions” of is also true of the RC church:

“Some don’t allow their believers to read certain good books.”

• The RC church has a whole LIST of books (and a rather long one at that) of which books are forbidden for RCs to read.

“Others caution against the so-called dangers of Catholic material”

• And vice-versa.

“More only permit their believers to understand things through their control: biased websites or new stations, feeding them misinformation, etc”

• Oh, just as the RC church rejects any understanding that is not through the Church Fathers (as it sees them), its councils, etc?

“This type of behavior is a sign of deception.”

• Right on.

“It is a sign that something is wrong. But the fence which the believers are kept in is arranged in such a manner that they believe it is for their own.”

• Yuep…

"So they do not question it. They just accept it. “It is for our good, so it is good.” "

• Exactly…

In Catholicism, Catholics are encouraged to verify everything.

But to reach a conclusion other than the one the RC church has reached is considered heresy.

Think a dogma isn’t true? Ask questions.

But for the love of … don’t say that the answer is inadequate once it’s been given…
(assuming that by “dogma” you mean the teachings that have been proclaimed ex cathedra and by the councils)

Wondering where the Catholic Church comes from? Go ahead and find out, and feel free to check out what non-Catholics say on the matter.

As long as you reject what they say, and agree with what the RC church says.

Don’t think a priest or a Pope is correct? Disagree with him. Know a bishop who is living in sin? Call him out on it, and don’t follow his example.

This is not at all unique to the RC church. In fact, I cannot off the top of my head think of any Christian denomination that teaches otherwise.
(and no, the cultish sects like the Branch Davidians, or similar lunatics don’t count…)

Is your spiritual director telling you to do something evil? Disobey him.

See above.

Think the Catholic Church is wrong when it comes to interpreting Scripture? Research the Bible, its history and writers, and why the Church interprets Scripture the way she dose, and research how other people interpret the Scripture - compare and contrast the interpretations even, if you so wish.

But don’t doubt that it’s the RC church that is right.

Catholics have a lot of freedom in the Church - something I don’t usually see in non-Catholic religions.

I don’t see much freedom in the RC church. At the most, it’s a “freedom to find out what the Church teaches, and then agree with it”, and I’m sorry, but that’s just not freedom.
And no - freedom is NOT always good. There needs to be unity in the most important aspects of faith. What I have written was not (although I know that some will see it like that and fire off a tirade of abuse against me…) written as your run-of-the-mill “The RC church is the Antichrist!”-nonsense. It was written as an call to put your own house in order before you make claims like the ones you’ve made…

 

[Rolltide]

…

I’m sorry, but this is just…
Most of what you accuse “non-catholic religions” of is also true of the RC church:

“Some don’t allow their believers to read certain good books.”

• The RC church has a whole LIST of books (and a rather long one at that) of which books are forbidden for RCs to read.

The banned book list in the Catholic Church was abandoned long ago.