Informed conscience

  • Thread starter Thread starter SHoJ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SHoJ

Guest
When I became Catholic, there were a few doctrines and dogmas that I didn’t fully understand and had trouble reconciling myself to. Over the years, I have read a lot and prayed even more for the Holy Spirit to help me understand those things which I couldn’t quite grasp. Most of my ‘issues’ have been resolved; but there remain two specific but related doctrines that, after much study and prayer, I just cannot accept as absolute. I have read in other threads that a Catholic can deny a teaching (doctrine, not dogma) of the Church, as long as they have an informed conscience and do not publicly deny the doctrine.

Is this true??? :ehh:
 
That would appear to be a question for Ask an Apologist.
But if there are only 2 questions that you can’t quite grasp, you’re ahead of many of us. Some doctrines of the church are mysteries that we probably never will understand fully, such as the nature of the Trinity.
I believe people on this forum would be happy to discuss your issues with you, if you’d care to mention them.
The one I’ve had the most trouble with is the Real Presence. But there are good explanations for how that can be true, involving physics which is way over my head.
Until I can say I’m as wise as the Holy Father, I’ll take his word for it that the Magisterium has the answers.
 
Actually, I think doctrine and dogma are non-negotiables. Where you might have some ‘room’ would be disciplines because disciplines may change.

But I do not believe that you can in your heart of hearts (even if not ‘publlically’) DENY dogma OR doctrine. You can say that you don’t understand it but you can’t ‘deny’ it. Informed consciences cannot deny Church teachings (dogma/doctrine) because those are usually under the ‘infallibility’ umbrella (not all infallible teachings are ex cathedra, for example.)

I would try the Ask an Apologist to make sure though, and to understand exactly what you mean by doctrine. (You might mean discipline). God bless.

It would help to know exactly what the two things are that you wish to deny, because we might be able to find some specific information in the Code of Canon Law that addresses them.
 
One requirement to become Catholic is to accept everything the Catholic Church teaches [see the Profession of Faith in the Holy Saturday Vigil Liturgy.] This does not mean that one understands and agrees with every teaching of the Church, but that one accepts them because they are taught by the Church. Everyone has some source for ultimate truth - usually God, secular experts, or self. If one opts for God it must be God, not some secular expert’s interpretation of God, and definitely not ones own interpretation of God. The Catholic accepts it to be God, and the Church as God’s chosen instrument to transmit that truth.
 
Tantum_ergo said:
Actually, I think doctrine and dogma are non-negotiables. Where you might have some ‘room’ would be disciplines because disciplines may change.

But I do not believe that you can in your heart of hearts (even if not ‘publlically’) DENY dogma OR doctrine. You can say that you don’t understand it but you can’t ‘deny’ it. Informed consciences cannot deny Church teachings (dogma/doctrine) because those are usually under the ‘infallibility’ umbrella (not all infallible teachings are ex cathedra, for example.)

**I would try the Ask an Apologist to make sure though, and to understand exactly what you mean by doctrine. (You might mean discipline). **
Click to expand...
God bless.
I go by this definition of dogma vs doctrine vs discipline:
Lion_of_Narnia said:
I’m doing this from memory, so someone who has the book PLEASE correct my mistakes!

Re Scott Currie’s Born Fundamentalist, Born-again Catholic
Click to expand...
:
  1. Deposit of Faith: Holy Scripture AND Sacred Tradition, recognized and deliniated by the Magesterium. INFALLIBLE. Cannot be added to or subtracted from.
  2. Dogma: INFALLIBLE teaching of Faith or Morals, derived from the Deposit of Faith. Propagated by ex cathedra pronouncment of reigning Pontiff or by a ecumenical council of the Church’s bishops in turn ratified by reigning Pontiff. Cannot contradict Deposit of Faith or prior Dogma.
  3. Doctrine: NOT infallible teaching of the Church of Faith and Morals. Binding on all Catholics while propagated. Can be altered, modified, abandoned, even condemned. Doctrine RARELY becomes Dogma.
  4. Discipline: NOT infallible rules of behavior, binding on all Catholics while propagated, designed with the intent to keep believers “on the straight and narrow”. Includes Lenten rules of fasting & priestly celibacy. Can be relaxed, altered, or abolished.
  5. Devotions: Private practice of prayers, meditations, and disciplines, in accordance to Church approval. Includes 99% of Marian devotions, belief in approved apparitions or visions (Private Revelation), First Saturdays, Stations of the Cross, etc…
It would help to know exactly what the two things are that you wish to deny, because we might be able to find some specific information in the Code of Canon Law that addresses them.
Click to expand...
I would rather not turn this thread into a discussion of these things, as there are many threads all over CAF about of the things I cannot fully accept. I’ve read Canon Law about them, as well as historical documents and current documents and books, and still cannot reconcile myself to them.
 
+There is no such allowance or teaching of the “supremecy of personal conscience” in the Apostolic Holy Roman Catholic Church’s doctrine . . . quite the opposite . . . below is a quote from . . . Catholic Answer’s Forum apologist **Peggy Frye ** . . . dealing precisely with this distinctly FALSE non-Catholic doctrine . . .

**. . . :coffeeread: . . . **
**Re:
Is it true that Catholics are free to choose,
with serious consideration,
which Church teachings to obey? **
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
**To protect the faith of the Catholic Church against errors: **
:compcoff:
**Motu proprio **
vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_30061998_ad-tuendam-fidem_en.html
Catholics are NOT free to “choose which teachings to obey”. …

The Code of Canon Law no 750 clearly states:

Can. 750

§1. A person must believe with divine and Catholic faith all those things contained in the word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the sacred magisterium; therefore all are bound to avoid any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.

**§2. **Each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same deposit of faith, is also to be firm-ly embraced and retained; therefore, one who rejects those propositions which are to be held definitively is opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church.

Submission of mind and will to the teachings of the Church even when not speaking ex cathedra must be shown (e.g., truths contained in the Catechism, and that artificial contraception is sinful).​
Lumen Gentium no 25:
“This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will.”​
And Vatican II in Gaudium et Spes no. 50 makes it clear that
“The teaching Church does not invent her doctrines; she is a witness, a custodian, an interpreter, a transmitter. As regards the truths of Christian marriage, she can be called conservative, uncompromising. To those who would urge her to make her faith easier, more in keeping with the tastes of the changing mentality of the times, she answers with the apostles, we cannot.” (Acts. 4:20)​
Is it o.k. to be a cafeteria Catholic? Pope John Paul II says,
“It is sometimes reported that a large number of Catholics today do not adhere to the teaching of the Catholic Church on a number of questions, notably sexual and conjugal morality, divorce and remarriage. Some are reported as not accepting the clear position on abortion. It has to be noted that there is a tendency on the part of some Catholics to be selective in their adherence to the Church’s moral teaching. It is sometimes claimed that dissent from the magisterium is totally compatible with being a “good Catholic,” and poses no obstacle to the reception of the Sacraments. This is a grave error that challenges the teaching of the Bishops in the United States and elsewhere.” (Pope John Paul II in his speech to the Bishops in 1987)​
Can the faithful form their own consciences when it comes to the teachings of the Church? No.
“In the formation of their consciences, the Christian faithful ought carefully to attend to the sacred and certain doctrine of the Church.(35) For the Church is, by the will of Christ, the teacher of the truth. It is her duty to give utterance to, and authoritatively to teach, that truth which is** Christ Himself**, and also to declare and confirm by her authority those principles of the moral order which have their origins in human nature itself.”​

:compcoff:
Dignitatis Humanae
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-humanae_en.html​

. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Dear Lord+
. . . thank you Blessed Virgin Mary our Mother+
. . . thank you Holy Mother Church+
:signofcross:​
 
+Below is a section of The Catechism of the Catholic Church which also deals with the extremely dangerous spiritual waters a soul enters into. . . when they decide their own . . . prone to sin . . . finite minds and hearts are the supreme authority . . . over** our Lord and **His **chosen and established Wonderful Apostolic Holy Roman Catholic Church . . .

. . . :coffeeread: . . .
**2089 **
  • Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it.
  • "Heresy is the** obstinate post-baptismal denial** of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same;
  • apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith;
  • schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."
. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Holy God+​
 
SHoJ said:
I go by this definition of dogma vs doctrine vs discipline:

I would rather not turn this thread into a discussion of these things, as there are many threads all over CAF about of the things I cannot fully accept. I’ve read Canon Law about them, as well as historical documents and current documents and books, and still cannot reconcile myself to them.
Click to expand...
As a Catholic you must accept all the teachings of the Church, even those you may not fully understand. You are not allowed to pick and choose those to accept or not.
 
OP: Did you note that the description you gave from Lion of Narnia had him (Lion) stating that he was doing this ‘from memory’ and asked for corrections from those who had read the book? WERE there in fact any corrections given? If not, does not mean that this was correct, or simply that nobody had actually seen the list, or if seeing, had checked, found error, and made the correction?

No matter how respected the author of Born Fundamentalist is (and he is), I wouldn’t go by a ‘definition’ which acknowledges that its points may be in error!
 
Perhaps you ought to open threads discussing these two doctrines.

Catholicism is a religion of revealed truth. By ‘revealed’ or ‘revelation’ we mean God revealed the truth to us, so it is therefor not disputable, because in such a case to dispute it is man vs. God.

The revealed truths are dogmas.

Since one doesn’t have to make a leap of faith to know Catholicism is founded and revealed by God, is Christ’s one religion, as there is sufficient historical and moral evidence this way – once you have down that God is working through Catholicism, it’s a simple step of humility to not have to understand all that is revealed, but to accept it, and to accept also whether God will or will not eventually give you the grace to understand it. It is His decision after all.

By faith we trust in God and what He reveals to us.

I tend to think God tends to put people and their trust in Him to the test often rather than explaining to them the ‘why’ a thing is this way or the other, to let them prove their virtue and trust in Him, or reveal the flaws they need to work on that way fundamentally. 🙂
 
+Below is the section of The Catechism of the Catholic Church which also deals with the extremely dangerous spiritual waters a soul enters into. . . when they decide their own . . . prone to sin . . . finite minds and hearts are the supreme authority . . . over** our Lord and **His **chosen and established Wonderful Apostolic Holy Roman Catholic Church . . .

. . . :coffeeread: . . .
**2089 **
  • Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it.
  • "Heresy is the** obstinate post-baptismal denial** of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same;
  • apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith;
  • schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."
. . . all for Jesus+
. . . thank You Sweet Spirit of our Holy God+​
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top