If push comes to shove I choose conscience over Church teaching

  • Thread starter Thread starter goodcatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You keep confusing the issue.

Nazis believed that Jews were subhuman, at best. A true Catholic would know that every person, regardless of race, creed, etc., is Created in the image and likeness of God and has been given, by God, his/her human dignity. So telling a Nazi that there are no Jews in the house is not a lie since all in the house, including the Nazi, have a human dignity.

Now, telling a Nazi that so and so are hiding in here or there so that you can avail yourself of his/her property (or children or wife) is using the factual truth to destroy human dignity and to side with the father of lies and the Murderer.

Telling the boss that I took an extra 20 minutes of lunch or was late three times last week is also a means to use factual truth to commit a violent act against another… however, the same can said if you lie to the boss and tell him/her that I was on time during all those occasions–you know full well that I am stealing from the company in the form of loss of time and production; not only that, but your simple whitish lie is enabling me to continue to rob the boss blind. (double jeopardy: you are assisting me into oblivion and you are coming with me for the ride).

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Last edited:
I heard you were into Jordan Peterson. Let me just say congrats! He’s an awesome thinker and has some really interesting points.

He emphasizes individualism and conscience over heard mentality. I don’t think the Church goes against that exactly, as we’re all told to think before acting or obeying. We are called to be intellectual, use our smarts, and make a choice. But we are also called to be obedient to known Truths, that can’t be changed, not ever. I think Mr. Peterson must understand this as well, as someone who acknowledges self-evident truths that are sometimes buried in us and need to be uncovered.

I’ve mulled over this a lot and that’s why at times I’ve had doubts about the Faith which is common for many people. But reason has always brought me back; because Her Truths are true. Simple as that. Doesn’t make us into tribes, as long as we use justice and mercy equally (or order and chaos equally, in other words)
 
Last edited:
I prefer to think of it as natural and Divine law, both of which are immutable.
 
Last edited:
Nobody is demanding that you tell a ruthless truth. There is always the option of saying a truth that is not ruthless, or exercising prudence and not saying anything. Just don’t say a lie.

You’re putting words into people’s mouths.
 
goodcatholic said:
exactly. And if I was hungry enough, homeless and penniless, I would steal food for sure. Call it a sin of you like.
Click to expand...
So instead of begin for food you would take it… it’s like those people who are too proud to take just any job but have no problems with ripping people off!

Maran atha!

Angel
 
jcrichton said:
Nazis believed that Jews were subhuman, at best. A true Catholic would know that every person, regardless of race, creed, etc., is Created in the image and likeness of God and has been given, by God, his/her human dignity. So telling a Nazi that there are no Jews in the house is not a lie since all in the house, including the Nazi, have a human dignity.
Click to expand...
That makes no sense at all.
 
misstherese said:
We are called to be intellectual, use our smarts, and make a choice. But we are also called to be obedient to known Truths, that can’t be changed, not ever
Click to expand...
I guess my thread title has doomed me to renegade status. The reality is I am very respectful of Catholic dogma and what is in the CCC.
I haven’t arrived. Some Catholics think they have. I will continue to question and evolve.
 
Do you know 1 Timothy 3:15 “if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, the Church of the Living God, the pillar and bulwark of Truth.” If we know that the Church cannot err, why shouldn’t we obey absolute truth over our feeble consciences?
 
No. Just being realistic.

Objective truth means that you accept the truth regardless of how you feel or believe deep inside.

As the saying: 2 wrongs don’t make a right.

Your argument is not about objective truth since you have stated, and continue to defend, that your conscience is far superior to Church Teaching.

So, by default, whatever you determine as the “right course” that’s what you will uphold as the right course.

Maran atha!

Angel
 
I think you need to remove that “maranatha” below. It often contradicts the tone of your posts.
 
My understanding about the universal destination of goods and such tells me that to take food because you are starving, when you have no way to pay for food, is not morally wrong.

At least, this is how Aquinas approached it, and such a position was never condemned by the Church
 
Last edited:
Yes; it’s called Protestantism.

It uses some Church Doctrines; it upholds some Apostolic Teaching; it claims some Apostolic Succession, it accepts some tenets of the Faith…

Maran atha!

Angel
 
Jordan Peterson holds some views on the current social engineering and experimentation agendas with which I agree. However, his stated atheism, or agnosticism, means that I have no time for reading him, and certainly no interest in joining his cult of oersonality.

nationalpost.com

Christie Blatchford sits down with 'warrior for common sense' Jordan Peterson

In his new book, 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos, Peterson draws on everything from neuroscience to the Old Testament to his well-known controversial views
nationalpost.com nationalpost.com
 
Last edited:
This isn’t quite true. Read up on some Aquinas and the universal destination of goods. Taking food from someone who had it because you have no other way of survival is actually considered legitimate. See also CCC 2408
 
Last edited:
Of what I’ve read, he believes in God and calls himself a Christian, though not in the sense we commonly think “Christian”. I certainly don’t consider him any authority to go to for Church teaching or anything like that, but like St. Thomas Aquinas, who often referred to Aristotle, I think there can be some gems in secular thinkers.
 
Last edited:
I’ve read quite a bit of Aquinas, thanks, though certainly not every word of every work. I’m guessing you’re referring to ST Q. 66?
Again, the act is still stealing, and needs to be confessed.

As has already been observed here, there are usually alternatives, such as begging. Did the thief explore every available alternative, before stealing? Services for the needy, such as we have today, were non-existent in Aquinas’ day. Food pantries, for example.
 
Last edited:
Would it be better to steal to feed somebody or let them starve to death? Just curious
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top