Is "belief" of ALL Catholic teachings required?

[freerf]

I’ve heard some on CAF say that Catholics must “believe” all doctrines/teachings of the Catholic Church. That belief is required. My primary question is: is this true?

Secondly, if true, how can one force themselves to “believe”?

According to wikipedia, “a belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a propsition or premis to be true.” How can one force a psychological state?

Some say Catholics are allowed to have doubts. If this is true, how can they also be simultaneously required to believe everything the Catholic Church teaches?

Does this not subvert control over ones own decision making?

 

[ConstantineTG]

I’ve heard some on CAF say that Catholics must “believe” all doctrines/teachings of the Catholic Church. That belief is required. My primary question is: is this true?

All doctrines must be believed. Its essential to the faith. There are things that are not as essntial, such as Marian Apparitions. The Church is clear what is doctrine, dogma, and what can be freely accepted or not.

Secondly, if true, how can one force themselves to “believe”?

Catechisis. Its not so much so about forcing you to believe, but learning about teachings of the Church helps you appreciate why the Church teaches that way and would lead to acceptance of the teaching. Contrary to what people say, there’s no such thing as blind faith. Just look at how thick the Catechism of the Catholic Church is. The Church doesn’t believe in leaving a teaching unexplained.

According to wikipedia, “a belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a propsition or premis to be true.” How can one force a psychological state?

As mentioned above, the Church doesn’t expect you to accept everything from day one. But it also expects you not to reject it. You can take your time for catechisis.

Some say Catholics are allowed to have doubts. If this is true, how can they also be simultaneously required to believe everything the Catholic Church teaches?

Having doubts is different from rejecting. I may doubt, say, purgatory. But its different from me rejecting that there is a purgatory or purgatorial state. Having doubts creates the occassion for catechisis and further learning. While you don’t fully accept, your mind is open to the truth. Rejection closes your mind from the truth.

Does this not subvert control over ones own decision making?

If you blindly accept, yes. But if you learn why, then you do not. Its like going to college. You may have notions of the profession you are persuing. But learning more about it gives you more accurate information about the profession and thus you may have to abandon previous false beliefs and accept the truth. That is what catechisis is for. But if your mind is shut to other information and only believes in what you think is true, then the opportunity to accept the truth is gone.

 

[freerf]

Thank you for your response Constantine, but I don’t get it. On the one hand you say “All doctrines must be believed” and then you say, “the Church doesn’t expect you to accept everything from day one.”

So if you don’t accept everything isn’t that synonymous with not believing?

You mention catechism. What about for a returning Catholic? or a cradle catholic?

Maybe I’m misunderstanding the term “Catechisis”. Can an already-Catholic be in catechisis?

 

[joandarc2008]

Thank you for your response Constantine, but I don’t get it. On the one hand you say “All doctrines must be believed” and then you say, “the Church doesn’t expect you to accept everything from day one.”

So if you don’t accept everything isn’t that synonymous with not believing?

You mention catechism. What about for a returning Catholic? or a cradle catholic?

Maybe I’m misunderstanding the term “Catechisis”. Can an already-Catholic be in catechisis?

Try replacing the term “Catechesis” with term “formation.” Formation is an ongoing, lifelong process. It must be. In the case of a convert this a fairly obvious. In the case of a cradle Catholic you cannot expect a child to have the same understanding of issues such as abortion, IC, BVM, sexuality, etc as they do when they are an adult.

The Church does not ask for an outright blind acceptance - just not an outright denial. There must be a willingness to learn.Conversion is a process. The idea of “being saved” is a Protestant idea.

I hope that makes things a bit easier - I think Constantine did a fairly good job.

 

[manygift1spirit]

A point that often harms understanding about belief is that belief is an act of the will, not only the brain. It is a choice.

Belief is not merely understanding – in fact sometimes understanding is impossible. Think of the Trinity, which the Church teaches is a mystery beyond human reason, or something similar. But we are called to believe it, to say, “I choose to give assent of my will to this idea.” or in English, “I choose to believe this teaching”

Now belief and understanding are not completely exclusive - most people can come to understand that murdering an innocent person is wrong, and also believe in its wrongness. But the understanding is not why it’s believed.

This idea of giving up understanding if it isn’t there is why it is called “faith”.

 

[freerf]

Try replacing the term “Catechesis” with term “formation.” Formation is an ongoing, lifelong process. It must be. In the case of a convert this a fairly obvious. In the case of a cradle Catholic you cannot expect a child to have the same understanding of issues such as abortion, IC, BVM, sexuality, etc as they do when they are an adult.

The Church does not ask for an outright blind acceptance - just not an outright denial. There must be a willingness to learn.Conversion is a process. The idea of “being saved” is a Protestant idea.

I hope that makes things a bit easier - I think Constantine did a fairly good job.

So this begs the question: as a “potential convert”, shall I forever maintain this status until such a time as I “believe” all dogma? Or is it acceptable to believe most dogma (such as the trinity, begotten an not made, etc.) but be in “formation” or “catechesis” (spelling!) about others (such as the assumption of Mary)?

 

[Bookcat]

Code of Canon Law Roman Rite:

Can. 748 §1. All persons are bound to seek the truth in those things which regard God and his Church and by virtue of divine law are bound by the obligation and possess the right of embracing and observing the truth which they have come to know.

§2. No one is ever permitted to coerce persons to embrace the Catholic faith against their conscience.

Can. 749 §1. By virtue of his office, the Supreme Pontiff possesses infallibility in teaching when as the supreme pastor and teacher of all the Christian faithful, who strengthens his brothers and sisters in the faith, he proclaims by definitive act that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held.

§2. The college of bishops also possesses infallibility in teaching when the bishops gathered together in an ecumenical council exercise the magisterium as teachers and judges of faith and morals who declare for the universal Church that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held definitively; or when dispersed throughout the world but preserving the bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter and teaching authentically together with the Roman Pontiff matters of faith or morals, they agree that a particular proposition is to be held definitively.

§3. No doctrine is understood as defined infallibly unless this is manifestly evident.

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.

Can. 751 Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.

Can. 752 Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.

Can. 753 Although the bishops who are in communion with the head and members of the college, whether individually or joined together in conferences of bishops or in particular councils, do not possess infallibility in teaching, they are authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the Christian faithful entrusted to their care; the Christian faithful are bound to adhere with religious submission of mind to the authentic magisterium of their bishops.

Can. 754 All the Christian faithful are obliged to observe the constitutions and decrees which the legitimate authority of the Church issues in order to propose doctrine and to proscribe erroneous opinions, particularly those which the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops puts forth.

 

[freerf]

A point that often harms understanding about belief is that belief is an act of the will, not only the brain. It is a choice.

Belief is not merely understanding – in fact sometimes understanding is impossible. Think of the Trinity, which the Church teaches is a mystery beyond human reason, or something similar. But we are called to believe it, to say, “I choose to give assent of my will to this idea.” or in English, “I choose to believe this teaching”

Now belief and understanding are not completely exclusive - most people can come to understand that murdering an innocent person is wrong, and also believe in its wrongness. But the understanding is not why it’s believed.

This idea of giving up understanding if it isn’t there is why it is called “faith”.

Belief is also not merely a choice. You said it yourself, “we are called to believe it”. By whom? Doesn’t the bible teach that faith is a gift from God? We are called by God. The holy spirit leads us to belief.

Now here’s my problem. The holy spirit has not called me to believe “the assumption”. theSo, if i’m not called to that belief, and don’t understand a reason for that belief, how can i say i believe? How can i honestly convert if only one doctrine is not “believed”?

One cannot merely say I believe and it be so. I cannot stand in the sun and say, i believe it is raining, and suddenly I believe it is raining. To me it seems that belief must come from either understanding or faith. And if faith, it must be given by God.

 

[thistle]

I guess what the OP might be asking is what is the difference between believing and accepting or not believing but still accepting (in obedience to the Church).

For example, the Catechism of the Catholic Church contains all the teachings of the Church (both infallible and non-infallible) plus disciplines.

Now ALL must be accepted but which must be believed as well from:

Infallible
Non-infallible
Disciplines

Then there is the question of how the ordinary Catholic on the street would know what in the CCC is infallible, non-infallible and disciplines. There is no note after each teaching stating which of the above categories it falls under.

 

[joandarc2008]

So this begs the question: as a “potential convert”, shall I forever maintain this status until such a time as I “believe” all dogma? Or is it acceptable to believe most dogma (such as the trinity, begotten an not made, etc.) but be in “formation” or “catechesis” (spelling!) about others (such as the assumption of Mary)?

It depends on whether it is doctrine, dogma, tradition, etc that you are having issue with. If it is dogma then yes you should stay a convert until you get these figured out. Once you partake in your Sacraments of Initiation you are promising to also embrace the life of the Church so it is important that you understand why you are doing what you are doing and the decisions you are making. Take your time and may the Holy Spirit guide you to ask whatever questions you need to ask.

 

[Bookcat]

Secondly, if true, how can one force themselves to “believe”?

One does not force oneself to believe…nor is one to be forced…

One does not believe in “that way” but in the way of the Christian!

On can believe …because one believes first in Jesus–trusts HIS word…that his Church is teaching in his Name and you believe his Church…one gives ones “I” to him …and one conforms oneself to him and to his Church…

(Even in centuries past great writers in writing theological works --great intellectuals etc would end their writings with…“but if anything I have written is contrary to the teachings of the Church I renounce what I have written”…which is like saying what I believed…I now reject and what the Church believes I now choose to believe–they submitted everything to Christ…for even their great intellects…even the “beliefs” of their great intellects could be wrong…)

This is the way of the Christian…we say yes to Jesus…and thus to all his Church teaches…

and thus “No” to all other things contrary…

As a Christian…

one renounces Satan and all his pomps…

one renounces sin…

one renounces all errors…

ones great YES to Christ involves alot of no’s …

but the YES is HIM and thus to true life…

Jesus said if we want to be his disciple we must renounce even ourselves…

Jesus’ call is a radical one…he even refers to “hating” things in comparison to following him…

“If any one comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:26)

He means this in the semintic way of teaching…(not that he wants us to hate our parents…etc) …but it is to express the radical nature of discipleship. And it does make things clear.

This discipleship includes the renewal of the mind…vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20090628_chius-anno-paolino_en.html (keep reading after the first parts…)

because we have met HIM …we trust HIM…we trust HIS Church about which he says “he who hears you hears me”…we trust …and give ourselves…just like in marriage…but more radically.

The YES to him in the Catholic Church is to be a YES to all the Church teaches…(in the various degrees…)

This YES is a choice…similar to Marriage…(in ones yes one says no to many things…and one must renounce various attractions…things that would draw one…)

…but this YES is greater.

read this…keep reading the whole thing:

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2006/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20060108_battesimo_en.html

Now of course …one can have difficulties…but a thousand difficulties does not make a single doubt. It is to be --“Faith” seeking understanding— Which is reasonable. Yes Faith and reason go together…the Faith is reasonable and is to be reasoned about (that is the nature of Theology) …and different persons may be a different places in this…but my point is largely that it is possible for one to give ones YES without understanding everything…

One may not understand everything about ones spouse the day one says “Yes” in marriage…there will be much to learn etc…but one has encountered him or her…

As Paul talks about things…one “hands oneself over” …freely

It is the Obedience of Faith…in some things and the religious submission of intellect and will in others…

But it is the reason of love …of the encounter with Christ in his Church…the kind of encounter that the first disciples experienced and which later would cause Peter to say “where would we go? you have the words of eternal life”…

---

In the early Church the Catecumenate could last years…before they gave their yes…so this is not always an overnight thing…but it is possible to give ones yes even if one still does not understand everything…

And yes some can go through various periods of difficulty…which other Christians can assist with…by counsel…prayer etc…(one reason CA exists)

 

[freerf]

Ah, friends, I think i’ve found some good answers from Catholic Answers:

Q:“ The catechism (2089) states, “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.” What is “obstinate doubt” and how does it differ from ordinary doubt?

”A: Obstinate doubt is voluntary doubt—doubt may be defined as either voluntary or involuntary. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains,

Voluntary doubt about the faith disregards or refuses to hold as true what God has revealed and the Church proposes for belief. Involuntary doubt refers to hesitation in believing, difficulty in overcoming objections connected with the faith, or also anxiety aroused by its obscurity. If deliberately cultivated, doubt can lead to spiritual blindness. (CCC 2088)

Involuntary doubt is not, in itself, sinful and may be experienced by any sincere believer. Voluntary doubt, on the other hand, as a willful refusal to assent to God’s revelation, is a grave issue."

End Quote.

Beautifully expressed. thank you catholic answers.

 

[freerf]

Now of course …one can have difficulties…but a thousand difficulties does not make a single doubt.

Thanks for your response. However, according to catholic answers, “Involuntary doubt is not, in itself, sinful and may be experienced by any sincere believer.”

 

[joandarc2008]

Thanks for your response. However, according to catholic answers, “Involuntary doubt is not, in itself, sinful and may be experienced by any sincere believer.”

Yes but read again - that was after Baptism -not before. You are in a different boat as a convert. The Sacrametns of Initiation leave an indellible mark on your soul meaning conversion to the Church is permanent. If you decide to leave after because you decide you never believed in Dogma or Doctrine than you basically place yourself in a sinful state by not upholding the precepts such as mass attendance, confession, eucharist, tithing, and fasting.

 

[Bookcat]

Thanks for your response. However, according to catholic answers, “Involuntary doubt is not, in itself, sinful and may be experienced by any sincere believer.”

I think your take may be a bit. . .unrealistic.

Yes of course …I agree with CA.

Actually what I wrote was basically a quote from the Catechism.

My take there is very realistic. I means what you were saying --that involuntary “doubts” are not the same as “voluntary doubts” the CCC notes that a thousand difficulties do not even equal one doubt…this is a poetic way (taken from Bl. Newman) to say the same thing…they are not voluntary…they are difficulties…not willful doubts

It is Faith …seeking understanding.

Josef Pieper had the great line which goes something like this (substance not quote)

That sometimes one must even stand fast …as did the he Martyrs…against ones own thoughts…suffering in silence holding fast to the Faith.

St. Therese was accosted by lots of temptations against Faith…she would simply write in her blood “credo” (I believe) …(she coughed up blood due to her illness)…

 

[Bookcat]

Yes but read again - that was after Baptism -not before. You are in a different boat as a convert. The Sacrametns of Initiation leave an indellible mark on your soul meaning conversion to the Church is permanent. If you decide to leave after because you decide you never believed in Dogma or Doctrine than you basically place yourself in a sinful state by not upholding the precepts such as mass attendance, confession, eucharist, tithing, and fasting.

Without commenting on the whole…

just a note…(not to derail the thread)…tithing is NOT a precept…the Church doe not require a tithe…we are to support the Church of course according to our ability though…

 

[freerf]

I guess what the OP might be asking is what is the difference between believing and accepting or not believing but still accepting (in obedience to the Church).

For example, the Catechism of the Catholic Church contains all the teachings of the Church (both infallible and non-infallible) plus disciplines.

Now ALL must be accepted but which must be believed as well from:

Infallible
Non-infallible
Disciplines

Then there is the question of how the ordinary Catholic on the street would know what in the CCC is infallible, non-infallible and disciplines. There is no note after each teaching stating which of the above categories it falls under.

Thank you. that is well put. So, what must be accepted vs. believed? for instance, the assumption?

 

[freerf]

Yes but read again - that was after Baptism -not before. You are in a different boat as a convert. The Sacrametns of Initiation leave an indellible mark on your soul meaning conversion to the Church is permanent. If you decide to leave after because you decide you never believed in Dogma or Doctrine than you basically place yourself in a sinful state by not upholding the precepts such as mass attendance, confession, eucharist, tithing, and fasting.

I’m baptised. I’ve been a Protestant for 10 years or so.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

I’ve heard some on CAF say that Catholics must “believe” all doctrines/teachings of the Catholic Church. That belief is required. My primary question is: is this true?

Secondly, if true, how can one force themselves to “believe”?

Do you believe everything the Bible teaches? If so, how did you “force” yourself to believe the Bible?

 

[freerf]

Yes of course …I agree with CA.

Actually what I wrote was basically a quote from the Catechism.

My take there is very realistic. I means what you were saying --that involuntary “doubts” are not the same as “voluntary doubts” the CCC notes that a thousand difficulties do not even equal one doubt…this is a poetic way (taken from Bl. Newman) to say the same thing…they are not voluntary…they are difficulties…not willful doubts

It is Faith …seeking understanding.

Josef Pieper had the great line which goes something like this (substance not quote)

That sometimes one must even stand fast …as did the he Martyrs…against ones own thoughts…suffering in silence holding fast to the Faith.

St. Therese was accosted by lots of temptations against Faith…she would simply write in her blood “credo” (I believe) …(she coughed up blood due to her illness)…

Thank you for the clarification. My problem is that my faith doesn’t translate to “the assumption” or things of that sort. I’m of protestant background, so my faith is rooted in scripture but not Tradition. (capital T - no i don’t want to get into that arguement! lol) Therefore, Tradition based “beliefs” are rather difficult for me.