Right and wrong now and in the future

[dominikus28]

Is it correct to say that what was wrong ten years ago will be wrong forever and always was? I ask this, because I am wondering if the Church could change it’s teachings on birth control and abortion.

Is everything that the Church teaches us is wrong and everything it teaches we must do (like go to Church) infallible teachings? Do they have the possibility of change?

 

[Ne_OrangeKnight]

There is a difference between doctrine and discipline; the latter are not always matters of morality and can be changed, while the former cannot.

Birth control and abortion are innately wrong, and can therefore never be condoned by the Church, any more than embezzlement, torture, or adultery could be condoned. On the other hand, things like eating meat on Fridays and attending Mass on Sunday are not inherently matters of morality (recall that worship day used to be Saturday in the first few decades A.D.). However, the Church can use its Christ-given authority to make certain things binding on the faithful. As an analogy, it’s like the State using its authority to set the speed limit, for example. While there’s nothing inherently evil about driving 75 MPH in a school zone, you’re still not allowed to do it.

Hope that clears things up!

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

 

[kimmielittle]

There is a difference between doctrine and discipline; the latter are not always matters of morality and can be changed, while the former cannot.

Birth control and abortion are innately wrong, and can therefore never be condoned by the Church, any more than embezzlement, torture, or adultery could be condoned. On the other hand, things like eating meat on Fridays and attending Mass on Sunday are not inherently matters of morality (recall that worship day used to be Saturday in the first few decades A.D.). However, the Church can use its Christ-given authority to make certain things binding on the faithful. As an analogy, it’s like the State using its authority to set the speed limit, for example. While there’s nothing inherently evil about driving 75 MPH in a school zone, you’re still not allowed to do it.

Hope that clears things up!

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

 

[dominikus28]

Thanks guys:thumbsup:

 

[Ron_Conte]

The Church has two types of authority: spiritual and temporal.
The spiritual authority is the Magisterium (the teaching authority).
The Magisterium teaches doctrine.
The temporal authority issues disciplines, not doctrines.

The spiritual authority teaches,
either infallibly and irreformably (so that the teaching cannot change)
or non-infallibly and non-irreformably (allowing for limited possibililty of change).

The temporal authority does not teach, and is fallible.
The temporal authority makes judgments of the prudential order,
with which the faithful reasonable Catholic might disagree.

 

[JW55]

Is it correct to say that what was wrong ten years ago will be wrong forever and always was? I ask this, because I am wondering if the Church could change it’s teachings on birth control and abortion.

Is everything that the Church teaches us is wrong and everything it teaches we must do (like go to Church) infallible teachings? Do they have the possibility of change?

I think David Currie’s book, “Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic” from Chapter 5 entitled “Authority Focused” has an excellent explaination of the levels of Catholic belief. I would suggest you get a copy of this book if you haven’t read it already. It is an easy to read book with some very good expanations of the Catholic faith. Using his explaination with a little of my own analogies thrown in, you might remember the 5 D’s (Deposit of Faith, Dogma, Doctrine, Discipline and Devotions) or view them as an Onion with its different layers. The Deposit of Faith at the center. The Deposit of Faith is the body of truth given to the Apostles that was written into scripture or remained in sacred tradition. From this nothing can be added or contradicted. An example of this might be, “Jesus rose from the dead”. The next layer would be Dogma. Dogma is a body of truth that has been affirmed by the council of the Church and the Holy See of Rome. Once declared as Dogma, Currie explains it can be developed but never contradicted by future dogma or doctrine. The next level is Doctrine. Doctrine is the development of truth on the basis of deposit and dogma. It can develop and even contradict itself over time. It is largely the thoughts of people. It has not been declared offically true or false by the church. It may or may not be accepted as dogma over time. The next layer is Discipline, which dictate the everyday life of faithful Catholics. They are mandatory when in force but can change over time. The celibacy of clergy would be an example of this. The outermost layer is Devotions. Devotions are not mandatory but may be encouraged to enhance the spirtual of life of an individual. An example of a Devotion would be the Rosary.

Hope this is helpful.

 

[SophiaLector]

On the other hand, things like eating meat on Fridays and attending Mass on Sunday are not inherently matters of morality (recall that worship day used to be Saturday in the first few decades A.D.).Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

Fridays are not about not eating meat, they are about making a sacrifice in solidarity with the suffering of our Lord on Good Friday.
Sunday is now the day of rest and worship because that’s the day Jesus came back to life.

I seriously doubt these are up for change. Ever.

 

[baylee]

I think David Currie’s book, “Born Fundamentalist, Born Again Catholic” from Chapter 5 entitled “Authority Focused” has an excellent explaination of the levels of Catholic belief. I would suggest you get a copy of this book if you haven’t read it already. It is an easy to read book with some very good expanations of the Catholic faith. Using his explaination with a little of my own analogies thrown in, you might remember the 5 D’s (Deposit of Faith, Dogma, Doctrine, Discipline and Devotions) or view them as an Onion with its different layers. The Deposit of Faith at the center. The Deposit of Faith is the body of truth given to the Apostles that was written into scripture or remained in sacred tradition. From this nothing can be added or contradicted. An example of this might be, “Jesus rose from the dead”. The next layer would be Dogma. Dogma is a body of truth that has been affirmed by the council of the Church and the Holy See of Rome. Once declared as Dogma, Currie explains it can be developed but never contradicted by future dogma or doctrine. The next level is Doctrine. Doctrine is the development of truth on the basis of deposit and dogma. It can develop and even contradict itself over time. It is largely the thoughts of people. It has not been declared offically true or false by the church. It may or may not be accepted as dogma over time. The next layer is Discipline, which dictate the everyday life of faithful Catholics. They are mandatory when in force but can change over time. The celibacy of clergy would be an example of this. The outermost layer is Devotions. Devotions are not mandatory but may be encouraged to enhance the spirtual of life of an individual. An example of a Devotion would be the Rosary.

Hope this is helpful.

Interesting. Does the book give any examples of doctrine that has changed and contradicted prior doctrine?

 

[Ron_Conte]

The next level is Doctrine. Doctrine is the development of truth on the basis of deposit and dogma. It can develop and even contradict itself over time. It is largely the thoughts of people. It has not been declared offically true or false by the church.

This particular point, quoted above, contradicts the teaching of the Magisterium.

A doctrine is a teaching of the Magisterium. The Magisterium teaches either infallibly or non-infallibly. The infallible teachings are called dogmas; a dogma is a doctrine that has been taught infallibly by the Magisterium. Any doctrine taught by the Magisterium but not taught infallibly by the Magisterium, is a non-infallible teaching.

These teachings (doctrines) are not merely the thoughts of people. And they are in fact official teachings of the Church. There is a possibility of error and reform in non-infallible teachings, but it is a limited possibility. And the faithful are required to give the religious submission of will and intellect to these non-infallible teachings.

Can. 750 §1. A person must believe with divine and Catholic faith all those things contained in the word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by **the solemn magisterium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium **which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the sacred magisterium; therefore all are bound to avoid any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.

[the above quote discusses the infallible teachings of the Magisterium]

§2. Each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same deposit of faith, is also to be firm-ly embraced and retained; therefore, one who rejects those propositions which are to be held definitively is opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church.

[this next section, above, refers to the non-infallible teachings]

Can. 752 Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.

[we are not free to disregard non-infallible teachings, nor can we consider these teachings to be merely ‘the thoughts of people’]

I recommend Germaine Grisez’s book, Fulfillment in Christ, which has a particularly good, succinct explanation of the Magisterium.

 

[mark_a]

I am wondering if the Church could change it’s teachings on birth control and abortion.

If the Church changes this teaching, we will know that all the Protestants were right in proclaiming that the Catholic Church is NOT the church started by Jesus.

Til then, submit.

 

[JW55]

This particular point, quoted above, contradicts the teaching of the Magisterium.

A doctrine is a teaching of the Magisterium. The Magisterium teaches either infallibly or non-infallibly. The infallible teachings are called dogmas; a dogma is a doctrine that has been taught infallibly by the Magisterium. Any doctrine taught by the Magisterium but not taught infallibly by the Magisterium, is a non-infallible teaching.

These teachings (doctrines) are not merely the thoughts of people. And they are in fact official teachings of the Church. There is a possibility of error and reform in non-infallible teachings, but it is a limited possibility. And the faithful are required to give the religious submission of will and intellect to these non-infallible teachings.

Can. 750 §1. A person must believe with divine and Catholic faith all those things contained in the word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by **the solemn magisterium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium **which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the sacred magisterium; therefore all are bound to avoid any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.

[the above quote discusses the infallible teachings of the Magisterium]

§2. Each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same deposit of faith, is also to be firm-ly embraced and retained; therefore, one who rejects those propositions which are to be held definitively is opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church.

[this next section, above, refers to the non-infallible teachings]

Can. 752 Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.

[we are not free to disregard non-infallible teachings, nor can we consider these teachings to be merely ‘the thoughts of people’]

I recommend Germaine Grisez’s book, Fulfillment in Christ, which has a particularly good, succinct explanation of the Magisterium.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[kimmielittle]

Hiyas

In sociology we learn there are two types of laws…Morays and Moral.

Morays are unwritten laws like : Mommy’s law; Don’t pick the frosting off her cake…etc.
Now, even though Mommy’s law applies…Some Mommy’s see it, secretly, as a compliment. So this law may be changed in the future. I know poor example but I’m sure you can follow my idea ].

Moral laws are written on the very soul…i.e, A Reverence of ALL of life…This will never change.

I hope this helps

 

[Ne_OrangeKnight]

Fridays are not about not eating meat, they are about making a sacrifice in solidarity with the suffering of our Lord on Good Friday.
Sunday is now the day of rest and worship because that’s the day Jesus came back to life.

I seriously doubt these are up for change. Ever.

I never argued against what you say. Nor did I say that they were going to change, only that there exists the valid possibility that they could change, because they clearly have in the past. It was a useful example of doctrine vs. discipline that came quickly to mind.

Sam, the Neon Orange Knight

 

[dominikus28]

Can anyone give an example of a doctrine (non-infallible teaching) that has changed?

 

[Rolltide]

Can anyone give an example of a doctrine (non-infallible teaching) that has changed?

Celibacy for secular priests used to be optional until around 1100. It was eventually changed as a reform to prevent, among other things, simony and nepotism. That said, it has ALWAYS been the rule that once ordained, a priest may not get married. They may only be married if they were married prior to ordination.

 

[baylee]

Celibacy for secular priests used to be optional until around 1100. It was eventually changed as a reform to prevent, among other things, simony and nepotism. That said, it has ALWAYS been the rule that once ordained, a priest may not get married. They may only be married if they were married prior to ordination.

This is not an example of a doctrine…this is discipline.

 

[Ron_Conte]

Can anyone give an example of a doctrine (non-infallible teaching) that has changed?

Good question. Many Bishops used to teach that unbaptized persons who die in infancy go to limbo, as a third final destination. Although the claim is often made that this was merely a theological idea, and not a teaching, I think it is clear that it was a non-infallible teaching, since it was taught by various Bishops as well as by some Popes. Also, if you look at the various non-infallible teachings on this question, there are a number of contradictory positions taken. Some Bishops even taught that unbaptized infants go to Hell. Historically, various Popes have taken various positions on this question.

Currently, the Magisterium takes the position that unbaptized infants may go to Heaven. So it has become an open question, even though previously there were various non-infallible teachings on that point.

 

[Bookcat]

Is it correct to say that what was wrong ten years ago will be wrong forever and always was? I ask this, because I am wondering if the Church could change it’s teachings on birth control and abortion.

Is everything that the Church teaches us is wrong and everything it teaches we must do (like go to Church) infallible teachings? Do they have the possibility of change?

Somethings are theological opinions…some things are dogma or doctrine…

some things are disciplines (which certainly can change)…

but as to abortion and contraception…no they will not be changed and can not be changed.