Is it acceptable to disagree with the Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Black_Rose
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
One says they believe in Jesus Christ — because they do 🙂

)
Yes one can say “I believe” …and thus embrace all the Church of Jesus Christ teaches.

No matter what opinions one may be tempted to hold. One simply rejects them…rejects all that is contrary to the teachings of the Church.

(it does not matter what I may want to believe…or naturally believe…I give up my beliefs for the great belief…for the great love of Christ)

The 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…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

And so what it something would be “naturally ones opinion”…Jesus said if we want to be his disciple we must renounce even ourselves

The YES to him in the Catholic Church must be a YES to all the Church teaches…

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.
 
Bookcat and Rence ~ I have been watching your discussion and I hope you don’t mind if I chime in. *Clarifying: Rence, you mean to say you don’t understand–not, agree with–some Church Teachings but you submit to them nonetheless, right? Because if we have the fullness of Truth as Catholics, we shouldn’t really “disagree” with anything the Church teaches, correct? Just clarifying. Not to ruffle anyone’s feathers, but Satan started out with a few disagreements as to how the show was run in Heaven.

I think a lot of what we profess as Catholics is similar to a parent telling a child to trust there is a thing called gravity, but the child is too young to understand. However, the child loves and trusts their parent, so they believe it even though they can’t quite grasp it.
 
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.
Well…no. This is like saying: if I do not agree with my tiny checking account balance, and believe that I have a million dollars, then that’s how it is for me. How long could I avoid staying out of jail if I acted on this? Yet the long-term consequences of your point of view are far more serious.

The truth is the truth whether you believe it or not. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it; and a lie is a lie even if everybody believes it.

If the Church founded by Jesus Christ can lead us astray in matters of faith and morals, then Jesus Christ cannot be the Son of God.
 
Well…no. This is like saying: if I do not agree with my tiny checking account balance, and believe that I have a million dollars, then that’s how it is for me. How long could I avoid staying out of jail if I acted on this? Yet the long-term consequences of your point of view are far more serious.

The truth is the truth whether you believe it or not. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it; and a lie is a lie even if everybody believes it.

If the Church founded by Jesus Christ can lead us astray in matters of faith and morals, then Jesus Christ cannot be the Son of God.
Great post!
 
Rence, you mean to say you don’t understand–not, agree with–some Church Teachings but you submit to them nonetheless, right? Because if we have the fullness of Truth as Catholics, we shouldn’t really “disagree” with anything the Church teaches, correct?
Was it not St. Augustine who said that understanding is the reward of faith? and that we must not seek to understand in order to believe, but believe in order to understand?

Since the Founder of our Faith is the Son of God, if we are tempted to reject a truth of the faith, we have an obligation to assume that the fault lies with ourselves.
 
Well…no. This is like saying: if I do not agree with my tiny checking account balance, and believe that I have a million dollars, then that’s how it is for me. How long could I avoid staying out of jail if I acted on this? Yet the long-term consequences of your point of view are far more serious.

The truth is the truth whether you believe it or not. The truth is the truth even if nobody believes it; and a lie is a lie even if everybody believes it.

If the Church founded by Jesus Christ can lead us astray in matters of faith and morals, then Jesus Christ cannot be the Son of God.
I don’t think you can say all these things, “truth is truth, etc, etc,” and just move on. You have to listen to what other people say, and try your best to understand where they are coming from.

Some people (No, not just you, Victorious) seem to forget that charity is involved it it as well. And if you don’t like to be charitable, remember that you won’t get converts by being a self righteous jerk.
 
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?
I was baptized (and therefore an indelible mark made on my soul) when I was an infant. The Church forever considers me Catholic. I follow teachings of the Church, to the best of my ability, even though I don’t agree with some of them, because that’s how I was raised. I can disagree with a teaching, but follow it, even if it’s hard to do. We all have free will. My will tells me to follow the teaching, to the best of my ability, even though it’s hard for me to do.
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.
Yes, I sometimes have difficulty trusting the human element of the Church. My faith in God is as strong as it ever was, however, I don’t have much faith in other humans because after all, we are only human and capable of making mistakes. There is no doubt in my mind that the Holy Spirit guides the leaders of our Church, however, sometimes I doubt that they are able to put their own beliefs and biases aside and listen perfectly to the Holy Spirit – because we, as humans, are not perfect. The human leaders of our Church also have free will. Free will is not taken away from them just because the Holy Spirit speaks to them. It’s up to them to be open to the message and understand it correctly.
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?
So are you saying I should give up being Catholic and just be protestant? But there is no protestant denomination with the Trinity, the Immaculate Conception, the Transubstantiation, Reconciliation, etc…These things I agree with, and can only get in the Catholic Church…therefore there is no where else to go.
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 believe a Church teaching is baloney (because it just doesn’t make sense to me at all), but still relay the teaching when I encounter a situation in which someone needs the information. That’s not lying, but telling the truth because regardless of whether I believe in a particular teaching of the Church, it’s still a teaching. So it’s not contrary to my conscience to state that the teaching (whether I agree with it or not) is a teaching of the Church. I can also steer clear of situations that would lead me to compromise what my conscience tells me to be right, when the Church says it’s wrong. For example, I’d never work in the operating room in a hospital that does abortions…so that I will never be called to participate in one, regardless of whether the patient is in danger or not. Someone else needs to have that burden, not me.
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?
Well first of all, I never said that it 'is not possible" or that I “will always believe such-and-such”. I just said that this is how I believe. If that changes in the future, then it changes, but I can’t just lie and say I believe something to be true or right, when in fact, I don’t. Whether or not I believe a teaching to be true, I still try to be faithful by following the teaching. I can’t force myself to believe something that I don’t. I am Catholic because I was baptized as an infant and raised in a Catholic environment. Disagreeing with some teachings does not make me non-Catholic. It just makes me a Catholic who doesn’t agree with every single thing that the Church teaches.

We all have choices to make in life. Let’s take IVF for example. At one point I considered it. When I found out it was against Church rules, I set it aside. That was my choice. I don’t agree with the teaching, and I was very disapointed, but I followed it. I could have said, 'oh well, that’s okay, they’re wrong anyway". But I didn’t.

It would be easy-peasy to be Catholic if you agreed with every little thing and did everything you were told as happy as a clam. I choose to be Catholic even when it’s hard. Or at least, I try to, to the best of my ability. Like everyone else, I’m not perfect. But I’m not going to lie about what I believe…There is no merit in agreeing with something for the sake of agreeing when in reality you don’t agree at all.
 
I don’t think you can say all these things, “truth is truth, etc, etc,” and just move on. You have to listen to what other people say, and try your best to understand where they are coming from.

Some people (No, not just you, Victorious) seem to forget that charity is involved it it as well. And if you don’t like to be charitable, remember that you won’t get converts by being a self righteous jerk.
I know where a person who is wrong comes from: a position of error. Error does not gain legitimacy just because people adhere to it. And it is the error that I fight, not the person who finds it plausible. (Errors, by the way, are frequently plausible; that is what makes them so dangerous.)

One of the worst plagues of our age is not to recognize charity when one sees it, and – even worse – to mistake for charity that which is not charity. To speak the truth is charity; and to counsel the doubtful is one of the spiritual acts of mercy. To worry about whether people like me for telling them the truth is not charity, but is a failing, particularly if it causes me to be silent when I should speak.
 
I don’t think you can say all these things, “truth is truth, etc, etc,” and just move on. You have to listen to what other people say, and try your best to understand where they are coming from.

Some people (No, not just you, Victorious) seem to forget that charity is involved it it as well. And if you don’t like to be charitable, remember that you won’t get converts by being a self righteous jerk.
Rascal, how was the OP being uncharitable? And I won’t even comment on that last part. :confused:
 
Rascal, how was the OP being uncharitable? And I won’t even comment on that last part. :confused:
I don’t believe I said they where. If I did, I didn’t mean to imply it. I was just issuing a subtle reminder to be nice.

Remember the bees/honey/and vinegar saying.

And the picture of Winston Churchill ROCKS!
 
Well…no. This is like saying: if I do not agree with my tiny checking account balance, and believe that I have a million dollars, then that’s how it is for me…
Well…no. Your tiny checking account balance is right there in black and white. The extra zeros on the end are tangibly not there. However, taking someone’s word that something abstract is true is not so black and white or tangible. We regard things to be good or bad, or right from wrong, by our environment and surroundings. I can completely understand how your tiny checking account just doesn’t add up to a million dollars, and when shown in black and white, I can agree with it. But some teachings just don’t add up the same way. If it did, the whole world would be devout Catholics and no one would ever have any questions, doubts or disagreements. But it’s not and therefore there are a lot of people still working on the details. 🙂
 
Thank you for the post in reponse, that all makes sense; I’d go as far to say that I find your loyalty to the Church admirable in the face of such doubts. 🙂
 
I don’t believe I said they where. If I did, I didn’t mean to imply it. I was just issuing a subtle reminder to be nice.

Remember the bees/honey/and vinegar saying.

And the picture of Winston Churchill ROCKS!
I love the bee saying! I recognize myself as assertive-smelling honey, though, as I’m sure Victorious does. 🙂

Now,
Some people (No, not just you, Victorious) seem to forget that charity is involved it it as well. And if you don’t like to be charitable, remember that you won’t get converts by being a self righteous jerk.
If you had said, “not you,” instead of “not just you,” I would not have responded. By adding that tiny word “just” you implied the OP, Victorious, was being uncharitable. Next time, don’t just throw random words in there :D. Hope things are going well as a “non-Catholic Catholic Mormon” btw!
Yours truly,
Therese
 
I don’t think you can say all these things, “truth is truth, etc, etc,” and just move on. You have to listen to what other people say, and try your best to understand where they are coming from.

Some people (No, not just you, Victorious) seem to forget that charity is involved it it as well. And if you don’t like to be charitable, remember that you won’t get converts by being a self righteous jerk.
Well, I’ll go along with more charity (although I’m not sure that complaining of others’ lack of charity by calling them ‘self-righteous jerks’ is a steriling example OF charity). . .

But here’s the thing. . .

Suppose that you have person X. Let’s say person X is Catholic, baptized, confirmed, then ‘lapsed’, now is expressing interest in either returning/relearning.

Now suppose person X is, well, let’s say engaged in sin. We’ll say, fornication. We’ll say person X is divorced from a youthful disastrous marriage (even though person X went through the pre marriage counseling and married in the Church). . .but it was many years ago and person X did not fully understand, the teaching was not presented well, etc.) And later person X married, in a nice ‘beach wedding’ by a Justice of the Peace, and is in a second marriage.

And person X is asking WHY, when he wants to go back to confession, the priest ‘won’t forgive him’ and accuses him of sin.

To person X, he is legally (therefore validly) married, and happily. He can’t understand WHY it is any ‘business’ of the Church to pronounce a perfectly ‘legal’ (and therefore, to him, ‘valid’) marriage as being invalid.

Now no matter how kind and charitable a Catholic is, the Catholic must agree that person X is, in fact, living in sin, and (unless certain steps are taken which currently person X will not do as he sees no ‘reason’ to do so), the priest CANNOT absolve him of sin.

And by agreeing with the priest as to the correctness of the teaching the priest is upholding regarding the sacrament of penance, person X is pretty certain to complain that “the Church”, “the priest” and all who ‘agree’ with them are being mean and uncharitable and hateful. . .

even when they are not.

Unfortunately, to a lot of people, it’s all about perception and feelings, and not about actual truth.

If it’s truthful but doesn’t make a person ‘feel’ good, it’s mean and hateful.

If it’s NOT truthful but makes the person feel warm and fuzzy, it’s ‘good’.

In this kind of situation, there is no way that person X is going to ‘perceive’ something as ‘charitable’ if it makes him ‘feel bad’. . .even though it is neither wrong, it is not ‘meant’ to hurt (in fact, if person X were to actually do as the Church teaches he would not only feel ‘better’ in this world, he’d EMPHATICALLY be better in the next world!!!), it is meant to bring about eternal salvation, etc.

So. . .what happens?

Do we refrain from the saving word which is PERCEIVED (and erroneously so to boot!) as 'uncharitable. . .

or do we (in charity) make the PERCEIVED ‘uncharitable’ words known because truth will set one free and one should always try to help another anyway?

If the first. . .are we in fact really being charitable, or are we being moral cowards afraid of being called mean?

If the second. . .are we in fact being ‘uncharitable’ even if that’s the accusation hurled at us?
 
I don’t believe I said they where. If I did, I didn’t mean to imply it. I was just issuing a subtle reminder to be nice.

Remember the bees/honey/and vinegar saying.

And the picture of Winston Churchill ROCKS!
That’s weird, I didn’t believe you were talking about the OP at all…go figure 🙂

Honey without the bees is what I prefer 😛

Rascalking, YOU ROCK!! 🙂
 
The dogmatically declared teachings on faith and morals are not really matters for opinion polling or individual agreement or disagreement by the body of Christ. They are solidly held eternal teachings, so disagreements with those items, is just sort of pointless, really. They are not items that are going to change. Whether it’s “acceptable”, is a bit beside the point.

There are also many things which are open to individual opinion which the Church encourages it’s members to endeavor to understand through a lens of a properly catechized and informed human conscience. Of course, being humans with free will, and the issues not being considered decided, or dogmatic, they are matters of conscience and opinion, and so far as the individual is not intending to harm the Church, or, violating some principal which IS dogmatically declared within the path of the reasoning leading to their decisions on a matter in this category, then there is nothing for the Church to find either acceptable or unacceptable. Nor for that matter, would the person be in stark disagreement with the Church, since the Church has as yet not found enough information to dogmatically define the matter, the person would simply be stating their personal opinion, and that should be acceptable to and for all persons.
 
Well, I’ll go along with more charity (although I’m not sure that complaining of others’ lack of charity by calling them ‘self-righteous jerks’ is a steriling example OF charity). . .

But here’s the thing. . .

Suppose that you have person X. Let’s say person X is Catholic, baptized, confirmed, then ‘lapsed’, now is expressing interest in either returning/relearning.

Now suppose person X is, well, let’s say engaged in sin. We’ll say, fornication. We’ll say person X is divorced from a youthful disastrous marriage (even though person X went through the pre marriage counseling and married in the Church). . .but it was many years ago and person X did not fully understand, the teaching was not presented well, etc.)

And person X is asking WHY, when he wants to go back to confession, the priest ‘won’t forgive him’ and accuses him of sin.

To person X, he is legally (therefore validly) married, and happily. He can’t understand WHY it is any ‘business’ of the Church to pronounce a perfectly ‘legal’ (and therefore, to him, ‘valid’) marriage as being invalid.

Now no matter how kind and charitable a Catholic is, the Catholic must agree that person X is, in fact, living in sin, and (unless certain steps are taken which currently person X will not do as he sees no ‘reason’ to do so), the priest CANNOT absolve him of sin.

And by agreeing with the priest as to the correctness of the teaching the priest is upholding regarding the sacrament of penance, person X is pretty certain to complain that “the Church”, “the priest” and all who ‘agree’ with them are being mean and uncharitable and hateful. . .

even when they are not.

Unfortunately, to a lot of people, it’s all about perception and feelings, and not about actual truth.

If it’s truthful but doesn’t make a person ‘feel’ good, it’s mean and hateful.

If it’s NOT truthful but makes the person feel warm and fuzzy, it’s ‘good’.

In this kind of situation, there is no way that person X is going to ‘perceive’ something as ‘charitable’ if it makes him ‘feel bad’. . .even though it is neither wrong, it is not ‘meant’ to hurt (in fact, if person X were to actually do as the Church teaches he would not only feel ‘better’ in this world, he’d EMPHATICALLY be better in the next world!!!), it is meant to bring about eternal salvation, etc.

So. . .what happens?

Do we refrain from the saving word which is PERCEIVED (and erroneously so to boot!) as 'uncharitable. . .

or do we (in charity) make the PERCEIVED ‘uncharitable’ words known because truth will set one free and one should always try to help another anyway?

If the first. . .are we in fact really being charitable, or are we being moral cowards afraid of being called mean?

If the second. . .are we in fact being ‘uncharitable’ even if that’s the accusation hurled at us?
Ah, Tantum-good to see you here again. I hope the Mason thing is going well for you. (Remember, it’s a joke-I suggest you join a Masonic hall, in jest-a few months ago…remember? Huh?..okay, guess not)

Suppose person X is interested in being Catholic, but is really turned off by all the hurling of “truth” and none of the hurling of “love” so, instead of being Catholic, they become (evil music in background) SOMETHING ELSE.

In the real world, you sometimes have to-gasp-be nice to others. If that includes killin’ em with kindness at first and being polite, funny, and tactful-well, maybe thats something you need to do.

A little niceness won’t kill anyone-try it, it might be addicting.
 
Thank you for the post in reponse, that all makes sense; I’d go as far to say that I find your loyalty to the Church admirable in the face of such doubts. 🙂
That’s sweet of you Marc Anthony, but I’m just me trying to figure it all out and trying not too get into too much trouble in the process :knight2:
 
That’s weird, I didn’t believe you were talking about the OP at all…go figure 🙂

Honey without the bees is what I prefer 😛

Rascalking, YOU ROCK!! 🙂
Mom, quit posting things online!

(By the way, my birthday is coming up, I’d like a new Mercedes)

Thanks for the kind words.
 
That’s sweet of you Marc Anthony, but I’m just me trying to figure it all out and trying not too get into too much trouble in the process :knight2:
hahaha, aren’t we all like that?

Actually, that sounds so much like me it’s scary…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top