I didn't know that!

[kalt]

I’m interested in learning what misconceptions of CC teaching are most common.

Did you come here with ideas of what the CC teaches that turned out to be incorrect? If you did, which teachings were they? Was it easy for you to understand what the CC teaches on the topic(s), or is the pov so different enough that you had to do mental gymnastics to figure out how the CC is thinking?

(Of course I’m not asking you what teachings you’ve decided to agree with the CC on–I’m not saying that you agree with the CC on these topics.) This is only about any misconceptions you had about CC teachings.)

Thank you in advance for not turning this thread into a screaming match about who believes what and which belief is right.

 

[Trishie]

You know that the Catechism of the Catholic Church and Canon Law are available on the internet; and reading the gospels is important. You can also get hold of encyclicals…there is no need really for us to be ignorant or confused about our faith with these resources. I frequently access these authorities in answer to others’ queries, but there is actually no reason why anyone can’t do this. There really is no need for confusion. If in doubt, I check.

 

[Just_Lurking]

The thing I often find here is that people claim that the CC teaches something, but it turns out that it is really conservative Catholics who teach it, and the CC actually has no official position on the matter.

 

[Lapey]

The thing I often find here is that people claim that the CC teaches something, but it turns out that it is really conservative Catholics who teach it, and the CC actually has no official position on the matter.

Specifics please.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

The thing I often find here is that people claim that the CC teaches something, but it turns out that it is really conservative Catholics who teach it, and the CC actually has no official position on the matter.

lol… Who me??? I would Never!!!

But yeah. Always gotta find out what the Church REALLY teaches, not just blindly follow someone, even someone you trust.

FSC

 

[Just_Lurking]

Specifics please.

Examples:

• That married women who are using the pill for medical reasons must abstain from marital relations during their fertile times.
• That the Catholic Church has no power to ordain women to the diaconate.
• That the early sessions of the Council of Constance are not ecumenical.
• That the Church’s teaching that contraception is intrinsically evil is infallible.

All of the above are (conservative) Catholic theological opinions, and not official Catholic Church positions.

 

[Rolltide]

Examples:
[That married women who are using the pill for medical reasons must abstain from marital relations during their fertile times.

You are correct. If absolutely necessary, this would fall under the principle of double effect. HOWEVER… most of the time there is some alternative to using the pill for medical reasons.

That the Catholic Church has no power to ordain women to the diaconate.

This is a little different case. There may be an historical precedent for women serving as deaconesses in the early church (primarily to assist with women’s baptisms due to modesty issues), but the church believes that these women were NOT ordained. Similarly, although nuns serve the church for life in a formal way, they are not “ordained” to their position.

That the early sessions of the Council of Constance are not ecumenical.

I cannot speak to this topic, as I don’t know enough about it.

That the Church’s teaching that contraception is intrinsically evil is infallible.

Correct again. Natural Family Planning is a form of birth control, and it is acceptable for married Catholics to use.
[/quote]

 

[Just_Lurking]

but the church believes that these women were NOT ordained.

Conservative Catholics believe that these women were not ordained. The Church has no teaching whether these women were ordained or not.

(Copied from Wikipedia):

In 2003, Father Ronald G. Roberson gave a presentation on the diaconate in the Latin Church to annual meeting of the U.S. Oriental Orthodox-Roman Catholic Consultation. He summarized the state of deaconess issue as follows: “The possibility of ordaining women to the diaconate is still an unsettled question in the Catholic Church. Latin rituals for ordaining deaconesses exist from as late as the 10th century, but the precise sacramental nature of these ordinations has not yet been determined authoritatively. There are recent indications that the Holy See intends to continue the exclusion of women from this office.”

Quote taken from the USCCB website (see here).

 

[Dominique1234]

From the CCC:

1st point :2399 The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).

Just like those who take Natural Family Planning, and wish to abstain from having children, it is a sacrifice to not be with your spouse during these times, especially for the woman, when she is at her hormonal peak. Women on the pill, on the other hand, do not naturally get this hormonal peak due to the effects of the pill.

What type of medical reason are we speaking of that one would need to be on contraceptives? There are MANY other types of medication that does NOT sterilize which can be used to attain the same medical outcome, unless you can name one particular disease or condition that one would not be aware of.

2nd point:1598 The Church confers the sacrament of Holy Orders only on baptized men (viri), whose suitability for the exercise of the ministry has been duly recognized. Church authority alone has the responsibility and right to call someone to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders.

1547 The ministerial or hierarchical priesthood of bishops and priests, and the common priesthood of all the faithful participate, “each in its own proper way, in the one priesthood of Christ.” While being “ordered one to another,” they differ essentially. In what sense? While the common priesthood of the faithful is exercised by the unfolding of baptismal grace --a life of faith, hope, and charity, a life according to the Spirit–, the ministerial priesthood is at the service of the common priesthood. It is directed at the unfolding of the baptismal grace of all Christians. The ministerial priesthood is a means by which Christ unceasingly builds up and leads his Church. For this reason it is transmitted by its own sacrament, the sacrament of Holy Orders.

1120 The ordained ministry or ministerial priesthood is at the service of the baptismal priesthood. The ordained priesthood guarantees that it really is Christ who acts in the sacraments through the Holy Spirit for the Church. The saving mission entrusted by the Father to his incarnate Son was committed to the apostles and through them to their successors: they receive the Spirit of Jesus to act in his name and in his person. The ordained minister is the sacramental bond that ties the liturgical action to what the apostles said and did and, through them, to the words and actions of Christ, the source and foundation of the sacraments.

1551 This priesthood is ministerial. “That office . . . which the Lord committed to the pastors of his people, is in the strict sense of the term a service.” It is entirely related to Christ and to men. It depends entirely on Christ and on his unique priesthood; it has been instituted for the good of men and the communion of the Church. The sacrament of Holy Orders communicates a “sacred power” which is none other than that of Christ. The exercise of this authority must therefore be measured against the model of Christ, who by love made himself the least and the servant of all. “The Lord said clearly that concern for his flock was proof of love for him.”

1592 The ministerial priesthood differs in essence from the common priesthood of the faithful because it confers a sacred power for the service of the faithful. The ordained ministers exercise their service for the People of God by teaching (munus docendi), divine worship (munus liturgicum) and pastoral governance (munus regendi).

There is SO much information on the Priesthood and so much evidence (Biblical) pointing towards men being priests, and only men that it renders me awestruck as to why this question is even being asked. Just read Article 6 in the CCC in it’s ENTIRETY. You will find your answer.

3rd point: Not quite sure where to find this.

4th point: 2399 The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil:

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.

I believe that anything taught in the CCC is infallible. There’s an article on this site. Just search “Birth Control” and you will find the article. (J.P II Humanae vitae)

 

[Dominique1234]

Conservative Catholics believe that these women were not ordained. The Church has no teaching whether these women were ordained or not.

(Copied from Wikipedia):

In 2003, Father Ronald G. Roberson gave a presentation on the diaconate in the Latin Church to annual meeting of the U.S. Oriental Orthodox-Roman Catholic Consultation. He summarized the state of deaconess issue as follows: “The possibility of ordaining women to the diaconate is still an unsettled question in the Catholic Church. Latin rituals for ordaining deaconesses exist from as late as the 10th century, but the precise sacramental nature of these ordinations has not yet been determined authoritatively. There are recent indications that the Holy See intends to continue the exclusion of women from this office.”

Quote taken from the USCCB website (see here).

Catholic nuns are a from of deacon. They take their vows as do priests. Some did anyhow, consecrating themselves to God and His Church. I knew of some in my home town. I don’t know about today though, because the way the world has become so ‘modern’.

 

[Just_Lurking]

I believe that anything taught in the CCC is infallible.

You can believe that if you want. However, the Catholic Church does not teach that, and other Catholics can disagree with you and still be orthodox.

There’s an article on this site. Just search “Birth Control” and you will find the article. (J.P II Humanae vitae)

The people who run this site can believe that Humanae vitae is infallible if they want. However, the Catholic Church does not teach that, and other Catholics can disagree with that and still be orthodox.

P.S. Humanae vitae was promulgated by Pope Paul VI.

 

[Dominique1234]

You know that the Catechism of the Catholic Church and Canon Law are available on the internet; and reading the gospels is important. You can also get hold of encyclicals…there is no need really for us to be ignorant or confused about our faith with these resources. I frequently access these authorities in answer to others’ queries, but there is actually no reason why anyone can’t do this. There really is no need for confusion. If in doubt, I check.

Amen! Two resources that are irreplaceable! One only needs to do the research instead of having others do it for them… I was dumb enough to do it!

 

[Just_Lurking]

There is SO much information on the Priesthood and so much evidence (Biblical) pointing towards men being priests, and only men that it renders me awestruck as to why this question is even being asked.

I agree with you as regards the Catholic Church teaching about the impossibility of the ordination of women to the priesthood.

The problem comes when conservative Catholics extend that teaching using their own reasoning to the (possible past or future) ordination of women to the diaconate, and then term other Catholics who disagree with them as “heterodox”.

 

[Dominique1234]

You can believe that if you want. However, the Catholic Church does not teach that, and other Catholics can disagree with you and still be orthodox.

The people who run this site can believe that Humanae vitae is infallible if they want. However, the Catholic Church does not teach that, and other Catholics can disagree with you and still be orthodox.

P.S. Humanae vitae was promulgated by Pope Paul VI.

Sorry, you’re absolutely right. In the article I mentioned, Pope Paul VI makes it WELL KNOWN that it is infallible (simply by stating it.) Here’s a quote from the article.

The Church also has affirmed that the illicitness of contraception is an infallible doctrine: “The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable. Contraception is gravely opposed to marital chastity, it is contrary to the good of the transmission of life (the procreative.aspect of matrimony), and to the reciprocal self-giving of the spouses (the unitive.aspect of matrimony); it harms true love and denies the sovereign role of God in the transmission of human life” (Vademecum for Confessors 2:4, Feb. 12, 1997).

Secondly I will believe exactly that because it’s what OUR Faith teaches. When you say one can disagree and still be orthodox is like saying, " I don’t believe in confession, but I still go to communion." Either you believe what the Church teaches FULLY or you don’t. But don’t claim to be Catholic if you do. One can excommunicate themselves this way.

Again, read the article. I’m only answering your questions. I’m sorry if I gave false information. It was NOT my intention. I remember reading and hearing J.P.II speak SO much of Humanae Vitae, and reiterated on many occasions what Pope Paul VI wrote. And was thinking that when I typed it out… my mistake! God bless! I hope these things help you!

 

[Dominique1234]

I agree with you as regards the Catholic Church teaching about the impossibility of the ordination of women to the priesthood.

The problem comes when conservative Catholics extend that teaching using their own reasoning to the (possible past or future) ordination of women to the diaconate, and then term other Catholics who disagree with them as “heterodox”.

I’ll simply state this. You can’t please everyone. When all the evidence is in front of you, and one still denies it, it’s called stubbornness of heart. Only prayer can heal this. No form of dialogue will help these people to see the Truth. Only praying for them. Trust me, I’ve known MANY who think this way. My home town was full of them, especially the shepherds.

I’ll ask you this. Was the diaconate of women infallible? Had the Church proclaimed this to be infallible? If not, then it can always be overturned. And it was. The MAIN question is, “WHY was it overturned?”

 

[Just_Lurking]

Pope Paul VI makes it WELL KNOWN that it is infallible (simply by stating it.)

Msgr. F. Lambruschini, who presented Humanae Vitae to the public at the Vatican Press Conference in 1968, said on that occasion that the Encyclical was not an infallible statement. So Pope Paul VI’s opinion as to Humanae Vitae’s infallibility is indeed well known, but exactly opposite to what you claim.

 

[kalt]

Thank you, everyone, for your replies. The question was about what Catholic teachings you might have had misconceptions about, not what teachings others have misconceptions about.

 

[Just_Lurking]

Thank you, everyone, for your replies. The question was about what Catholic teachings you might have had misconceptions about, not what teachings others have misconceptions about.

Sorry! I didn’t mean to derail your thread.

To answer your question, if I have any misconceptions about what the Catholic Church teaches, I’m not yet aware of them.

 

[Bill_Pick]

I’m interested in learning what misconceptions of CC teaching are most common.

Did you come here with ideas of what the CC teaches that turned out to be incorrect? If you did, which teachings were they? Was it easy for you to understand what the CC teaches on the topic(s), or is the pov so different enough that you had to do mental gymnastics to figure out how the CC is thinking?

(Of course I’m not asking you what teachings you’ve decided to agree with the CC on–I’m not saying that you agree with the CC on these topics.) This is only about any misconceptions you had about CC teachings.)

Mary the Mother of God
The Pope
Praying to the saints
Purgatory
Baptism
and #1 The Eucharist

Thank you in advance for not turning this thread into a screaming match about who believes what and which belief is right.

 

[Dominique1234]

Thank you, everyone, for your replies. The question was about what Catholic teachings you might have had misconceptions about, not what teachings others have misconceptions about.

I guess my misconception is this. I am now told that Humanae Vitae is not an infallible doctrine of the Catholic Church. Is this true? And could one provide evidence (more than one quote) against it? Possibly even where I could find it. Thanks.