Reasearching your own answers

  • Thread starter Thread starter Shondee
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Shondee

Guest
I know we are morally obligated to seek knowledge when we don’t have it, in regards to sin. (ie, purposefully not finding out if something you’re not sure of being a sin or not is a sin itself. If you don’t know, youre moraly bound to find out). My question is, can one’s self reasearch fill this need? I find it would be often be imposible to detail nitpick every possible scenario one could think of, and take that to a priest or here, even though it would be a simpler answer.

So anyway, what I’m asking is, if you aren’t sure if A grave matter, but you know B, which is very similar, is not, and you can’t find sin in the difference, and through searching you can’t find the EXACT question, can a well formed conciounce assume it is not sinful? I understand that if the situation is very pequliar and unique, it would require a personal detailed question, but let’s say Ann isn’t sure if it’s a sin to miss mass while out of town helping her sister recover from surgery, but knows there ARE times when it’s permissible, and they’re usually based on times of sickness or great need, is her morality in the right place to assume it isn’t a sin?
 
Shondee said:
I know we are morally obligated to seek knowledge when we don’t have it, in regards to sin. (ie, purposefully not finding out if something you’re not sure of being a sin or not is a sin itself. If you don’t know, youre moraly bound to find out). My question is, can one’s self reasearch fill this need? I find it would be often be imposible to detail nitpick every possible scenario one could think of, and take that to a priest or here, even though it would be a simpler answer.

So anyway, what I’m asking is, if you aren’t sure if A grave matter, but you know B, which is very similar, is not, and you can’t find sin in the difference, and through searching you can’t find the EXACT question, can a well formed conciounce assume it is not sinful? I understand that if the situation is very pequliar and unique, it would require a personal detailed question, but let’s say Ann isn’t sure if it’s a sin to miss mass while out of town helping her sister recover from surgery, but knows there ARE times when it’s permissible, and they’re usually based on times of sickness or great need, is her morality in the right place to assume it isn’t a sin?
Click to expand...
the problem with rules are the borders.
Now York is the States.
Mexico city is Mexico.
But if a hen put a egg exactly on the border, whose is the egg?
So, you have to examine case by case and decide…
 
The distinction you’re making doesn’t really exist. No matter the source from which you obtain your information (a priest, a spiritual writer, a saint’s writings, an internet forum, an apologist, an information hotline etc.), you’re doing your own research. Whether the source is reputable is a different story. That varies between sources.

Also, you can’t assume anything with a well formed conscience (or even a poorly formed conscience). Technically, whether you make the right choice or the wrong choice, if you used logic and a conscience (in whatever state) to reach it, you reached a decision by deduction. You didn’t pull it out of thin air.

With that said, your primary assertion, that we are morally obligated to seek knowledge of sin when we don’t have it, that isn’t true. The only time we’re obligated to do that is if we’re in a situation in which we either did something or are considering something and we’re trying to figure out if it is a sin. It is a good and noble (also potentially foolhardy) thing to want to know if random situations entail sin. Knowing all manner of grave matter that is possible in which to find ourselves is not something that behooves us as Catholics. 🙂

I hope this helps.

God bless,

Rob
 
You’re right, I’m sorry, i was intending to ask about being in a situation where it did apply to you, where you were contemplating doing something, not something random. Thank you for finding better words.

I suppose what I mean is, if you couldn’t find the exact answer to your specific, exact question, but you had found much information to very similar situations, would that qualify as being knowledgeable? or are we obligated to find the answer to every specific change in a situation? I ask this because I was thinking today about how every scenario is going to change for every person, even if by small details, and it doesn’t seem possible to me to direcetly ask a priest or apologist, “well, is THIS a sin? but what about this? what if it happens like this? or to this person? in this instance? on the third tuesday of june?”
 
Actually, Shondee the correct answers to many questions including regarding a legitimate reason to be unable to be present at Mass, are to be found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Our ‘self-research’ can be helpful if we know the right sources,

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

Yes it would be difficult to assess every little circumstance, but when people come here asking questions, I usually find that the Bible, the Code of Canon Law, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, popes’ encyclicals, and other reliable sources provide one with guidelines that help anyone to make a decision. As you say every detail and question of everyone’s daily life can’t be minutely covered. Basic principles help. We apply them honestly and the best we can in individual circumstances. If there is a question of possible sin, then we can choose to take that when possible to a priest. In Confession usually it is possible to receive some guidance.

For something to be a sin, we must knowingly and willingly consent to something which we recognize is a sin.

Those sources that I mentioned are available in full online

God bless you. 🙂
 
@ Shondee, as mentioned above, most of all the resources you could ever want are available online. I do recommend purchasing a copy of the Catechism, though. The printed version has a great and user-friendly index for looking up particular topics. It’s also not very costly…I paid $13 for one, I think. I had found the online versions difficult to navigate until I got used to where things were located. (Of course, I may also have just not seen a search tool for it that may exist…I’ve been known to miss things from time to time. 😉 )
 
No, you are all missing my point entirely. The catechism CAN NOT POSSIBLE answer every single question a catholic has.

If alice doesn’t know if it’s ok to sel ham sandwiches on Monday, but knows it’s ok to BUY ham sandwiches on Monday, may she rightfully assume it’s ok to sell them, or does she need to go ask someone specifically?
 
Shondee said:
No, you are all missing my point entirely. The catechism CAN NOT POSSIBLE answer every single question a catholic has.

If alice doesn’t know if it’s ok to sel ham sandwiches on Monday, but knows it’s ok to BUY ham sandwiches on Monday, may she rightfully assume it’s ok to sell them, or does she need to go ask someone specifically?
Click to expand...
In your given hypothetical scenario, one would have to understand the criteria involved that would permit one to sell a ham sandwich on Monday, not simply presume that since one may buy a ham sandwich, one may sell a ham sandwich on that day. I’m of legal drinking age. With my ID, I may purchase alcohol. I, however, am not permitted to sell alcohol to the public. The same thing can apply to Church law (you are asking about Church law, are you not? The scenario you posed is rather legalistic in its nature, not moral).

You do make a good point, though. The Catechism (though it may point one in the right direction) is not the end all and be all. It is only infallible insofar as what is contained within it is already infallible, and by no means is it perfect. That is not to say that what it says is not true. It just doesn’t answer every question one can have. The same can be said of the Bible (to an even greater extent). That’s why we have the Church: a living, breathing, thinking organism made up of members, some of whom have the charge of instructing us. That’s where priests come in. If you have a question that you don’t feel can be answered by the Catechism, I would highly encourage you to seek out one of the priests that are at our disposal. If you can’t find one locally, you can contact virtually every one that is on the internet (and that’s a lot).

As to your original question, I think I said that inquiry into virtually any mode by which information may be obtained counts as research, so you’re doing your own research no matter what you do. You can’t not be doing your own research unless you’re sitting in a class being taught the information by rote. 🙂 I hope this helps.

God bless,

Rob
 
thank you for your help. I’m still not sure I have the answer I was seeking though. Let me give another example.

On this forum, I often see people asking about the morality of sin within books. I’m not here to start that debate, again, but let’s say someone reads all sides and comes to the informed decision that as long as those fictional situations are not a temptation for a reader, and it is not otherwise problematic, such as porn, then one may read that book. Now, as an extension of that, no one mentioned writing in that thread, but it makes sense to our hypothetical web searcher that if such books are not, in the proper hands, sinful to read, they also would not be sinful to write under the same circumstances. Could this be assumed as a correct answer, or are they obligated by conciounce to start another thread/ask a priest/ask an apologist if it’s ok to write the same situations.
 
Shondee,

There are paragraphs in the Catechism that may help to answer your question
These include paragraphs 1776-1804 are relevant to your question and I believe, answer it. I’ll find the link for you

1749 Freedom makes man a moral subject. When he acts deliberately man is, so to speak, the father of his acts . Human acts, that is, acts that are freely chosen in consequence of a judgement of conscience, can be morally evaluated. They are either good or evil.

1750 The morality of human acts depends on:
– the object chosen;
– the end in view or the intention;
– the circumstances of the action.

1776 “Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is good and to avoid evil, sounds in his heart at the right moment… For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God… His conscience is man’s most secret core and his sanctuary. There he is alone with God whose voice echoes in his depths.”<47>

1777 Moral conscience,<48> present at the heart of the person, enjoins him at the appropriate moment to do good and to avoid evil. It also judges particular choices, approving those that are good and denouncing those that are evil.<49> It bears witness to the authority of truth in reference to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn, and it welcomes the commandments. When he listens to his conscience, the prudent man can hear God speaking.

1778 Conscience is a judgment of reason whereby the human person recognizes the moral quality of a concrete act that he is going to perform, is in the process of performing, or has already completed. In all he says and does, man is obliged to follow faithfully what he knows to be just and right. It is by the judgment of his conscience that man perceives and recognizes the prescriptions of the divine law:
 
Not exactly. it’s just, in one AAA thread, someone asked Fr Serpa what to do if they weren’t sure of if something was grave matter or not, and he replied that he was required to find out, and to PM him. but Is that the only licit way to discern if something is grave matter? And what if you don’t know if you know, or you only think you know? What if you can say to yourself, well, I’ve never heard this EXACT situation addressed, but from what I know from church teaching, apologetics, answers to similar questions, books, etc, i have no reason to think that, under the circumstances that apply to me, it wooould be grave matter…but how can you be sure that you’ve come to that conclusion with a good heart, or if you’re just trying to convince yourself it’s not? Are we required to address a priest for every doubt, or can our own logic suffice? but what if our logic is wrong? If you use your own logic, and it’s wrong, how do you know you won’t be later held accountable by God for keeping yourself ignorant?
 
Conscience can remain in ignorance or make erroneous judgments. Such ignorance and errors are not always free of guilt.

and now i feel even worse.
 
Shondee, we cannot make the worst possible interpretation of that. For instance, an abused child is much sinned against and the guilt, if there is guilt, of that child is exceedingly less than that of an adult. Canon Law, for instance, holds that a child even cannot commit grave sin before the age of 7. They can do wrong of course, but it isn’t until after seven that a child is considered guilty of grave sin. I was exploring that canon last evening. Guilt in a child can be very misplaced. Parents/abusers can impose a sense of guilt on children where there is none, particularly in abuse situations. The same can occur with abused adults. They can feel excessively guilty…for the sin imposed upon them, the sin of the other person. It can be a very complex situation for the person who is coming from an abuse situation, and healing is needed to overcome and remove the tentacles that abuse can leave in a person’s life.
It is less situation for guilt, though it is for honesty, and for moving forward towards a wholesome life…

So that is one situation where an abused person’s guilt is not as the person might fear.
 
Thank you all again. I’m afraid i STILL do not have the answer to the question i was looking for, but I appreciate your advice all the same.
 
Shondee, we all have to do the best we can to make our moral decisions as well as we can in our understanding of the Commandments and the bible, the Catechism…we do the best we can and God understands our best intentions and efforts as we try to do so, but most of us have questions and doubts about our thoughts, words, acts, decisions, me as much as anyone. We try our best, the best we can manage.
God sees the heart and the good intentions. And loves us
 
Shondee, true the following paragraph in the Catechism can be misapplied,
but perhaps it goes towards answering your question:

1782 Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. “He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.”

This paragraph could lead to debate, but where you are concern right now, this is the significant line: **Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions.
**
You have made plain that you realise that an informed conscience is required

Where we have sinned, do sin, we need Confession:

If we are particularly nervous of the serious matter we can go to a priest that does not know us, but priests absolutely keep our sins secret, they must or they are excommunicated! The sense of peace after a good confession is amazing!
Confession aids to a new beginning.

For our better understanding of, of what is grave and what is not:

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c1a8.htm

1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent."131

1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments… One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

1862 One commits venial sin when, in a less serious matter, he does not observe the standard prescribed by the moral law, or when he disobeys the moral law in a grave matter, but without full knowledge or without complete consent.
 
It is always helpful to research your own answers, but if it no answer can be found that exactly fits the situation you are in, I would ask a priest. Honestly, we all need to think before we act, in some cases, long before we act. We should not be afraid to go to priests, for example, and explain our exact circumstances and/or lack of clarity on any issue.

With all due respect to everyone here, I think that some ‘opinions’ certainly fall outside of Church teaching. Getting an answer that can be backed up by Scripture, or the Catechism or an Encyclical from the Vatican are the best answers. After that, I recommend contacting a priest.

Hope this helps,
Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top