Is it acceptable to disagree with the Church?

[Rolltide]

I guess what it boils down to for me is this:

I have no problem with the church receiving by donation, or even buying, beautiful things that are going toward worship. In other words, ceremonial garments, church buildings, things used in the liturgy, and church decoration. The church should inspire us, make us realize that we are experiencing something otherworldly, and demonstrate that we are willing to offer our best to God. If we read the Old Testament (and study history), we learn that the Temple of Solomon was fabulously and sumptuously decorated. In fact, according to historical evidence, it may have almost bankrupted ancient Israel! The New Covenant is the fulfillment of the Old, and we read in Revelation that the Holy Mass (and the Divine Liturgy) are direct reflections of heavenly worship. We are actually present with Christ on Calvary, eternally, out of time, witnessing the same sacrifice re-presented! The Mass really is heaven on earth!

Long ago, the Church instituted policies to prevent abuses regarding the personal wealthy of the clergy. This is what most people have a problem with. Before the Reformation (and during the time of the Cluny Reform Movement), many priests were corrupt, spending lavishly on themselves and their families, and out for power. Most of this has been corrected by the Church, although there will always be the occasional exception. This is the kind of wealth that is dangerous to the faith.

The amount of money spent on ceremonial items, even with their high cost, is only the tiniest, tiniest fraction of the Church’s budget. These items have a high up front cost, but usually last for hundreds of years. For example, in 2007, the Vatican had a budget of just 236 million Euros. (A little less than the US public university I went to school at). The city-state, which has a separate budget, had just a 6.7 million Euro surplus. Vatican financial investments brought in another 1.7 million Euros (they were hit hard by the economy). It had 36.3 million Euros in real estate investments. Their media operations LOST 14.3 million Euros. The Peter’s Pence collection (the worldwide donation from parishoners that goes to the Vatican’s budget) was 50.8 million Euros, including a single donation of $14.3 million dollars. Most of this money doesn’t go to charity; this is the money that directly goes to the operation of the Vatican, with the exception of Peter’s Pence, which is used to respond to natural disasters. Of this budget, much goes to restoration, the pope’s travels, day to day operations of the Vatican, operation of the museums, and so on. Only a few million dollars every year goes to new wardrobe and new liturgical items. Frankly, the Vatican doesn’t need many new things, when it has so many wonderful old ones.

Now, compare this to the Vatican’s charitable operations. In the US alone in 2007, Catholic Charities brought in over $3.6 BILLION dollars. Worldwide donations were far higher yet. Catholic Charities in the US is so large, that only the federal government provides more services. In some areas, Catholic Charities actually surpasses the government itself (and keep in mind, the country is only 22% Catholic, but Catholic Charities is open to all). It spends billions a year to help people in developing countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. It spends millions per year spreading the Catholic faith in the media and with missionaries (and much of that does come from the Vatican budget mentioned above). And… none of this takes into account donations that are given by local parishoners to their local parish, which are indeed used for the maintenance of the Church, but also go to stock food pantries, help immigrants, and fund Catholic schools, which have their own separate budget. Given what a TINY amount of money goes to the splendor of the Church… no, it doesn’t bother me at all. It’s literally a drop in the bucket. I think its wonderful, and I think the Vatican has it just right, though I respect everyone’s opinion to disagree.

 

[Rolltide]

By the way, you’d be surprised how much money it takes to run even a moderately sized university. Let’s look at a few for comparison:

Penn State 2008-2009
Total University Budget - $3,607,444,000

Harvard University 2007
Total University Budget - $3,210,506,000
Total University Endowment - $36.9 billion

Notre Dame University 2008
$7.41 billion in assets
(Just this single Catholic university has a larger budget than the whole of the Vatican!)

University of Alabama 2008
Total University Budget - $682.9 million

Just to remind everyone again, the Vatican’s TOTAL budget, converted into American dollars (as of today, and rounding up), is only about $327 million. And that’s million, NOT billion like some of the universities listed above. In fact, a lot of the larger individual Catholic DIOCESES in the US have bigger budgets than the Vatican!

 

[tbcrawford]

I primarily disagree with the Church on abortion and don’t subscribe to some of its teachings currently.

I posted this because I recently read an article about Brad Lidge, written about a year ago, and how he disagrees with the Catholic Church, similar to my situation. Would he be a Catholic? His views seem legitimate although they may be arguing from incomplete information.

philly.com/philly/sports/20091028_The_education_of_Brad_Lidge.html

Hi Black_Rose we are all human and it is natural for us to disagree with soemthing if we do not fully understand it.There are many things in our daily lives we may not fully agree with or understand but we know for our greater good we do certain things.For example when we were young and our parents told us not to talk to strangers it was to protect us from harm but as young children we were not fully aware of the possible danger involved,being innocent young things we want to be friendly to everyone.

There are many things about the church we may not understand or see the whole picture of,if and when these doubts appear and they will in all of us at different times in our lives) it is good to talk to our priest and ask the questions until we feel satisfied we understand.My Parish priest is always mentioning in his homilies how we will all doubt things from time to time but it is good to question things at times.He asks us to approach him, make appointments to speak with him in confidence.
I certainly welcome you to the church with open and loving arms.It is good you are being moved to question things it is how we learn.When you are satisfied in your mind you will feel more enthused to fully join the catholic church.
If you know your local priest or even if you don’t, make an appointment to speak with one and bring along your questions he will welcome you and be far more knowledgable than any of us here.
May God bless you on your journey in faith

 

[wanner47]

“They could sell all those things, auction them off and probably feed half that world’s starving population. There is that much wealth stored in the Sistine Chapel. For it just to be sitting there I think is a crime. It just doesn’t make sense anymore. People have given well-deserved gifts to the church, but Jesus said, ‘Store for yourself not treasures on earth but treasures in heaven.’ These are treasures on earth. That’s not what we’re supposed to be doing.”

Wait a minute, Brad Lidge traveled to Italy on vacation? Why didn’t he take the money he would have used to go on vacation and give it to the poor instead?

Jesus had things to say about hypocrites, too.

 

[Julian0404]

Black Rose,

Acceptability in following the teachings of the church is a personal choice, as that is the way GOD has made us, with free will. However, with free choice you determine both what is acceptable to you, and you in turn accept the consequences of your choice.

Abortion is intrinsically evil. It cannot be explained in a way that makes it good. To voluntarily murder a defenseless baby, within what should be the best protect ennvironment the baby will ever know, the mothers womb, is intrinsically evil.

This defenseless murder scenario is even defended by our courts when a baby in the mothers womb is murdered by someone other than the mother, like for instance a criminal who shoots the mother and kills the baby and the mother. The courts will put that criminal on trial for two murders. This hypocrisy will be the “millstone around the neck” of every politician, judge and citizen who supported abortion on the day of their judgement, unless they confess their sins and reject abortion and return to JESUS.

You can disagree with the Catholic Church on this point, but then you are not catholic. As per Bishop Raymond Burke, the “title” does not grant the grace.

 

[mark_a]

I primarily disagree with the Church on abortion and don’t subscribe to some of its teachings currently.

Which other teachings?

 

[Rascalking]

I think there is a difference between, “I disagree” and “I don’t understand why…”

There are things that I’m not sure why, or can’t wrap my brain around, but I trust the church, so, maybe they’ve got something right.

However, I think you should be allowed to question. There is NOTHING wrong with asking why ,a debating, or anything else like that. The church doesn’t ask for non-questioning obedience.

 

[CMatt25]

I primarily disagree with the Church on abortion and don’t subscribe to some of its teachings currently.

I posted this because I recently read an article about Brad Lidge written about a year ago, and how he disagrees with the Catholic Church, similar to my situation. Would he be a Catholic?

Can one disagree and be Catholic? While it might seem to depend on who you ask as I personally have found some here on CAF define a Catholic as only those who more faithfully follow the teaching. That merely defines who are Catholics of the more faithful bend. It is not exactly the definition of who the Church calls Catholic.

Not only are the more faithful Catholics considered Catholics according to the Church. But all of Her members. For those who become members thru Baptism for instance, an indelible character is placed onto one’s soul which can not be removed regardless of any act. Even the excommunicated Catholic while told they are not to receive the Sacraments nor serve at Mass as lectors, ministers of the Eucharist and so forth, are nevertheless still considered Catholic.

Incorporated into the Church, the Body of Christ

CCC 267 Baptism makes us members of the Body of Christ: "Therefore . . . we are members one of another. Baptism incorporates us into the Church. (Note the capital letter “C”)

And from a 2006 Pontifical Council letter to His Holiness Pope Benedict XV1…

1. It remains clear, in any event, that the sacramental bond of belonging to the Body of Christ that is the Church, conferred by the baptismal character, is an ontological and permanent bond which is not lost by reason of any act or fact of defection.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/intrptxt/documents/rc_pc_intrptxt_doc_20060313_actus-formalis_en.html

A previous bishop of mine seemed to concur as he explained it this way to me now nearly 2 decades ago. In his letter of reply when I asked a similar question to yours including the matter of abortion, he wrote the following, “A person becomes a member of the Catholic Church by the Sacrament of Baptism.” And though perhaps not fully practicing, “would still be considered to be Catholic”.

There is also the primacy of conscience.

CCC 1776 "Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment. . . . For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. . . . His conscience is man’s most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths.

CCC 1782 Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.

CCC 1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

Many here on CAF might argue this means your conscience is only morally correct if you indocrinate it according to everything the Church teaches. And that one must accept all of this indocrination regardless of whether it still goes against one’s own conscience. The problem with this is it does not reflect the conscience of the person who after doing all they can to inform the conscience and combine doing so with much prayer and contemplation, still nevertheless has a conscience deep within not in accordance.

His Holiness at a time prior to becoming the Holy Father had this to say…

“Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority, there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed above all else, if necessary even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority.”

ascensioncatholic.net/TOPICS/morality/ConscienceAndMoralDecisions.html

So I hope all of this helps and gives you some insight.

But the short answer is yes. While many will apply various terms such as faithful, cafeteria, practicing or non, and many other such terms, the bottom line is ID-ing as Catholic is acceptable. Because the Church Herself counts you as such.

God bless you along your walk and peace be with you always.

 

[Soler]

Can one disagree and be Catholic? While it might seem to depend on who you ask as I personally have found some here on CAF define a Catholic as only those who more faithfully follow the teaching. That merely defines who are Catholics of the more faithful bend. It is not exactly the definition of who the Church calls Catholic.

Not only are the more faithful Catholics considered Catholics according to the Church. But all of Her members. For those who become members thru Baptism for instance, an indelible character is placed onto one’s soul which can not be removed regardless of any act. Even the excommunicated Catholic while told they are not to receive the Sacraments nor serve at Mass as lectors, ministers of the Eucharist and so forth, are nevertheless still considered Catholic.

Incorporated into the Church, the Body of Christ

CCC 267 Baptism makes us members of the Body of Christ: "Therefore . . . we are members one of another. Baptism incorporates us into the Church. (Note the capital letter “C”)

And from a 2006 Pontifical Council letter to His Holiness Pope Benedict XV1…

1. It remains clear, in any event, that the sacramental bond of belonging to the Body of Christ that is the Church, conferred by the baptismal character, is an ontological and permanent bond which is not lost by reason of any act or fact of defection.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/intrptxt/documents/rc_pc_intrptxt_doc_20060313_actus-formalis_en.html

A previous bishop of mine seemed to concur as he explained it this way to me now nearly 2 decades ago. In his letter of reply when I asked a similar question to yours including the matter of abortion, he wrote the following, “A person becomes a member of the Catholic Church by the Sacrament of Baptism.” And though perhaps not fully practicing, “would still be considered to be Catholic”.

There is also the primacy of conscience.

CCC 1776 "Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment. . . . For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. . . . His conscience is man’s most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths.

CCC 1782 Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.

CCC 1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

Many here on CAF might argue this means your conscience is only morally correct if you indocrinate it according to everything the Church teaches. And that one must accept all of this indocrination regardless of whether it still goes against one’s own conscience. The problem with this is it does not reflect the conscience of the person who after doing all they can to inform the conscience and combine doing so with much prayer and contemplation, still nevertheless has a conscience deep within not in accordance.

His Holiness at a time prior to becoming the Holy Father had this to say…

“Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority, there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed above all else, if necessary even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority.”

ascensioncatholic.net/TOPICS/morality/ConscienceAndMoralDecisions.html

So I hope all of this helps and gives you some insight.

But the short answer is yes. While many will apply various terms such as faithful, cafeteria, practicing or non, and many other such terms, the bottom line is ID-ing as Catholic is acceptable. Because the Church Herself counts you as such.

God bless you along your walk and peace be with you always.

All true, I guess, but the moral obligation to obey the Church remains.
It doesn’t greatly matter if you can’t understand a particular teaching of the Faith, because you can still accept it, you can still say “The Church knows better than me.” Unfortunately, many people nowadays find it hard to admit that someone knows better than them. I find that kind of strange: wouldn’t it be comforting to know that you don’t have to re-invent the wheel, that other (very learned) people in other times have done a lot of the thinking for you.

I have been blessed in that I can understand, to an extent, most teachings of the Church. There are still one or two things I find it hard to get my head around, yet I accept them, because the rational evidence for the Catholic Faith as a whole remains so overwhelming.

 

[tafan]

They could sell all those things, auction them off and probably feed half that world’s starving population. There is that much wealth stored in the Sistine Chapel. For it just to be sitting there I think is a crime

This **** about the Church having all this weath in the form of art/buildings and it should sell it off to help the poor really gets old. When does anyone tell the city of new york to sell off its treasures in the New York metropolitan museem to help the poor? When does anyone tell the US government to sell off its valuables in the Smithsonian or to sell of the national parks in order to give the proceeds to the poor? Has the government of France ever considered liquidating the Louve or Versailles in order to help the poor? What about other religions who have great churches and large amounts of art?

Why is this only thrown in the face of Catholics?

 

[edwest2]

It is not acceptable. We live in a period of time when the mind of man is being worshipped. On the internet, an extremely bad phenomenon is occurring - I call it Opinion Culture. 99 times out of 100, it has nothing to do with the truth. It is about rumors, lies and deceptions.

The Catholic Church is the largest truth telling institution on earth. It has many critics, and many who denounce it. Those who speak against it either don’t understand it or do understand it and simply wish to say - Look at them! They’ve done wrong! Even the Pope goes to confession.

The Bible tells us “with wisdom get understanding.” We must understand and obey. The Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth - The Holy Father. And like a father he seeks the good of the flock entrusted to him by Jesus Christ which was handed down from Peter.

We are being taught that there can be differences of opinion. Opinion is of little value when seeking to know the truth. There is one True Answer - not a bunch of true answers. Once you know the true answer, accept it and obey. Otherwise, you will be deceived by the world that only seeks after its own lusts and desires every excuse to be free of all authority, especially religious authority.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Rence]

I primarily disagree with the Church on abortion and don’t subscribe to some of its teachings currently.

I posted this because I recently read an article about Brad Lidge, written about a year ago, and how he disagrees with the Catholic Church, similar to my situation. Would he be a Catholic? His views seem legitimate although they may be arguing from incomplete information.

I didn’t read your article about what “Brad” doesn’t agree with. But I have talked to two different priests at length about concerns I have with Church teachings. They both told me that you can disagree with Church teachings, but you must follow the teachings despite disagreeing.

When there is a situation that arises in which there is a conflict in how I believe, and what the Church teaches, I make certain to relate that the teachings of the Church are such and such, rather than just say what I believe. I may or may not admit that I have this hypothetical conflict with an example teaching, but I still relate the teaching regardless. I also try to avoid situations in real life where I have to explain a Church teaching when the teaching is exceptionally contrary to what I believe, rather than blatantly go against a teaching. You don’t have to agree with everything, but you do have to live within the guidelines of the Church if you want to be in communion with the Church.

 

[mtnmikeblue]

Can one disagree and be Catholic? While it might seem to depend on who you ask as I personally have found some here on CAF define a Catholic as only those who more faithfully follow the teaching. That merely defines who are Catholics of the more faithful bend. It is not exactly the definition of who the Church calls Catholic.

Not only are the more faithful Catholics considered Catholics according to the Church. But all of Her members. For those who become members thru Baptism for instance, an indelible character is placed onto one’s soul which can not be removed regardless of any act. Even the excommunicated Catholic while told they are not to receive the Sacraments nor serve at Mass as lectors, ministers of the Eucharist and so forth, are nevertheless still considered Catholic.

Incorporated into the Church, the Body of Christ

CCC 267 Baptism makes us members of the Body of Christ: "Therefore . . . we are members one of another. Baptism incorporates us into the Church. (Note the capital letter “C”)

And from a 2006 Pontifical Council letter to His Holiness Pope Benedict XV1…

1. It remains clear, in any event, that the sacramental bond of belonging to the Body of Christ that is the Church, conferred by the baptismal character, is an ontological and permanent bond which is not lost by reason of any act or fact of defection.

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/intrptxt/documents/rc_pc_intrptxt_doc_20060313_actus-formalis_en.html

A previous bishop of mine seemed to concur as he explained it this way to me now nearly 2 decades ago. In his letter of reply when I asked a similar question to yours including the matter of abortion, he wrote the following, “A person becomes a member of the Catholic Church by the Sacrament of Baptism.” And though perhaps not fully practicing, “would still be considered to be Catholic”.

There is also the primacy of conscience.

CCC 1776 "Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment. . . . For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. . . . His conscience is man’s most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths.

CCC 1782 Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.

CCC 1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

Many here on CAF might argue this means your conscience is only morally correct if you indocrinate it according to everything the Church teaches. And that one must accept all of this indocrination regardless of whether it still goes against one’s own conscience. The problem with this is it does not reflect the conscience of the person who after doing all they can to inform the conscience and combine doing so with much prayer and contemplation, still nevertheless has a conscience deep within not in accordance.

His Holiness at a time prior to becoming the Holy Father had this to say…

“Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority, there still stands one’s own conscience, which must be obeyed above all else, if necessary even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority.”

ascensioncatholic.net/TOPICS/morality/ConscienceAndMoralDecisions.html

So I hope all of this helps and gives you some insight.

But the short answer is yes. While many will apply various terms such as faithful, cafeteria, practicing or non, and many other such terms, the bottom line is ID-ing as Catholic is acceptable. Because the Church Herself counts you as such.

God bless you along your walk and peace be with you always.

I don’t know about anybody else but I found all you wrote here to be helpful. Especially the truth about;
“sacramental bond of belonging to the Body of Christ that is the Church, conferred by the baptismal character”

As well as the role of our “conscience.”

Thank you for posting

 

[Bookcat]

I didn’t read your article about what “Brad” doesn’t agree with. But I have talked to two different priests at length about concerns I have with Church teachings. They both told me that you can disagree with Church teachings, but you must follow the teachings despite disagreeing.

When there is a situation that arises in which there is a conflict in how I believe, and what the Church teaches, I make certain to relate that the teachings of the Church are such and such, rather than just say what I believe. I may or may not admit that I have this hypothetical conflict with an example teaching, but I still relate the teaching regardless. I also try to avoid situations in real life where I have to explain a Church teaching when the teaching is exceptionally contrary to what I believe, rather than blatantly go against a teaching. You don’t have to agree with everything, but you do have to live within the guidelines of the Church if you want to be in communion with the Church.

A couple of Priests…are not “the Church”. One must look to what the Church says…

Many things must be given the “obedience of Faith”…(see Paul, LG 25 and Canon 750 etc)

And even in things not “defined” etc…we are to give a religious assent. A religious submission of mind and will…(not just actions). A religious submission of intellect…and will…this is required…(see The Second Vatican Council Document Lumen Gentium 25 and Canon Law 752)

So it is not just “not saying contrary” but actually submitting both the mind and the will…

We need the renewal of our minds as Paul and Pope Benedict XVI notes vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/homilies/2009/documents/hf_ben-xvi_hom_20090628_chius-anno-paolino_en.html

 

[Bookcat]

I didn’t read your article about what “Brad” doesn’t agree with. But I have talked to two different priests at length about concerns I have with Church teachings. They both told me that you can disagree with Church teachings, but you must follow the teachings despite disagreeing.

You see…we may not “understand” why such a teaching is or why such a reality is…

but some things are of the Faith per se (see LG 25)…and these we live the “obedience of faith”…we believe and seek to understand (faith seeking understanding)…other things require at least the submission of mind and will…and then we still seek to understand more and more…

Not everyone understands to the same degree…in matters of the Teachings of the Church …just as in other areas of life…I do not get sayyy Music…(though my wife does) but I do enjoy the beauty of it…

We encounter Jesus Christ…and come to know him and to know that in him is life…

true life.

That he has the words of eternal life…and we enter his Church…knowing that it is his Church that he guides by the Holy Spirit…where we find life in Christ…and his teachings and the implications of them. Some things we may understand more than others…but we follow him accepting his word and the word of his Church (even if thoughts tempt us otherwise at times…or we do not fully understand…for we know the source)…joyfully knowing and following him.

 

[Rence]

A couple of Priests…are not “the Church”. One must look to what the Church says…

Many things must be given the “obedience of Faith”…(see Paul, LG 25 and Canon 750 etc)

And even in things not “defined” etc…we are to give a religious assent. A religious submission of mind and will…(not just actions). A religious submission of intellect…and will…this is required…(see The Second Vatican Council Document Lumen Gentium 25 and Canon Law 752)

So it is not just “not saying contrary” but actually submitting both the mind and the will…

We need the renewal of our minds as Paul and Pope Benedict XVI note in the link above…(very much worth a careful read)

I can’t say I believe something when I do not. If I do not agree with a Church teaching, and believe it to be an error, then that’s how it is for me. That doesn’t mean I go against the teaching. You can’t (or I can’t) just say, “golly gee, I choose to believe that” when in reality, I don’t. It’s not possible to decide to believe something when you don’t. You either believe or you don’t believe something to be true. We can argue about it until the cows come home, but the reality of it is, if I don’t believe in something, I just don’t. Too bad it’s not enough that I follow the teaching despite thinking it’s full of bolonie…

 

[Bookcat]

I can’t say I believe something when I do not. If I do not agree with a Church teaching, and believe it to be an error, then that’s how it is for me. That doesn’t mean I go against the teaching. You can’t (or I can’t) just say, “golly gee, I choose to believe that” when in reality, I don’t. It’s not possible to decide to believe something when you don’t. You either believe or you don’t believe something to be true. We can argue about it until the cows come home, but the reality of it is, if I don’t believe in something, I just don’t. Too bad it’s not enough that I follow the teaching despite thinking it’s full of bolonie…

Actually yes one can!..one says I believe in Jesus Christ…I believe HIM and thus I believe HIS Church…

I believe in what his Church teaches! (because it is his Church…his authority etc…it is following him…)

It is the very profession of Faith!

One gives the great YES of Faith and also of submission of mind and will…

…one gives oneself.

It is only in losing oneself that one finds oneself.

After some of the disciples left Jesus and walked away after his teaching about the Eucharist…Jesus just turned to his Apostles and said are you too going to leave?

Peter answered…no for YOU have the words of eternal life. They did not so much understand likely either…but they Believed in HIM and so even though they did not understand --they gave the great YES of Faith to him and to all of his Teaching.

One says YES to Jesus and to his Church…even if one can not get ones head around everything…for we Believe HIM.

(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…)

(and it does not matter if we like it or not…such is part of being a Catholic Christian…we need to hand ourselves over in the “obedience of Faith” and the submission of our mind and our will…but such is the nature of things…it is about love…handing oneself over…there is a totality involved…)

 

[Rence]

Actually yes one can!..one says I believe in Jesus Christ…I believe HIM and thus I believe HIS Church…there is a totality involved…)

One says they believe in Jesus Christ — because they do

Thank you Bookcat for all your advise, opinions, quotes and links I appreciate all the time you take to explain things. But I’m sure that the priests I have talked to know what they’re talking about. They’ve been trained to answer all of our questions and they have been trained to address our concerns.

 

[Bookcat]

One says they believe in Jesus Christ — because they do

Thank you Bookcat for all your advise, opinions, quotes and links I appreciate all the time you take to explain things. But I’m sure that the priests I have talked to know what they’re talking about. They’ve been trained to answer all of our questions and they have been trained to address our concerns.

Look…the Priests you need to listen to are the Pope and Bishops gathered in the Second Vatican Council --they taught this --to certain matters of Faith one must give obedience of Faith to other things one must give a religious submission of mind and will.

No Priest is correct if he says otherwise. Priests can make mistakes… Please do not take the word of a Priest or even two over that of the Catholic Church…

…and by the way I have a degree in Theology from Franciscan University…so I too have been trained…but it is not about my opinion not at all …this is what the Church teaches. Just go read the documents…go read Canon Law etc (which is issued on the authority of the Pope)

 

[Marc_Anthony]

One says they believe in Jesus Christ — because they do

Thank you Bookcat for all your advise, opinions, quotes and links I appreciate all the time you take to explain things. But I’m sure that the priests I have talked to know what they’re talking about. They’ve been trained to answer all of our questions and they have been trained to address our concerns.

Here’s my question: if you think a Church teaching, especially an infallible one, is full of baloney, why do you follow it? Why are you Catholic?

This is an actual question, and is not meant to be mean-spirited or sarcastic. I’m genuinely curious.

First of all, if you think that one of the Church’s teachings-especially one of the Church’s infallible teachings, is baloney (and I know from previous discussions that you have some issues with some of the stuff the Church has declared infallibly, namely that if both the Mother and child are going to die while the Mother is pregnant then the Mother is bound to die or else be in sin) then you essentially have issues with what makes Catholicism Catholicism-namely, her infallibility.

If you believe the Church can be wrong about issues she has infallibly spoken on, then you don’t believe in the Catholic Church, do you? For the Church is what it is because of it’s authority given to it from Jesus to teach without error on matters of faith and morals. If you don’t believe that, might you just be a Protestant?

And also, if you believe a Church teaching is baloney, then to follow it is to go against your conscience…which you’re absolutely not supposed to do. So how can you follow Church teachings you think are baloney?

I can understand having difficulty with certain teachings and doing your best to understand them properly and reconcile your views to theirs, but you seem to have admitted that his is not possible…you know yourself, you know that you will always believe these teachings are baloney, so you don’t believe them. So why are you Catholic?

I hope this doesn’t come off as rude or disrespectful; I’m genuinely curious as to your reasoning here.