Must one believe EVERYTHING The Church teaches in order to be a Catholic?

[Elzee]

Last week I heard a reporter on Fox ask one of the Cardinals (I can’t remember which one) what the Pope would think of ‘Cafeteria Catholics’ and would he consider them Catholic. The Cardinal said something to the effect that he thought the Holy Father would consider them Catholic, but as we all are, they are involved in an on-going conversion, and that each person is at a different point in their conversion.

 

[Matt16_18]

tuopaolo:

… we may have true difficulties accepting something as true but nevertheless we make an act of the intellect by command of the will, assenting to, believing in, the truth which God has revealed.

Amen!

Faith is a gift that is offered to man, but we must make an act of the will to accept the gift. God will not force faith on anyone that does not want to believe.Blessed is the man who fears the LORD always; but he who hardens his heart will fall into calamity.
Proverbs 28:14

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Asimis:

Just wondering, is it necessary to believe in EVERYTHING The Church teaches?

What do you think? Do you believe everything?

Hello? Asimis?

You haven’t posted in this thred since we’ve all been out here on a tangent. Have we answered your question?

When you say “necessary” do you mean necessary in order to completely walk in the faith, or are you asking if the Church considers you “non-Catholic” if you have reservations about her teachings?

Alan

 

[Asimis]

Wow, just two days off and this thread has exploded!

Lots of different answers here…but I guess it all boils down to yes, we must in fact believe in everything the Catholic Church teaches.

I was thinking more along the lines of, do we own for example equal obedience to say…the Immaculate Conception(which is an infallible dogma) than Contraception(which as far as I know is not)? Or are both on equal grounds when it comes to Obedience?

By the way thanks for all the replies everyone, very helpful!

Asimis

 

[FCEGM]

We believe there is objective Truth to be known and embraced re Faith and Morals because Christ has come from the Father to reveal Himself and how we should live in Him in this life and the next, and that Christ has given the authority to His Church to preserve and teach these truths for our salvation. So those who do embrace Christ in and through His Church DO have a deeper spiritual insight and anointing than those who prefer the *a la carte * approach to religious belief and practice.

If one denies the authority of the Church to teach, or proposes that a particular teaching on either faith and/or morals is in error, then one must explain why his insight is greater than those who are faithful either on earth, e.g., John Paul II, Fr. Benedict Groeschel, Fr. John Corapi, Scott and Kimberly Hahn, Mother Angelica, to name but a few who come to mind - or in Heaven, e.g., Mother Teresa of Calcutta, John XXIII, St. Therese of Lisieux, Zelie and Louis Martin, to name but a few more. One doesn’t look to the dissenters for examples of how to believe and live, but to those live and have lived the Faith to the full.

Keep in mind that we don’t “get” ourselves to believe. We prepare ourselves to believe through simply saying, “I believe, Lord, help Thou my unbelief.” One, then, wanting to believe through one’s own sorting through all the arguments one can array pro and con will not come to the fullness of the faith; but rather wanting to believes as the Lord would have one with and through His Church, is what is efficacious to belief. The Lord did not create us to live in unsurety, but to be assured of the truth of His teaching through His Church to which He has entrusted all that He would have us believe and how He would have us live in concert with what we believe

One with Catholic and Divine Faith sustained by prayer and moral living will have questions (for which theology gives fitting arguments which will make sense) - or which even if not grasped as fitting will not essentially destroy Catholic and Divine Faith; one can afford to wait for theological explanation. Faith of this Divine and Catholic sort is experienced as a Gift or Grace from God personally. The teachings will not be experienced, then, as being merely mental assertions about reality or proposed doctrines, because now the soul is experiencing them as lived and living truths.

 

[CatholicHoser]

Food for thought on this thread. My question is about the “Faith and Morals” thing, more specifically morals.

Faith I don’t have any questions about. I believe in the Resurrection, Ascension, Assumption, etc. etc. and would lay down my life for my faith in these things.

My question is about morals… what exactly constitutes an infallible teaching on morals? Abortion, gay marriage, etc. I would be certain are on this list that the Church has infalliable teachings about. What about things that the Pope or other very-high ranking, duly authorized official has not given official word about (that I am aware of)? Things like tattoos, smoking, even downlaoding music, things away from the current central focus? In a nutshell, what has to happen for a teaching to be infallible? I don’t know… maybe someone reading this does?

 

[bajolyn]

Matt16_18:

At the Profession of Faith, the convert swears before man and God that he or she accepts all the infallible teachings of the Catholic Church.

The Profession of Faith in the revised Roman Ritual is this:I believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church believes, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God.

You say that a convert must accept all the infallible teachings of the Church, but that is not what the Catechism actually says. It states that a convert must believe and profess “all that the holy Catholic Church believe, teaches, and proclaims to be revealed by God.”

If I do not actually believe everything in the Catechism, (and it actually does say “believe” and not just “have faith in”), then I cannot in good conscience convert. To do so would require me to lie.

So I am stuck between a rock and a hard place. I could not convert, even if I desired to do so, because to do so I would have to solemnly affirm that I believe something which I do not believe, thus violating my conscience before God.

Matt16_18:

The Catholic Church does not have a double standard. She does not have one standard that requires converts to accept all the infallible teachings of the Catholic Church, while at the same time she gives cradle Catholics the right to dissent from her infallible teachings.

I believe that the Church does have a double standard. I don’t know too many cradle Catholics who believe absolutely everything that the Catholic Church affirms.

 

[Ghosty]

I believe that the Church does have a double standard. I don’t know too many cradle Catholics who believe absolutely everything that the Catholic Church affirms.

It’s not a double standard at all. Those cradle Catholic who live without accepting the things the Church teaches are putting themselves outside of the grace that the Church offers, plain and simple. Anyone can call themselves Catholic, but only those who adhere to the faith are truly Catholic, whether they were raised in it or converted. Those Catholics you mention are what we call CINOs, Catholics In Name Only, and do not enjoy the eternal benefits of membership in the Church. In fact, they are likely held to a higher standard by God because they have every reason to believe but do not, so the benefit of having easy access to the Church is balanced by the increased responsibility to obey.

 

[bajolyn]

Ghosty:

Those Catholics you mention are what we call CINOs, Catholics In Name Only, and do not enjoy the eternal benefits of membership in the Church.

And yet they can avail themselves of the Eucharist, while the earnest seeker who finds that they cannot yet affirm every single thing in the Catechism cannot.

Doesn’t the Catechism say something to the effect that the grace bestowed by the Eucharist is not dependant on the worthiness of either the celebrant or the receiver?

So, those who are already “in,” and yet may not believe even half of what the Catechism teaches are still free to receive this grace; while those who are not yet “in,” though they may be fervent in their love for Christ and believe 99 percent of what the Church teaches, cannot.

It still sounds like a double standard to me.

 

[Trelow]

bajolyn:

And yet they can avail themselves of the Eucharist, while the earnest seeker who finds that they cannot yet affirm every single thing in the Catechism cannot.

Doesn’t the Catechism say something to the effect that the grace bestowed by the Eucharist is not dependant on the worthiness of either the celebrant or the receiver?

So, those who are already “in,” and yet may not believe even half of what the Catechism teaches are still free to receive this grace; while those who are not yet “in,” though they may be fervent in their love for Christ and believe 99 percent of what the Church teaches, cannot.

It still sounds like a double standard to me.

Or they could be commiting sacrilege.

The grace may not be dependant on our worthiness but to receive one must be in communion with the Church. One cannot reject the teachings of the Chruch and still be in communion withHer.

 

[Ghosty]

And yet they can avail themselves of the Eucharist, while the earnest seeker who finds that they cannot yet affirm every single thing in the Catechism cannot.

Protestants can avail themselves of the Eucharist too. The priest doesn’t ask for a membership card when you go up to receive.

To eat unworthily is to invite death upon oneself. That’s straight from Scripture. The Eucharist is real regardless of the faith of the consecrator or the receiver, but those who receive it when not in true Communion are commiting one of the gravest sins imaginable. The Eucharist is not a cookie prize for members only, it is a spiritual food for those who believe fully in the Church. Those that take it without being so commited are best prayed for, for their souls are heaping sacrilege upon their disobedience. This is true even for Catholics who believe in the Church 100%, but who have the stain of mortal sin on their souls.

 

[bajolyn]

Trelow:

Or they could be commiting sacrilege.

.

And yet, how many cradle Catholics do you know who even *know *all the beliefs of the Catholic Church, much less agree with 100 percent of them? Is, then, every Catholic who cannot yet fully understand or perhaps believe with every single thing the Church teaches committing sacrilege by receiving the Eucharist?

I am not advocating that practicing Catholics should not be held to a high standard regarding their faith. What I am saying is that potential converts seem to be held to an even higher standard.

Here’s what I mean. In order to stand up and affirm that you believe and profess everything that the Catholic Church believes and teaches, you would first of all have to *know *everything that the Church believes and teaches. That right there is a tall order. You would have to know this, because according to the Catechism, you can’t just *profess *to believe whatever the Church asks you to believe, but you must actually believe it. So that implies that you would first have to have a vast amount of knowledge.

Secondly, because of the way the profession of faith is worded, you would have to come into the church with 100 percent, absolutely flawlessly perfect belief. You could not be uncertain about a single thing. There would be no room for growth in your beliefs, you would simply have to actually believe (and not simply choose to affirm) *all *that the Church believes. If you did any less, you could not make the required statement in good conscience, as it would not be true.

So a potential convert, then, is required to have perfect knowledge and perfect belief in order to truthfully make a profession of faith and become a part of the Church. I don’t see where that is required of *any *cradle Catholic.

I think of the man who came to Jesus crying, “Lord, I believe, help Thou my unbelief!”? Thankfully, our Lord did not turn him away.

By the way, this is not just a theoretical question for me. On this question hangs my ability or inability to ever become a part of the Catholic Church…

 

[bajolyn]

Ghosty:

The Eucharist is not a cookie prize for members only, it is a spiritual food for those who believe fully in the Church.

Jesus said “As often as you do this, do it in remembrance of Me.” I would say, rather, that it is a spiritual food for those who believe fully in Christ.

PS: Sorry, I’m not trying to nit-pick words here, but to me this seems an important distinction.

 

[TobyLue]

Wow, just two days off and this thread has exploded!

Lots of different answers here…but I guess it all boils down to yes, we must in fact believe in everything the Catholic Church teaches.

I was thinking more along the lines of, do we own for example equal obedience to say…the Immaculate Conception(which is an infallible dogma) than Contraception(which as far as I know is not)? Or are both on equal grounds when it comes to Obedience?

By the way thanks for all the replies everyone, very helpful!

This link might help. It explains the levels of teachings and what one must believe.

Apologetics

Shop thousands of Catholic gifts and home décor for every occasion, sacrament, and holiday. Large online selection of Christian jewelry, rosaries, statues, framed artwork, saint candles, and more.

saint-mike.org

followed by Expert Answer Forum – Saint-Mike.org

 

[bajolyn]

TobyLue,

Thanks for the links. I tried them, but couldn’t get them to work.

 

[Ghosty]

Catholics, cradle or convert, are expected to know and affirm everything the Church teaches. Sometimes they don’t, through no fault of their own. Sometimes they don’t because of willed ignorance. This is the same for both converts and cradle Catholics. Many converts go through poor training and are not taught everything the Church teaches.

Remember, when a child is baptised, their families must make a pledge to teach the child everything about the faith and raise them to be holy. The child is given some leeway in their formative years because the responsibility is given to others. As adults, however, it is their responsibility to maintain their knowledge and faith. Converts simply enter in as adults, so they don’t get the childhood leeway. This doesn’t mean that they’re held to a higher standard than the cradle adults.

A convert, or cradle, Catholic can only be held responsible for the information that is available to them, of course. They are assenting to the best of their knowledge. Converts simply start the education process with a much higher degree of responsibility and understanding, but that level is no different than the place that adult cradle Catholics are at. RCIA can be attended by anyone, and isn’t a Sacramental requirement for Baptism.

You do seem to be confusing internal belief with belief by assent, which are two distinct things. I am not required to have internally come to the belief that the Trinity is real, because I’m not expected to have the understanding necessary to comprehend it. I must assent to believe, however, based on the fact that the Church teaches it. This is the same as believing in gravity without understanding a single aspect of physics. The Church merely asks that we give our assent and acknowledge the truth of certain things even if we haven’t come to an internal understanding and independent belief.

 

[Ghosty]

Jesus said “As often as you do this, do it in remembrance of Me.” I would say, rather, that it is a spiritual food for those who believe fully in Christ.

That’s a distinction without a difference. If you believe fully in Christ, you believe fully in the Church, and if you believe fully in the Church you believe fully in Christ. There is no complete belief in Christ without complete belief in the Church. Period. The Church is called the Body of Christ for a reason.

 

[bajolyn]

Ghosty:

You do seem to be confusing internal belief with belief by assent, which are two distinct things. I am not required to have internally come to the belief that the Trinity is real, because I’m not expected to have the understanding necessary to comprehend it. I must assent to believe, however, based on the fact that the Church teaches it. This is the same as believing in gravity without understanding a single aspect of physics. The Church merely asks that we give our assent and acknowledge the truth of certain things even if we haven’t come to an internal understanding and independent belief.

Thanks. This is helpful, but the wording of the Catechism still messes me up. It says that you must say that you “believe and profess,” not that you must “assent to believe.” To me, this means that you must actually internally believe it.

By the way, yes, I have been known at times to be a victim of scruples!

 

[Ghosty]

Well, give me the paragraph of the CCC you are reading and I’ll gladly go over it with you in more detail to help you work out any difficulties. I can assure you, however, that the Church does not place such demands on people as you fear. If we did, we wouldn’t allow the severly mentally handicapped to be Catholic, as they have a hard time believing anything beyond “My nurse feeds me”. We are not a gnostic faith that elevates knowledge as salvation.

 

[bajolyn]

I’m looking for it, but of course, can’t seem to locate it at the moment!

I’ll keep looking…