Quid Est Veritas?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DL82
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DL82

Guest
Seriously, I am struggling.

I came to Catholicism having had a grounding in both Marxist and post-structuralist epistemology, and tend to think of language as defining truth.

Until recently, I think I tried to understand Catholicism as basically being about the Pope and the Magisterium having the power, through God’s creative Word, on whose behalf they speak, to define Truth.

I have been reading the Catechism through flocknote’s ‘read the Catechism in a year’ emails for the Year of Faith, and we have recently been reading about the Bishops and the teaching authority of the Church. I realize my epistemology is not supported by what the Catechism states, and is quite deeply flawed.

I also found myself dumbfounded by a case I am aware of where a bishop dismissed concerns about an abusive priest. I cannot say that the bishop defined Truth when he ruled on that issue, to do so, and to ask his victims to do so, would be to believe in the kind of oppressive relativism by which Communist states are run, and against which the Holy Father has so clearly spoken out.

I think part of the reason this epistemology appealed to me was the selfish thought that it would be enough, in order to be saved, to convince the human authorities of the Church that I am worthy of canonization. I didn’t feel as though I would ever truly be a good person, but if I could convince enough people of it, I could have some future Pope declare infallibly that I was in heaven, and that would make it really so. I know this is also not likely to be on the cards, but it still seemed more likely than ever living an authentically Christian life. I realize that this view is no longer sustainable.

Clearly, then, the authority of the Church is not the authority to create an ‘official’ Truth to which everyone (including God) must (at least pretend to) believe. A thing does not become true just because the Pope says it.

So now I am confused again, what is a correct Catholic epistemology? How does the Church know the Truth, and how does she define and discern it? I’m confused.
 
The church creates no truth in and of itself. She only looks at what has been divinely revealed and declares the revealed.

She does this through her teaching authority. It is usually triggered by the people being divided by something or a sense that the people are very confused on a matter of faith or morals bringing it to the attention of the church’s authority.
 
Primarily what the church does is “pass on to you what was handed…” 1 Corinthians 11
 
DL82 said:
Seriously, I am struggling.

I came to Catholicism having had a grounding in both Marxist and post-structuralist epistemology, and tend to think of language as defining truth.

Until recently, I think I tried to understand Catholicism as basically being about the Pope and the Magisterium having the power, through God’s creative Word, on whose behalf they speak, to define Truth.

I have been reading the Catechism through flocknote’s ‘read the Catechism in a year’ emails for the Year of Faith, and we have recently been reading about the Bishops and the teaching authority of the Church. I realize my epistemology is not supported by what the Catechism states, and is quite deeply flawed.

I also found myself dumbfounded by a case I am aware of where a bishop dismissed concerns about an abusive priest. I cannot say that the bishop defined Truth when he ruled on that issue, to do so, and to ask his victims to do so, would be to believe in the kind of oppressive relativism by which Communist states are run, and against which the Holy Father has so clearly spoken out.

I think part of the reason this epistemology appealed to me was the selfish thought that it would be enough, in order to be saved, to convince the human authorities of the Church that I am worthy of canonization. I didn’t feel as though I would ever truly be a good person, but if I could convince enough people of it, I could have some future Pope declare infallibly that I was in heaven, and that would make it really so. I know this is also not likely to be on the cards, but it still seemed more likely than ever living an authentically Christian life. I realize that this view is no longer sustainable.

Clearly, then, the authority of the Church is not the authority to create an ‘official’ Truth to which everyone (including God) must (at least pretend to) believe. A thing does not become true just because the Pope says it.

So now I am confused again, what is a correct Catholic epistemology? How does the Church know the Truth, and how does she define and discern it? I’m confused.
Click to expand...
Why is it that when I read this I envision 3 guys huddled together…laughing. Is this a serious post?
 
As MichaelHowling said, the Church does not create truth by what it says, but recognizes what is true to be true in a way that is protected from error. All truth comes from God - if anyone can speak and have what is spoken become true, it would be Him. The Church can just listen well.

But this does not apply to any individual Bishop (except the Pope under special circumstances), but the Bishops as a whole in union with the Pope, and even then only on matters of faith and morals.

So God protects the Church from falling into error by officially teaching that priestly abuse or covering up priestly abuse is a good thing. That is something that the Church never has and never can say. But God does not interfere with Church leaders’ wills so much as to stop it from actually happening (as bad as it is) any more than He interferes with teachers’ or coaches’ or their superiors’ wills to stop them from doing the same thing.

We should have higher expectations of the leaders of the Church (which are usually met), I think, but not so much because we expect God to just cause it to happen as because we expect people who are so immersed in Godly things would react to them accordingly.

But when they fail, it is a failing in them personally, not a failure of any sort of infallibility.
 
Reread part four of the catechism of the catholic church. Enter the prayer of the mystical body of Christ. From this perspective your quest for sainthood will possess a firmer foundation. Jesus Christ is the truth of the catholic church. If you do not make it to the calendar of saints, the church acknowledges you on All Saints Day. The ecclesial form of Holy Mother Church is not as important as Her Teaching the power of , and “how to”, pray.

Peace
 
DL82 said:
Seriously, I am struggling.

I came to Catholicism having had a grounding in both Marxist and post-structuralist epistemology, and tend to think of language as defining truth.

Until recently, I think I tried to understand Catholicism as basically being about the Pope and the Magisterium having the power, through God’s creative Word, on whose behalf they speak, to define Truth.

I have been reading the Catechism through flocknote’s ‘read the Catechism in a year’ emails for the Year of Faith, and we have recently been reading about the Bishops and the teaching authority of the Church. I realize my epistemology is not supported by what the Catechism states, and is quite deeply flawed.

I also found myself dumbfounded by a case I am aware of where a bishop dismissed concerns about an abusive priest. I cannot say that the bishop defined Truth when he ruled on that issue, to do so, and to ask his victims to do so, would be to believe in the kind of oppressive relativism by which Communist states are run, and against which the Holy Father has so clearly spoken out.

I think part of the reason this epistemology appealed to me was the selfish thought that it would be enough, in order to be saved, to convince the human authorities of the Church that I am worthy of canonization. I didn’t feel as though I would ever truly be a good person, but if I could convince enough people of it, I could have some future Pope declare infallibly that I was in heaven, and that would make it really so. I know this is also not likely to be on the cards, but it still seemed more likely than ever living an authentically Christian life. I realize that this view is no longer sustainable.

Clearly, then, the authority of the Church is not the authority to create an ‘official’ Truth to which everyone (including God) must (at least pretend to) believe. A thing does not become true just because the Pope says it.

So now I am confused again, what is a correct Catholic epistemology? How does the Church know the Truth, and how does she define and discern it? I’m confused.
Click to expand...
You have all sorts of things mixed up here. Bishops can be wrong, individually.
The Church has no " epistomology. " God gave us an intellect and free will suited to living in this world and able to see the truth in things and in ideas. He gave us the Church to guide us in faith and morals but not in practical, mundane affairs.

Its too bad you studied Epistomology, most of what passes for Epistomology these days is warmed over hog - wash. Forget it !!! If you have to have something besides your own common sense study St. Thomas. S.T., Part 1, Ques 75-120 - but it is tough. Linus
 
Thanks for all of this.

I suppose what I was trying to understand is how does a Catholic go about knowing and understanding the truth? We know that the Church does not err, but do we believe simply BECAUSE the Church teaches it, or do we believe because some other sense has revealed it to be true, and if so, what is that sense? How do we come to know the Truth if it is not blind submission to the Church? What about in areas on which the Church has not pronounced, or where faith and morals interacts with science and psychology?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top