Non-Catholics: What do you think of Catholic morality?

[Eliazer]

I’m aware that, for some reason, this is a divisive issue and even many Catholics make use of birth control against the teaching. I agree with the Church’s teaching on the matter for the reasons given, but natural family planning (usually called NFP) is where it gets tricky because it’s simply a “natural” thing and it’s supposed to be better.

However, nature would have it that children are produced whenever it is possible or whenever God wills it. St. Augustine wrote that the Manichaeans used something akin to NFP and thought it immoral to produce children, but so did other Gnostic groups.

Actually I agree with your statement Hatikvah even in ancient times as well as today NFP even in human vitae insinuates that it should be consulates with a spiritual director. And it is only used under extreme circumstances. Only the spiritual director knows.
On a part of casti connubi by Pope Leo XI says the following: “54. But no reason, however grave, may be put forward by which anything intrinsically against nature may become conformable to nature and morally good. Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.”
w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19301231_casti-connubii.html

For those claiming that humanae vitae authorizes it. You definitely want to re-read the whole encyclical not just parts:
w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html

So birth control even in a natural way must be first consulted with a priest to see if it is morally right for only extreme reasons but if it is just to not have children it is evil. See what happened to Onan in the old testament.

 

[carefullytread]

What do other non-Catholics think, appreciate, take issue with…?

I appreciate the fact that Catholic morality takes itself so seriously. It has some principles and it tries to follow the principles wherever they lead, no matter how unpopular the destination.

In the Middle Ages, Catholicism discovered the natural law and incorporated it into its morality. Then 700 or 800 years later it runs against the issue of ABC and even though the entire tide of history is against it, it takes the implications of natural law seriously and forbids ABC. Even when the recommendations of the theologians to the Pope were to allow it and even when the entire Western world (including almost all Catholics - look at the surveys! accept it, the Church refuses to and sticks to its principles. That’s pretty remarkable! I can certainly appreciate it.

I mostly take issue with what I feel is the misdirection of its purposes. There’s only so much effort any person can spend fighting against their nature and their culture. So many of the demands of morality are exactly that, fighting your own inclinations and the direction of your culture. To engage Catholic morality is to struggle mightily. But when you meet a Catholic or talk to a priest, the issues that people are always struggling with are ones that, as a non-Catholic, strike me as a waste.

Why make people suffer over masturbation when they could be suffering about giving more of their money to charity or trying to find in themselves love for those people they naturally avoid? It’s so hard to be genuinely loving to someone who you don’t understand. It’s so hard to tell yourself that you can live much simpler than all the people around you and give the surplus to those who die neglected in the poor corners of the world. Your culture tells you need a nice car and a bigger house while people starve to death in other parts of the world!

Another of Catholicism’s possible great advantages it includes the law of gradualism, that people start where they start and the struggle is to take the next step down the road to saintliness, not to get to the end all at once. But the steps I see people doing are ones that, again as a non-Catholic, strike me as things that should come at the very end, not the beginning.

If you want to push your moral limits, give up a little luxury and give that money to the poor. Find someone that disgusts you and show them love. That road alone will likely take your whole live. Those, to me at least, seem like they should be first steps along the road, but I never meet a Catholic who struggles there before they worry about suppressing their sex drive and whether they really need to have 10 children.

 

[Eliazer]

It’s OK, I suppose. I like the catholic understanding of abortion; catholics are passionately against it and I like that. I like the current Pope because he seems to think of himself as an average person, not necessarily as the ‘Holy Father’ people claim him to be. He’s the kind of guy I’d like to invite over at my house to have some halal chicken wings and discuss theology. He doesn’t seem like he’s full of himself.

I think the understanding of mortal vs venial sins represents a misunderstanding. There are major sins and minor sins in Islam, but I don’t believe you have to work off ill-effects of sins, like say, looking at internet pornography and doing a penance. You simply repent directly to Allah and that’s the end of it. I think relying on a priest to come back into the “state of grace” is an unnecessary hurdle and ultimately diminishes a person’s confidence in Allah’s mercy.

I like catholics and I like the Pope, but I’ve got issues with their theology. It’s nothing personal.

I have to disagree with “…Unnecessary hurdle and ultimately diminishes a person’s confidence in Allah’s mercy”
a priest in Christianity is God’s representative on earth we based it on the book of St John 20:21-23 " He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained."(Douay-Rheims Catholic bible) Which is the Peshitta

 

[Reuben_J]

I agree with much of it though I have noticed a few issues though I think this is more about individual Catholics and their spiritual maturity and lack thereof, than the Magisterial Teaching.

…

1. Same with praying for souls in Purgatory, some people do that with a very “quid pro quo” mentality of “if I pray for the souls they will pray for ME and their prayers will benefit ME”!

Now, I am NOT saying most Catholics are like that, such are likely a minority. And that “bad Catholics” and even “bad Popes” do not negate the truth of the Catholic faith itself.

But I must admit that Matthew 7: 16 reference to “You will know them by their fruits” keeps coming up for me.

I notice that you are considering Catholicism. While this kind of finding doesn’t affect us in any way that matters, it is interesting to know that a beginner would pick such thing.

I would say it is unfair to yourself in your assessment of Catholics if you would count this. This is truly an exception and basically Catholics do understand what it means to pray for the souls in purgatory, which is to hasten their staying there. I have not come across anybody that expect these souls to pray back to them. Yes, we can ask the angels and saints to intercede for us but not the souls in purgatory simply because we do not know when they will enter heaven. Even though we pray for them, we also know that it is God’s prerogative; we just know that God will listen to our prayers because Jesus said so.

But even if they expect to be prayed back, that do not make them bad Catholics but rather a misunderstanding of the doctrine.

God bless.

 

[Memaw]

I agree with much of it though I have noticed a few issues though I think this is more about individual Catholics and their spiritual maturity and lack thereof, than the Magisterial Teaching.

1. A CAF poster once stated that he didn’t pay any attention to his venial sins because he isn’t required to confess them and they’re not going to keep him out of Heaven. So that’s the only reason to avoid sin, to avoid Hell?
2. I still get the feeling sometimes that many Catholics see annulment as just “Catholic divorce”, just a set of legal loopholes to jump through.

For example, I heard an episode of EWTN Open Line, when a caller stated that he’d been married 5 times and wanted to know what to do about that since he wanted to “find the right girl at Church and get married” again.

The host gave pretty generic “consult an annulment advocate” advice, possibly because a break was coming up. But I thought (especially as the man stated he was a Vietnam vet and had PTSD) that it’s actually possible that the caller may actually be incapable of conducting a valid marriage and that a tribunal may very well find that.

(It also occurred to me that maybe that caller was just trolling and the host suspected that. )

I guess to me that’s what strikes me as the actual scandalous part, not the idea behind annulments, even secular laws often allow for annulments of civil marriages, such as Britney Spears’s first “marriage”. The grounds for that civil annulment don’t sound that different from arguments I’ve seen made for Catholic annulments.

From the Smoking Gun article that actually links to the actual legal document:

My issue with annulments, is the idea that apparently anyone can get a “trial of marriage” in the Catholic Church, I know there is the 6 month precana requirement but I’ve never heard of a priest denying a couple marriage. And apparently, even if the marriage starts out under very questionable conditions, and it is possible to BOTH (1) have the couple make the marriage valid eventually without a convalidation from a priest AND (2) have that same couple eventually still get an annulment because the tribunal only looks at conditions on the day of the actual wedding.

About the only exception appears to be, a couple pregnant out of wedlock. And I’ve even seen people argue that absent major issues such as addiction, abuse, etc., that such a couple should give it the “old college try” because there’s no downside to an attempt at marriage here, that either it works out, “becomes valid” and the kid is spared growing up with a single parent, or it doesn’t, but the couple have a slam-dunk case for annulment anyway and won’t be trapped in a bad marriage.

Although I do think that argument ignores the fact that divorce is very traumatic for children, or perhaps naively assumes that even a year or two of childhood spent in an “intact home” followed by divorce, is superior to childhood spent with a single parent from the get-go.

1. Same with sterilization, I have heard this is the most common method of “contraception” among Catholics. That may or may not be true. But the Church doesn’t require the couple to do anything to reverse the procedure, or engage in NFP as a penance, though some couples do. I have seen Catholics proclaim they intend to undergo this procedure and just confess it to a priest later. And yes I have heard of the “sin of presumption”, that you can’t fool God, etc.

But it seems some spiritually immature Catholics don’t really care about pleasing God, they just care about following the rules, they are content with being “not guilty” based on some technicality, even if they’re not really “innocent” of sin.

1. Same with praying for souls in Purgatory, some people do that with a very “quid pro quo” mentality of “if I pray for the souls they will pray for ME and their prayers will benefit ME”!

Now, I am NOT saying most Catholics are like that, such are likely a minority. And that “bad Catholics” and even “bad Popes” do not negate the truth of the Catholic faith itself.

But I must admit that Matthew 7: 16 reference to “You will know them by their fruits” keeps coming up for me.

Let’s not forget that one of the 12 Apostles, (picked by Jesus Himself) was a traitor. Lukewarm or indifferent Catholics do NOT change the teachings of the Catholic Church but sets a bad example to all. I think that happens in all walks of life.

 

[Sarcelle]

I disagree with the RC stance on birth control, also with the mortal venial sin distinction.

I used to have your point of view but then I thought about it again and now see the distinction.

Now I will not say the sin of overeating is equal to that of murder.

 

[Kliska]

By this, I mean the moral stances that Catholicism takes on any particular issues, including (if you’d like, as it is related) the mortal vs. venial sin distinction.

I still don’t know about splitting them up in that way, mainly because I was raised being taught and shown that sin leads to death, period. Of course, that’s outside of Christ and under a different covenant. A related issue, to me, is the idea of perfect contrition within the Catholic framework.

I believe that all contrition should be “perfect” in that it is the idea of our offending God that is important in, and for, forgiveness. I think that some protestants more easily grasp the idea of contrition because we are taught that’s the only way to properly feel toward sin. In other words, it shouldn’t be fear of Hell, or of repercussions that gets us to seek forgiveness and mend out ways, but rather knowing that we offend God by our sin, and that we add to the sin Christ paid for by sinning.

Personally, being a more “conservative” Protestant (as opposed to, what, allowing everything as right?), I take no issue with Catholic morality because it’s practically mine, though I say it doesn’t go far enough on some issues. It is perfectly in line with Scripture and common sense.

What do other non-Catholics think, appreciate, take issue with…?

There are many many things that I was pleasantly surprised to find that I believe (or came to believe) that line up with Catholic teachings; opposition to the death penalty for example. I appreciate the attempt to make things clear and to give believers the help and the tools to try to amend their lives with grace.

I really appreciate the stand on abortion, and have come to at least start changing my mind on “contraceptive mentality.” I also like that it is made clear that we are to start trying to actually be Christlike and to push forward with that. Love becomes a major point, as well as our true adoption as God’s children and all that entails.

One thing I still struggle with and wonder about when looking at all the rules in the Catholic Church is; has it happened again were men “… bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders.” Jesus’ yoke is easy and His burden light… that’s part of the Good News and sometimes it seems that is somehow lost. As I’ve said before, the Catholic church and the Church I see in the NT sometimes don’t line up as far as rules and regs and what is required of the people to join in the new flock. Perhaps, as Pope Francis has observed, there does need to be more of an emphasis on gradualism.

 

[Dorothy]

It’s OK, I suppose. I like the catholic understanding of abortion; catholics are passionately against it and I like that. I like the current Pope because he seems to think of himself as an average person, not necessarily as the ‘Holy Father’ people claim him to be. He’s the kind of guy I’d like to invite over at my house to have some halal chicken wings and discuss theology. He doesn’t seem like he’s full of himself.

I think the understanding of mortal vs venial sins represents a misunderstanding. There are major sins and minor sins in Islam, but I don’t believe you have to work off ill-effects of sins, like say, looking at internet pornography and doing a penance. You simply repent directly to Allah and that’s the end of it. I think relying on a priest to come back into the “state of grace” is an unnecessary hurdle and ultimately diminishes a person’s confidence in Allah’s mercy.

I like catholics and I like the Pope, but I’ve got issues with their theology. It’s nothing personal.

To explain about confession:

The priest is a stand-in for Jesus Christ. It is called “in persona Christi”. It is humiliating to confess for many, and that is good. Also, the priest can give wise advice to the penitent. I have found it to be a very healing sacrament.

 

[Rosebud77]

carefullytread wrote

“If you want to push your moral limits, give up a little luxury and give that money to the poor. Find someone that disgusts you and show them love. That road alone will likely take your whole live. Those, to me at least, seem like they should be first steps along the road, but I never meet a Catholic who struggles there before they worry about suppressing their sex drive and whether they really need to have 10 children”

Your view of Catholics is very caricaratured and biassed… Please,if you are ever in eg Ireland,come and meet me and see how many Catholics really live. And amend your appraisal … Thank you.Your third sentence is also woefully inaccurate…

 

[ShrodingersCat]

Actually I agree with your statement Hatikvah even in ancient times as well as today NFP even in human vitae insinuates that it should be consulates with a spiritual director. And it is only used under extreme circumstances. Only the spiritual director knows.
On a part of casti connubi by Pope Leo XI says the following: “54. But no reason, however grave, may be put forward by which anything intrinsically against nature may become conformable to nature and morally good. Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.”
w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19301231_casti-connubii.html

For those claiming that humanae vitae authorizes it. You definitely want to re-read the whole encyclical not just parts:
w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html

So birth control even in a natural way must be first consulted with a priest to see if it is morally right for only extreme reasons but if it is just to not have children it is evil. See what happened to Onan in the old testament.

Actually this is not what the church teaches. Only a couple can discern whether or not to use nfp, though consulting a priest is a good idea. In addition only just reasons are needed, not extreme. Finally, nfp is not evil like contraception. It is amoral in and of itself. The motivation for its use can be selfish. Of course of used to completely sterilise a marriage it is more than just selfishness.

ewtn.com/expert/answers/nfp_serious_motives.htm

 

[carefullytread]

carefullytread wrote

“If you want to push your moral limits, give up a little luxury and give that money to the poor. Find someone that disgusts you and show them love. That road alone will likely take your whole live. Those, to me at least, seem like they should be first steps along the road, but I never meet a Catholic who struggles there before they worry about suppressing their sex drive and whether they really need to have 10 children”

Your view of Catholics is very caricaratured and biassed… Please,if you are ever in eg Ireland,come and meet me and see how many Catholics really live. And amend your appraisal … Thank you.Your third sentence is also woefully inaccurate…

Rereading my post (too late to edit it now), I agree with you that it comes off a worse than I would have liked.

But my main point, which could have been better worded, was to answer the OP’s question of what Catholic morality looks like to an outsider.

From my perspective, whenever I hear people struggling with Catholic morality, what I always hear about are the sex prohibitions. I suspect if you tallied the forum threads here were people struggle with sins and counted the ones about sins against chastity and counted them against the sins against charity, you would find a huge imbalance.

Now, as a non-Catholic, I don’t have any position to tell Catholics what their priorities should be. I have no standing to do so and they have no reason to listen to me.

But to tell the OP what it looks to an outsider is a tragic loss of opportunity. To me, that our culture directs us away from charity is a hundred times more tragic than that it directs us away from chastity and I can’t help but think that Catholics are struggling against the wrong issues.

Again, really none of my business and I apologize for the earlier wording, but hope it’s a helpful outside perspective for the OP.

 

[Reuben_J]

Rereading my post (too late to edit it now), I agree with you that it comes off a worse than I would have liked.

But my main point, which could have been better worded, was to answer the OP’s question of what Catholic morality looks like to an outsider.

From my perspective, whenever I hear people struggling with Catholic morality, what I always hear about are the sex prohibitions. I suspect if you tallied the forum threads here were people struggle with sins and counted the ones about sins against chastity and counted them against the sins against charity, you would find a huge imbalance.

Now, as a non-Catholic, I don’t have any position to tell Catholics what their priorities should be. I have no standing to do so and they have no reason to listen to me.

But to tell the OP what it looks to an outsider is a tragic loss of opportunity. To me, that our culture directs us away from charity is a hundred times more tragic than that it directs us away from chastity and I can’t help but think that Catholics are struggling against the wrong issues.

Again, really none of my business and I apologize for the earlier wording, but hope it’s a helpful outside perspective for the OP.

Well, you are only answering the question of the thread and it was only your opinion. I think not need to apologize. At least it tells us what you think.

 

[jane_doe]

Ok, im assuming this is what LDS church teaches as well?

Correct. I assure you, we have plenty of children

 

[Rohzek]

I know that it would be nebulous to say “Catholic morality,” even though Christianity can agree on most morals up until this century or the last where people start “accepting” gay marriage, abortion, whatever the matter may be that the Bible rejects.

By this, I mean the moral stances that Catholicism takes on any particular issues, including (if you’d like, as it is related) the mortal vs. venial sin distinction.

Personally, being a more “conservative” Protestant (as opposed to, what, allowing everything as right?), I take no issue with Catholic morality because it’s practically mine, though I say it doesn’t go far enough on some issues. It is perfectly in line with Scripture and common sense.

What do other non-Catholics think, appreciate, take issue with…?

While not adamantly opposed to the mortal/venial distinction, I don’t endorse it either. The only thing I tend to significantly part ways on is on the issue of divorce and remarriage. Oh and also the issue of birth control I disagree with them on.

 

[Wannano]

Actually I agree with your statement Hatikvah even in ancient times as well as today NFP even in human vitae insinuates that it should be consulates with a spiritual director. And it is only used under extreme circumstances. Only the spiritual director knows.
On a part of casti connubi by Pope Leo XI says the following: “54. But no reason, however grave, may be put forward by which anything intrinsically against nature may become conformable to nature and morally good. Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.”
w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_19301231_casti-connubii.html

For those claiming that humanae vitae authorizes it. You definitely want to re-read the whole encyclical not just parts:
w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html

So birth control even in a natural way must be first consulted with a priest to see if it is morally right for only extreme reasons but if it is just to not have children it is evil. See what happened to Onan in the old testament.

I have read through with interest these two submissions. Could you explain in plain English what is being said in #59 of the first one? Thanks.

 

[ShrodingersCat]

I have read through with interest these two submissions. Could you explain in plain English what is being said in #59 of the first one? Thanks.

“Holy Church knows well that not infrequently one of the parties is sinned against rather than sinning, when for a grave cause he or she reluctantly allows the perversion of the right order. In such a case, there is no sin, provided that, mindful of the law of charity, he or she does not neglect to seek to dissuade and to deter the partner from sin. Nor are those considered as acting against nature who in the married state use their right in the proper manner although on account of natural reasons either of time or of certain defects, new life cannot be brought forth. For in matrimony as well as in the use of the matrimonial rights there are also secondary ends, such as mutual aid, the cultivating of mutual love, and the quieting of concupiscence which husband and wife are not forbidden to consider so long as they are subordinated to the primary end and so long as the intrinsic nature of the act is preserved.”

I am guessing (not 100% sure) the first part means that if, say, a husband insists on wearing a condom and the wife cannot dissuade him, she does not sin in having sex with him since she does not wish to contracept and cannot convince him otherwise.

The second part states that if a couple is naturally infertile, through menopause or an illness or other reason, they can still have sex because sex is not just about new life, but also about unity between the couple. “Quieting concupiscence” means reducing the risk of sins that one might be tempted towards if one was sexually frustrated, e.g. masturbation.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

Correct. I assure you, we have plenty of children

Honestly, I would have thought LDS would be the only other ones to side with us on BC issues .

Even though I disagree with their theology a great deal, I have noticed they are superb in the morality dept.

 

[Horton]

1. I still get the feeling sometimes that many Catholics see annulment as just “Catholic divorce”, just a set of legal loopholes to jump through.

 

[LutheranScholar]

Catholic morality? As my grandmother was a Catholic born and raised and all of her grandchildren are staunch Christians still ( whatever their denominations), I have a very high regard and respect for Catholic morality.Pro- life? Check. Bible and Sacraments? Check. High respect and regard for family? Check. Adherence to the teachings of their Church? Like any other group of Christians, I suppose… some more conservative than others. Even the conservatives in my own church tend to run more highly among clergy and church workers than the average laity, although high standards of morality and Confessional fidelity are preached from the pulpit.

 

[Rosebud77]

Rereading my post (too late to edit it now), I agree with you that it comes off a worse than I would have liked.

But my main point, which could have been better worded, was to answer the OP’s question of what Catholic morality looks like to an outsider.

From my perspective, whenever I hear people struggling with Catholic morality, what I always hear about are the sex prohibitions. I suspect if you tallied the forum threads here were people struggle with sins and counted the ones about sins against chastity and counted them against the sins against charity, you would find a huge imbalance.

Now, as a non-Catholic, I don’t have any position to tell Catholics what their priorities should be. I have no standing to do so and they have no reason to listen to me.

But to tell the OP what it looks to an outsider is a tragic loss of opportunity. To me, that our culture directs us away from charity is a hundred times more tragic than that it directs us away from chastity and I can’t help but think that Catholics are struggling against the wrong issues.

Again, really none of my business and I apologize for the earlier wording, but hope it’s a helpful outside perspective for the OP.

Hmmm, you clearly are not aware that we are bidden not to let our right had know what our left is doing; to do good quietly and not boast. You have no awareness of what individuals and groups are doing to give to others, in need.
Chastity matters.Purity matters, They form the bedrock of family, of society, Of course you will read more concerns here; you want we should make threads boasting what we have done or given for others? Please!

Thank you for the dumbing down! But what you have still written is much the same,