personal responsibility

[Daniel_Marsh]

How far does personal responsiblity go in what one believes?

If the Church were in error on some doctrine and you believe it, are you excused because the church believes it?

 

[banjo]

With regard to your first question the following came to mind.
“The disciple has a grave obligation to Christ, his Master, to grow daily in his knowledtge of the truth he has received from him, to be faithful in announcing it and vigorous in defending it without having recourse to methods which are contrary to the spirit of the Gospel.”
Dignitatis humanae 14 Vat. II

As a Catholic who believes that the Holy Spirit will protect the Church from teaching error in matters of faith and morals, I don’t believe your second scenario is possible.

 

[puzzleannie]

Daniel Marsh:

How far does personal responsiblity go in what one believes?

If the Church were in error on some doctrine and you believe it, are you excused because the church believes it?

The Church does not and cannot err on matters of doctrine, we have the assurance of Jesus Christ on that point, so the matter does not arise.

 

[MariaG]

If a person believed the Church were in error, they should prayerfully ask God to show them why the Church is right and try to conform thier conscience to the teaching of the Church. As well as to ask God to deepen their faith of knowing the Church is right!

God Bless,
Maria

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

So, if the church is wrong it is right?

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Hippolytus (?), III century
Novatian, 251
Felix II, 355-365
Ursicinus, 366-367
Eulalius, 418-419
Laurentius, 498-501
Constantine II, 767
Philip, VIII century
Anastasius, 855
Leo VIII, 956-963
Boniface VII, 974
John XVI, X century
Gregory, 1012
Sylvester III, 1044
Benedict X, 1058
Honorius II, 1061-72
Guibert or Clement III, 1080-1100
Theodoric, 1100
Aleric, 1102
Maginulf, 1105
Burdin (Gregory VIII), 1118
Anacletus II, 1130-38
Victor IV, 1159-64
Pascal III, 1164-68
Calixtus III, 1168-77
Innocent III, 1178-80
Nicholas V, 1328-30
Robert of Geneva (Clement VII), 20 September, 1378 to 16 September, 1394
Amadeus of Savoy (Felix V), November, 1439 to April, 1449

If one were to follow one of these above listed thinking they were the genuine Pope are they resposbile for their choice or does their desire to follow the church excuse their mischoice?

 

[1ke]

Daniel Marsh:

So, if the church is wrong it is right?

You have missed the point. The Church cannot be wrong on matters of Faith and Morals.

 

[1ke]

Daniel Marsh:

If one were to follow one of these above listed thinking they were the genuine Pope are they resposbile for their choice or does their desire to follow the church excuse their mischoice?

Your illustration does not follow your premise. You stated “if the church is in error on some doctrine and you believe it…”.

The people who were invalidly elected or declared pope were not following the Church. The Church was not in error at any point, therefore this is a non-example.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

And, the people who believed these to be the real pope and therefore believed they were following the church, are they excused or are they responsible?

And, are those leaders that covered up for the sexual predators, their responsibility?

There were times when various theologians in the church had differing ideas on doctrine, were they personaly responsible for their error?

And, if the claim that the church can not error is in fact an error is one not responsible for following that error?



And, why can’t I expand the scope of the question?

 

[StMarkEofE]

Daniel Marsh:

So, if the church is wrong it is right?

Good question. How is one to know if your particular church’s teaching is in error or not? The only remedy that I found usefull is a combination of Scripture, writings of the Church Fathers, writings on the saints, and contemporary books on church history and theology. I became convinced of my decision after many many hours of reading dealing with just this very question. But, most of all, I truly felt the Holy Spirit working within me which made my move all that easier. Everyone will not see eye to eye on all points of what we deem the truth. Whether one moves to a new faith or not he or she must be convinced beyond a showdow of a doubt that what is being believed by their church is the truth. The Truth must not conflict with scripture, the truth must not deny the divinity of Christ, the truth must not deny the Trinity, and the Truth must not deny the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

StMarkEofE:

Good question. How is one to know if your particular church’s teaching is in error or not? The only remedy that I found usefull is a combination of Scripture, writings of the Church Fathers, writings on the saints, and contemporary books on church history and theology. I became convinced of my decision after many many hours of reading dealing with just this very question. But, most of all, I truly felt the Holy Spirit working within me which made my move all that easier. Everyone will not see eye to eye on all points of what we deem the truth. Whether one moves to a new faith or not he or she must be convinced beyond a showdow of a doubt that what is being believed by their church is the truth. The Truth must not conflict with scripture, the truth must not deny the divinity of Christ, the truth must not deny the Trinity, and the Truth must not deny the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Good thoughtful answer thanks

Now, lets expand the question to the other areas without stone throwing. Bringing up the sexaul predators is a question concerning personal responsiblity nothing more because I believe all demoninations have the same problems with sexual pediators.

 

[StMarkEofE]

Daniel Marsh:

Good thoughtful answer thanks

Now, lets expand the question to the other areas without stone throwing. Bringing up the sexaul predators is a question concerning personal responsiblity nothing more because I believe all demoninations have the same problems with sexual pediators.

If you are referring to the pedophilia cases against some RC priests I would say that you cant judge a faith by some of their practicioners. All faiths have sinners and it is the obligation of those sinners to part ways with commiting those sins. Look to the teachings of the church for your inspiration not to those who chose to ignore their own church’s teachings.

 

[banjo]

Daniel Marsh:

And, the people who believed these to be the real pope and therefore believed they were following the church, are they excused or are they responsible?

And, are those leaders that covered up for the sexual predators, their responsibility?

There were times when various theologians in the church had differing ideas on doctrine, were they personaly responsible for their error?

And, if the claim that the church can not error is in fact an error is one not responsible for following that error?

Individuals are obliged to follow their conscience. The other side of that is that they are also obliged to inform their conscience. The following quotes from the CCC may be helpful.

**1787 **Man is sometimes confronted by situations that make moral judgments less assured and decision difficult. But he must always seriously seek what is right and good and discern the will of God expressed in divine law.

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.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

 

[Mike_D30]

Daniel Marsh:

And, the people who believed these to be the real pope and therefore believed they were following the church, are they excused or are they responsible?

And, are those leaders that covered up for the sexual predators, their responsibility?

There were times when various theologians in the church had differing ideas on doctrine, were they personaly responsible for their error?

And, if the claim that the church can not error is in fact an error is one not responsible for following that error?



And, why can’t I expand the scope of the question?

Daniel,

The Church has had its fair share of dubious Popes, but they’ve also had many devout pious Saints. You should research a little bit about what Catholics believe about Papal infallibility. It has nothing to do with being a good person, or the Pope is perfect and incapable of sinning or being wrong on anythingc…It only has to do with teachings on faith and morals, and we believe the Holy Spirit will not allow a Pope to lead us astray on these matters.

For example if Pope Benedict tomorrow tries to state that abortion is fine, and Jesus is not divine, we believe he wouldn’t be able to do so.

So you can list Popes and previous crimes that may have been done by them, but you would have to show where they lead the Church astray on matters of faith and morals for it to have any bearing on the discussion.

I hope your sexual predator comment isn’t insinuating that the Catholic Church teaches that behavior is appropriate? Because it doesn’t.

 

[MariaG]

Daniel Marsh:

Good thoughtful answer thanks

Now, lets expand the question to the other areas without stone throwing. Bringing up the sexaul predators is a question concerning personal responsiblity nothing more because I believe all demoninations have the same problems with sexual pediators.

Well, you can change the question not expand it. The question of whether the Church is unable to officially teach error and the people in the Church acting in a manner that is completely contrary to Christianity through sinful actions and sinful inactions are two very separate questions. Not an expansion of the question.

One deals with doctrine and the other is dealing with the actions and choices of those in charge of teaching that doctrine.

Your original question was unable to be answered in the form posed. The Church cannot officially teach error. Where is the personal responsibility when we see those in charge acting in a manner that is inconsistent with our declared Christian faith? Our responsibility is to bring it to the attention as many times as necessary to those who are in charge and can change things.

All you have to do is look at the reformation. There were a great many saints who were trying to reform the actions of those in the Church, and Luther who left it. A perfect example of what to do, and what not to do.

God Bless,
Maria