You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Some Catholics are ‘unnerved’ by current events in the Church, says Cardinal Pell
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
F
fin
Guest
how very true, the words of Cardinal Pell. When it comes to sexual morality and marriage, boom, we have to be ‘merciful’, not judge the circumstances of those in irregular ‘marriages’ and follow our consciences…but is our conscience well formed? Are we doing what God wants, or are we doing what we want?
thecatholicthing.org/2016/12/02/whose-side-are-we-on/
thecatholicthing.org/2016/12/02/whose-side-are-we-on/
If we really believe it, and if a disagreement opens up between Jesus and the pope on the question of the indissolubility of marriage, then, much though it grieves us to separate ourselves from such a good man as Pope Francis, we have no choice but to take the side of Jesus in this dispute.
V
Vic_Taltrees_UK
Guest
The vast majority of archbishops, bishops, clergy and Catholics in the pews are sentimental about Communion and about the Catholic faith. This is no good for it at all.
In my young day only half the congregation would go to communion. My African friend is horrified at the concept of “frequent communion”, a pudding that was probably over-egged by Alphonsius Liguori, Pius X, JP II (albeit with the mentioned riders) but not in his (uniate-style) church.
You would think that in an age of increased individualism which we then had, even more people would have been content to sit out. Now we seem to have have swung into an age of ultra-conformism (which I try to detach myself from) to further confuse the confusion.
Spiritual Communion is universally and extremely forcefully condemned as the deepest of evils, just when it is the highest good.
If the Catholic faith is any good, it is good without Communion. I know the CCC raises Communion to the object of worship, but that is one of the weakest facets of the CCC (albeit it takes up almost half the length).
In my young day only half the congregation would go to communion. My African friend is horrified at the concept of “frequent communion”, a pudding that was probably over-egged by Alphonsius Liguori, Pius X, JP II (albeit with the mentioned riders) but not in his (uniate-style) church.
You would think that in an age of increased individualism which we then had, even more people would have been content to sit out. Now we seem to have have swung into an age of ultra-conformism (which I try to detach myself from) to further confuse the confusion.
Spiritual Communion is universally and extremely forcefully condemned as the deepest of evils, just when it is the highest good.
If the Catholic faith is any good, it is good without Communion. I know the CCC raises Communion to the object of worship, but that is one of the weakest facets of the CCC (albeit it takes up almost half the length).
1
1Lord1Faith
Guest
The author of this article that you posted a link to should get his mind out of the gutter.how very true, the words of Cardinal Pell. When it comes to sexual morality and marriage, boom, we have to be ‘merciful’, not judge the circumstances of those in irregular ‘marriages’ and follow our consciences…but is our conscience well formed? Are we doing what God wants, or are we doing what we want?
thecatholicthing.org/2016/12/02/whose-side-are-we-on/
Why would you post a link to an article as vile as this^.“In short, doesn’t the pope’s blessing of adultery in certain circumstances imply the collapse of almost the entire structure of Catholic sexual morality? Apart from rape and child molestation, what sexual taboos would remain? And won’t the priest or ex-priest who molested boys be able to argue that that kind of thing is allowable “in certain circumstances”?”
J
josh987654321
Guest
I think Cardinal Pell makes some good points in that article, thank you for sharing it.
God Bless
Josh
P
PassingSoul
Guest
I agree with the Cardinal Pell. I volunteer in my Church with some people who will vote on the single issue of Abortion. It’s okay to vote that way but what comes out of their mouth next is racist remarks on the sitting President. I just scratch my head and think to myself what is missing here in being a Catholic.
P
phil19034
Guest
FYI - It’s not racist to disagree with Obama or think that he’s a terrible president.I agree with the Cardinal Pell. I volunteer in my Church with some people who will vote on the single issue of Abortion. It’s okay to vote that way but what comes out of their mouth next is racist remarks on the sitting President. I just scratch my head and think to myself what is missing here in being a Catholic.
I happen to think Obama is the worst President we’ve had in my lifetime, and I voted for him.
People told me he was a communist and I didn’t believe it. Today, I totally believe that Obama is a closet communist
C
carn
Guest
I would suggest next time to ask them, whether they consider there to be any difference between abortion in case of “white father/white mother”, “black father/black mother”, etc.I agree with the Cardinal Pell. I volunteer in my Church with some people who will vote on the single issue of Abortion. It’s okay to vote that way but what comes out of their mouth next is racist remarks on the sitting President. I just scratch my head and think to myself what is missing here in being a Catholic.
Reason is that in my experience racist see there differences; and someone against abortion independent of the “ethinicy”, “race”, etc. of mother and father are usually not racists or at least not such way, that they cannot be reasoned with to understand their racistic tendencies are a problem.
G
godisgood77
Guest
You’re right… it is not racist to disagree with someone. I really don’t believe anyone thinks it’s racist to disagree. I personally believe that most people are pretty smart and understand that difference.FYI - It’s not racist to disagree with Obama or think that he’s a terrible president.
I happen to think Obama is the worst President we’ve had in my lifetime, and I voted for him.
People told me he was a communist and I didn’t believe it. Today, I totally believe that Obama is a closet communist
However, I don’t think anyone would deny that it’s racist to demean someone due to their ethnicity or color…It is racist to use cheap, insulting language to describe someone based on those traits. It is racist to judge someone’s competency based on those traits…
I unfortunately am witness to terrible racism and sexism in my own family; from my own father in law and believe it is all to prevalent in our society. Too often in my Catholic Parish.
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
You live in a racially divided place. And part of that is Obama’s own making. While racism is wrong. It’s wrong on those who exploit it for power as well.You’re right… it is not racist to disagree with someone. I really don’t believe anyone thinks it’s racist to disagree. I personally believe that most people are pretty smart and understand that difference.
However, I don’t think anyone would deny that it’s racist to demean someone due to their ethnicity or color…It is racist to use cheap, insulting language to describe someone based on those traits. It is racist to judge someone’s competency based on those traits…
I unfortunately am witness to terrible racism and sexism in my own family; from my own father in law and believe it is all to prevalent in our society. Too often in my Catholic Parish.
T
Thomas_White
Guest
I fully agree with Cardinal Pell: “The idea that you can somehow discern that moral truth should not be followed or should not be recognised (is) absurd.”
“Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey.” --CCC 1776. This is the teaching of the Church.
“Cardinal Pell said that emphasising the ‘primary of conscience’ could have disastrous effects if conscience did not always submit to revealed teaching *and the moral law.” * (emphasis added)
While I agree with Cardinal Pell, what the head of the Greek bishops is mentioned in the article as saying is very concerning: “The head of the Greek bishops has said that the four cardinals were guilty of ‘very serious sins’ and could provoke a schism.”
“Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon himself but which he must obey.” --CCC 1776. This is the teaching of the Church.
“Cardinal Pell said that emphasising the ‘primary of conscience’ could have disastrous effects if conscience did not always submit to revealed teaching *and the moral law.” * (emphasis added)
While I agree with Cardinal Pell, what the head of the Greek bishops is mentioned in the article as saying is very concerning: “The head of the Greek bishops has said that the four cardinals were guilty of ‘very serious sins’ and could provoke a schism.”
P
PassingSoul
Guest
You know he’s no Communist. You can disagree but when people add on comments “like those people are lazy and want everything handed to them” Are you not stereotyping a race of people ?FYI - It’s not racist to disagree with Obama or think that he’s a terrible president.
I happen to think Obama is the worst President we’ve had in my lifetime, and I voted for him.
People told me he was a communist and I didn’t believe it. Today, I totally believe that Obama is a closet communist
Johnson , Nixon, and George W. Bush were worst then Obama. How can you say the country is worst off now then before he took office ? People don’t realize how close the country came to a Great Depression. He’s not perfect but he has done a lot of good things. You can scream at Obama Care but even Trump agrees that the core principles of Previous Conditions, allowing your kids to stay longer on your health care, and closing the Donut Hole on your Medicare Drug Plan must be kept in any new health plan. Was he naive on religious freedoms in the ACA, yes he was.
C
CaptFun
Guest
What an astute observation on behalf of the Cardinal. (As I often say when someone agrees with me and/or puts what I was thinking into words well).
That "… my conscience tells me (that I may do precisely the opposite of what the Church teaches anytime my flesh or ego find the attendant crops too large) … seems too me to be the most transparent of evasions per the sinner … and the most treasonous or silly of counsels per any )church leaders) regardless of technical rank.
P
patricius79
Guest
Cardinal Pell talks about submitting to the moral law and not emphasizing the primacy of conscience.
I’m still trying to understand what this means in number 301 of AL:
The Church possesses a
solid body of reflection concerning mitigating
factors and situations. Hence it is can no longer
simply be said that all those in any “irregular”
situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are
deprived of sanctifying grace. More is involved
here than mere ignorance of the rule. A subject
may know full well the rule, yet have great difficulty
in understanding “its inherent values”,339 or
be in a concrete situation which does not allow
him or her to act differently and decide otherwise
without further sin. As the Synod Fathers
put it, “factors may exist which limit the ability to
make a decision”.340
Does anyone know what it means to know a moral rule without being able to follow it without “further sin”?
I want to interpret this accurately and charitably according to the Pope’s meaning.
I’m still trying to understand what this means in number 301 of AL:
The Church possesses a
solid body of reflection concerning mitigating
factors and situations. Hence it is can no longer
simply be said that all those in any “irregular”
situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are
deprived of sanctifying grace. More is involved
here than mere ignorance of the rule. A subject
may know full well the rule, yet have great difficulty
in understanding “its inherent values”,339 or
be in a concrete situation which does not allow
him or her to act differently and decide otherwise
without further sin. As the Synod Fathers
put it, “factors may exist which limit the ability to
make a decision”.340
Does anyone know what it means to know a moral rule without being able to follow it without “further sin”?
I want to interpret this accurately and charitably according to the Pope’s meaning.
P
Polycarp1
Guest
People can convince themselves that their conscience is telling them to do almost anything.
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
Yep.People can convince themselves that their conscience is telling them to do almost anything.
A
AKDee
Guest
I do find some of the current events unnerving. And I absolutely believe that telling people to follow their conscience might have some following theirs straight into hell. Prior to becoming Catholic, I felt I was leading a pretty good life. I lived with my boyfriend but we were faithful to one another and we loved each other. No problem. I read the Bible, I prayed, but I never went to church. Churches were full of hypocrisy, and I felt closer to God when I went hiking. I could go on. Perhaps by worldly standards I was a decent person, but not by God’s standards. And I had no idea- until I began the RCIA process- how damaged my soul really was. I believe that if God had not intervened and led me to the Church that I would have gone to hell with a clean conscience. I thank God that He has begun leading me from the darkness into the light, and pray that He never lets me go.
O
OraLabora
Guest
Assuming for one moment that telling someone to follow their conscience in a specific instance is wrong, (and it is never wrong to follow one’s well-formed conscience), do you really think God would send someone to hell for following advice they accepted in good faith from someone in a position to give it, but that was erroneous to begin with? Similarly if a priest erred in some piece of moral advice to a penitent (and to err is human), do you really think that following it would condemn someone to hell? Would not the sin rest with the person giving the advice rather than he or she who follows it? And if the priest committed the sin of giving wrong advice in good faith (for example misunderstood someone with a thick accent), would he be condemned to hell for it? Does God convict us to eternal punishment on a misunderstanding?I do find some of the current events unnerving. And I absolutely believe that telling people to follow their conscience might have some following theirs straight into hell.
If it were the case that following wrong advice sends the recipient to hell, then the whole sacrament of confession would fall apart: a priest could, for instance, advise someone that their culpability is not mortal and that they don’t need to confess a specific sin every time it occurs (this happens). If the priest erred in that judgment of culpability, in good faith, do you think that God would condemn both the priest and penitent to hell for following it? If He did, the confessional would rapidly become a torture chamber and not a place of healing and reconciliation, and contrition, far from being perfect, would become based on fear of the consequences of a mistake.
Strange kind of “loving” and “just” God!!!
P
patricius79
Guest
that’s a beautiful testimony, AKDee. Yes, we are very good at deceiving ourselves. That’s why we need the Commandments, and especially the Blessed Mother so much to bring us to Jesus.I do find some of the current events unnerving. And I absolutely believe that telling people to follow their conscience might have some following theirs straight into hell. Prior to becoming Catholic, I felt I was leading a pretty good life. I lived with my boyfriend but we were faithful to one another and we loved each other. No problem. I read the Bible, I prayed, but I never went to church. Churches were full of hypocrisy, and I felt closer to God when I went hiking. I could go on. Perhaps by worldly standards I was a decent person, but not by God’s standards. And I had no idea- until I began the RCIA process- how damaged my soul really was. I believe that if God had not intervened and led me to the Church that I would have gone to hell with a clean conscience. I thank God that He has begun leading me from the darkness into the light, and pray that He never lets me go.
A
AKDee
Guest
I will have to look it up (Book, chapter and verse) but in the Gospels Jesus talks about how some people will go to hell but that the people who led them astray will have the greater sin. It doesn’t mean the people led astray didn’t have the sin or that they were safe from hell. And the reality is that many people - like my former self- who are living sinful lives choose to ignore God’s teachings as archaic, not applying to today’s society, not recognizing that God’s law is unchanging. I was aware of the 10 Commandments. I’d read the Bible. I was guilty even if I chose to think I was a good person. People that are utterly ignorant of the teachings of Christ may well get a pass. People that sincerely repent and call on God’s Mercy before their death certainly will. I believe in a Merciful God. But I also believe in a Just God and believe that had I continued to ignore God’s teachings that I would have happily skipped my way towards hell never the wiser. And I believe that people- particularly Catholics- who ignore Church teaching and choose to rely on their own consciences instead are at great risk.Assuming for one moment that telling someone to follow their conscience in a specific instance is wrong, (and it is never wrong to follow one’s well-formed conscience), do you really think God would send someone to hell for following advice they accepted in good faith from someone in a position to give it, but that was erroneous to begin with? Similarly if a priest erred in some piece of moral advice to a penitent (and to err is human), do you really think that following it would condemn someone to hell? Would not the sin rest with the person giving the advice rather than he or she who follows it? And if the priest committed the sin of giving wrong advice in good faith (for example misunderstood someone with a thick accent), would he be condemned to hell for it? Does God convict us to eternal punishment on a misunderstanding?
If it were the case that following wrong advice sends the recipient to hell, then the whole sacrament of confession would fall apart: a priest could, for instance, advise someone that their culpability is not mortal and that they don’t need to confess a specific sin every time it occurs (this happens). If the priest erred in that judgment of culpability, in good faith, do you think that God would condemn both the priest and penitent to hell for following it? If He did, the confessional would rapidly become a torture chamber and not a place of healing and reconciliation, and contrition, far from being perfect, would become based on fear of the consequences of a mistake.
Strange kind of “loving” and “just” God!!!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.