Is dissent without an action grave sin?

[Iowa_Mike]

Well SAID!!
I just want to add that when someone has not deeply studied the bible and explored the Catholic teachings then if you state something that is against the Catholic teachings it will hurt them deeply and contribute even for them to make a decision that might endanger that relationship with God.
We have the responsibility to express what we know to help other come out of their confusion. People need to start realizing that the road to GOD is not a nice walk in the country…NO!! It is hard and full of barriers and sacrifices and you need to be strong in your faith in order to stay in it.
The devil is deceiving and is using all the tools that we have created ourselves to lie and lure us into sin.
Open your eyes…To offend God is very easy, it takes almost nothing but his love and mercy are so BIG that if we honestly repent and try to find him, then he will be waiting with his open arms…the problem is How much time do we have left?

Amen…

Iowa Mike

 

[m134e5]

I hope this is the right place to post this. This is just a question I was thinking about in church this morning.

In the Missal I read, it gave rules for receiving holy communion. They state those Catholics being in Grave sin should not recieve. I got to thinking about this, and I do not have an answer…please help!

Is dissent against the church without doing the said action a grave sin?

Examples-
Is just being pro choice (and never, ever, procuring or assisting in abortion) a grave sin in itself?

Another example-Being in favor of Euthanasia (but never actually DOING it) a grave sin?

For the record, I am a pro-life, anti-euthenasia, anti emrboynic stem cell research, and generally don’t disagree with the church (I’m sure I have one or two disagreements here or there) so I don’t really have a dog in the fight. Just purely curious.

Thanks in advance!

If you find yourself thinking you’d be happier if the Church taught a different way, it isn’t necessarily a sin just to feel that way. Watch what you do with that feeling though- keep quiet about it. Don’t provide those who don’t know the Faith well with your dissenting beliefs. Don’t be disrespectful to anyone- particularly clergy and religious (see my quote in my signature), or undermine their efforts to bring the Faith to the world as the Church teaches it. Don’t provide support for organizations or people who publicly dissent from Church teaching (this includes supporting politicians who are pro-choice). Finally, have the humilty to at least consider that God promised to protect His Church from error, and pray that God will either prove them wrong, or prove you wrong.

 

[tjm190]

You don’t control what you believe, it’s a result of your interpretation of your experiences. If you look at the same information the Church does and arrive at a different conclusion, you should open a dialogue with someone who favors the Church’s conclusions and try to reason out your differences.

 

[manualman]

This is all about language and nuance.

To “dissent without action” could go either way. It’s possible that somebody like Frances Kissling (Catholics for a Free Choice) has never actually had an abortion, but her public dissent does grave damage to the faithful and I gotta believe THAT is sin.

On the other hand, if you personally can’t bring yourself to call all abortion inherently immoral, but are still obedient to God’s revelation and do nothing to encourage others to be rebellious, that isn’t really dissent. It’s more like having a “difficulty.” There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. John Henry Newmann was famously opposed to the Vatican I declaration about papal infallibility while it was being debated at the Council. He never spoke against it again afterwards, but I suspect he had plenty of “difficulty” with it on the inside.

See the difference?

 

[Betterave]

John Henry Newmann was famously opposed to the Vatican I declaration about papal infallibility while it was being debated at the Council. He never spoke against it again afterwards, but I suspect he had plenty of “difficulty” with it on the inside.

Just to be clear, I’m pretty sure he had a difficulty about it being declared at that point in time, not about the truth of the doctrine. His difficulty was about the politics, not the doctrinal position.