My difficulties with the Catholic Faith

[Janet_S]

Well, the problem with saying that is that very often the doctrines that are the most fragile and questionable are the ones labelled “not for debate”.
If something is self-evidently objective, what is the harm in debating it?
Take abortion. I think that if a mother’s life is seriously at risk, then abortion is justified. I know some priests agree with that although I am not sure what the official Church line is.

Questions for Jack:

Which doctrines (most fragile) are you refering to?

Do you think it is acceptable for individual Catholics to reject Church teaching on doctrines and moral issues that are clearly defined?

As far as the issue of abortion, the official Church line is that it is never acceptable to intentionally kill an innocent human life.

We had a moral theologian give a talk at our parish RCIA class a few years ago. If a pregnant woman needed life-saving treatment, and that treatment resulted in the unintentionaly death of the unborn baby, that is one thing. However, to intentionally kill the unborn baby by performing an abortion is always wrong. No exceptions to that.

 

[jack_hawkins]

well the cause of some illnesses the mother suffers is the foetus
without an abortion, both die
naturally, if the foetus is anywhere near viability then premature delivery is an option
if it were my wife, I know I would not let her die needlessly

 

[Janet_S]

well the cause of some illnesses the mother suffers is the foetus
without an abortion, both die
naturally, if the foetus is anywhere near viability then premature delivery is an option
if it were my wife, I know I would not let her die needlessly

To Jack:

I don’t want to get too far the original topic, but in the cases above, are you talking about choriocarcinoma and ectopic pregnancies? I am pretty sure the Church would consider these as cases where life-saving treatment for the mother results in the unintentional death of the unborn baby.

But, honestly, how many abortions are performed because of imminent danger to the mother’s health? Every day pregnant mothers make sacrifices to their health for their children. It goes with the territory, and there are health risks involved with every pregnancy. If the Church said that abortion is permissable if a mother’s life is “seriously at risk” is to make a loophole that would permit nearly all abortions. This definition is too vague and can be interpreted to include psychological well being which in turn can be twisted to justify any abortion.

Also, do you have answers to my other questions from a previous post? They were:

Which doctrines (most fragile) are you refering to?

Do you think it is acceptable for individual Catholics to reject Church teaching on doctrines and moral issues that are clearly defined?

 

[jack_hawkins]

The fact that a scenario is rare does not mean it is not worth addressing, esp when the statement has been made that there are no exceptions. I think making a rigid rule to avoid leaving “loopholes” is taking an unreasonably uncharitable of Christians as a whole. It also can erode the credibility of the Church.
To digress to your examples, molar pregnancies/choriocarcinoma don’t involve a child - treatment for ectopic pregnancy definitely does intentionally involve the destruction of the foetus, but the pregnancy almost certainly couldn’t have gone to term anyway.

Should we think for ourselves? yes
When a doctrine seems to be based on a false assumption or inconsistencies should we debate it? yes

 

[organist]

Some people have asked me where I have gone and why I am not responding anymore.

For some reason the forum stopped notifying me by email when a new response was posted, so I assumed the thread had died. I’ve just checked back now and to my surprise found it still active.

I was getting a little weary of where the discussion was going anyway, to be honest. As I indicated in my first post, I was hoping people with a more intellectual background would respond.

My initial two main messages outlined my predicament, and it is one that is primarily epistemological. But no one has yet addressed that side of things.

I know of quite a lot of philosophy forums online, but they all tend to have an atheistic bias, which is why I came here. So, does anyone know of any such forums with good Catholic representation?

 

[RyanL]

As I indicated in my first post, I was hoping people with a more intellectual background would respond.

I’ve been fairly well educated, by most standards. I responded.

My initial two main messages outlined my predicament, and it is one that is primarily epistemological. But no one has yet addressed that side of things.

What do you mean by an epistemological concern? Are you wondering if an idea is that *which *is known (Descartes), or if an idea is that by which we know (Aquinas)? Do you *really *mean epistemology?

OR, are you simply wondering how we can know what we know about God, given that anything can actually be known? If it is the last question, there has been a fair amount of discussion.

Specifically, what’s your beef? More on this in a sec:

I know of quite a lot of philosophy forums online, but they all tend to have an atheistic bias, which is why I came here.

Good thinking. Atheists really only have two arguments claiming to disprove God - one is self-defeating (the problem of evil), and the other is logically invalid as a proof against God’s existence (unneeded/superfluous hypothesis).

I wouldn’t spend much time with atheists - their thinking is bad.

So, does anyone know of any such forums with good Catholic representation?

Right here. You just need to ask the right questions, and ask them in the right way. If you ask some broad “how can I know” question, you’re going to get just about every answer under the sun - it’s a public forum, and you’re going to get answers from the general public. Expect it, and tailor your question accordingly.

Hints:

1. Be specific.
2. Take each question one-at-a-time. Shotgunning questions is only going to draw shotgunned answers.
3. Try to give a citation to what you’re working with.

Examples of good opening questions, each deserving of its own thread:

1. “I don’t understand Aquinas’ second logical proof for the existence of God. Why is it impossible for a chain of efficient causes to extend back infinitely? Would someone with a rather extensive background in Thomistic studies or philosophy please walk me through it? No free-for-all speculation, please.”
2. “If the Catholic Church is the One True Church, why don’t all the members immediately become (and remain) Saints? How can I reconcile this apparent hospital-for-sinners with my expectations of what I subjectively (and without adequate foundation) would expect from the One True Church established by Jesus Christ? Could ‘free will’ possibly play a role?”
3. “How can stupid people get to heaven? Repent and believe has been too complex for me to grasp, so what hope is there for people who aren’t as smart as me? What is invincible ignorance, according to the Catechism, and how might this relate?”
4. “The Catholic Church claims to be historically based. Why should I believe this? Please understand that I have read this and still do not believe, because I think that ‘X’ may not be true. Please tell me why I should accept ‘X’ as a rational conclusion, and please provide hard evidence.”

Start a new thread on one difficulty, and be as specific as you can possibly be about what your question is. Once that has been worked through, move on to the next question.

God Bless,
RyanL

 

[JLM316]

Dear organist,
I am wondering how much you are relying on the opinions expressed on an internet site to determine what you believe. Be careful if you are. The one thing I’ve learned is that Christianity is meant to be very personal. Meaning it works from the inside outward. A common mistake made by many is to think that it works from the outside inward - it does not. ie: no one can convince you to believe is the bottom line. Faith is a gift that even cradle catholics need to nurture within themselves, so we come before God with an empty and humble heart yearning for Him. The word “yearning” is key. If you are not yearning for a relationship with God - there is no one here who can convince you of anything. If it is an intellectual thing only - you will never never never be convinced. In fact, because Ive been there - I know you will be in turmoil inside until you just let go and allow God to lead your heart- and that sometimes means forgeting the complex stuff, avoiding the debaters which have caused much ink and even more blood to be spilled and just focus on finding your peace with God.