SPLIT: Human conscience is inviolate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter wisedom
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I believe that what Wisedom is saying is that we all possess 2 levels of mind, conscious and subconscious. Our conscious mind is the seat of reason and is prone to errors and distortion of the truth. Our subconscious mind is not singular, but rather is a part of, or is tapped into, a universal subconscious mind. This collective mind being the infinite mind of God. It binds us to God as well as every other person in that we are all just a part of the One Mind which is God. By operating at this level of consciousness when making decisions, we are being guided by the one, single truth. When operating at the level of conscious mind, we are separate from this One Mind of God and therefore prone to error in our judgements. In this light, I would have to assume that the forming of conscience is a training of the conscious mind to reflect, or be in sync with the truth known inherently at the subconscious level.
Rudy,

As a Physician, trained hypnotherapist and student of General Semantics, NLP and Neurosemantics I believe that you may want to consider that there is only one mind and not two. Within your mind you have access to stored information by recall and Imagination as a source of information. It is what you are aware of and what you are not aware of. What you are aware of or conscious also directs the subconscious and provides information for change thus the forming.

How do you know we do not reason subconsciously? We reason consciously to engage what we are not aware of and change what we are not aware by reasoning it to acceptance.

While you say we are prone to distortion and error a tenet of NLP is that at the submodality level or the first area of forming thought after taking information in via our senses we all have filters or things like distortion, generalities, deletions that operate to filter the information to the meta levels and in fact what you call subconscious is actually at a higher level of conscience than conscience.

Things that are stored in your subconscience are not necessarily unavailable and you can retrieve them consciously through self reflective thinking. What you reason to be acceptable consciously gets stored subconsciously as a value and in that you are forming your conscience.

Now concerning the link to the eternal as it regards your conscious and subconscious I don’t know. There are paradigms of the collective subconscious and collective conscious.

I would imagine that any suggestion to believing that your created subconscious is tapped into the almighty would only be, in my opinion, when filled with grace, for if you are to mingle sin with that which is not sin would not make sense, now would it?
 
I wonder why I recall Henry Ford’s famous saying: “You can buy a car of any color, as long as it is black”.
Really?
he could well have said, 'you can buy a car of any make/brand, as long as it is a FORD!
 
These kinds of sentiments (which are encountered practically everywhere) is exactly why I find the CCC worse than useless for the vast majority of people.
i think that ccc means cathecism of catholic church…

in the light of the fact that the majority of catholics have never read the manual and would not want to, i have to disagree/agree with you thus: …we find the ccc a little less than useless for the vast majority of catholics WORLDWIDE.
 
We should follow our conscience, BUT we are obliged to form our conscience to be in accord with the Church. If our conscience tells us that something is morally right and the Church says that it is morally wrong, we should NOT follow our conscience, but obey the Church, since we are not infallible. Of course our conscience can err. Because of our sinfulness we can distort our conscience. We can even kill it entirely!
my earlier reply is based on the assumption that you know that THE WORD OF GOD is SACROSANCT; it follows, that our conscience would have to necessarily be subservient or subordinate or in total obedience, to Scripture, to the extent or degree we understand it, and as inspired to us, by the HOLY SPIRIT.
I AFFIRM AND CONFIRM THAT THE ETERNAL WORD OF GOD IS INFALLIBLE.
hopefully i am right and stand corrected in my responses, and shall be thankful to know of any statement that is a deviation from Scripture.

ty

dominic
 
actually i was responding in relation to a “boarder’s”, ‘ARTICLE’, so the questions or replies were directed to her/him…
anyway, i understand that we have the FREEDOM to choose GOD or the devil (evil), just as the devils had earlier…
finallly, to be brief, WHO IS THE CHURCH?
Wisedom,

The proper question would be “What is the Church”…

Your Catechism will explain this.
 
i think that ccc means cathecism of catholic church…

in the light of the fact that the majority of catholics have never read the manual and would not want to, i have to disagree/agree with you thus: …we find the ccc a little less than useless for the vast majority of catholics WORLDWIDE.
Wisemdome,

The Catechism is not useless, you will find many reading it and it appears that you do not. I can provide you a link. Explain why you appear not to have read it and why you say it is useless.
 
Rudy,

As a Physician, trained hypnotherapist and student of General Semantics, NLP and Neurosemantics I believe that you may want to consider that there is only one mind and not two. Within your mind you have access to stored information by recall and Imagination as a source of information. It is what you are aware of and what you are not aware of. What you are aware of or conscious also directs the subconscious and provides information for change thus the forming.

How do you know we do not reason subconsciously? We reason consciously to engage what we are not aware of and change what we are not aware by reasoning it to acceptance.

While you say we are prone to distortion and error a tenet of NLP is that at the submodality level or the first area of forming thought after taking information in via our senses we all have filters or things like distortion, generalities, deletions that operate to filter the information to the meta levels and in fact what you call subconscious is actually at a higher level of conscience than conscience.

Things that are stored in your subconscience are not necessarily unavailable and you can retrieve them consciously through self reflective thinking. What you reason to be acceptable consciously gets stored subconsciously as a value and in that you are forming your conscience.

Now concerning the link to the eternal as it regards your conscious and subconscious I don’t know. There are paradigms of the collective subconscious and collective conscious.

I would imagine that any suggestion to believing that your created subconscious is tapped into the almighty would only be, in my opinion, when filled with grace, for if you are to mingle sin with that which is not sin would not make sense, now would it?
I did not make the claim that the subconscious did not reason. I merely interpreted what Wisedom was saying. But…

My understanding is that NLP in part treats the prime directive as a method of change. The prime directive being that which is designed to run and protect the body and bring to fruition the beliefs of the person… “as a man thinks, so is he…” The (admittedly brief) NLP I’ve researched taught that the subconscious mind will carry out whatever you give it until manifestation. By changing the belief while honoring the prime directive, you can literally change who you are. When the beliefs are flawed, the subconscious carries the belief and creates the life circumstances to support it. As Ernest Holmes states in his book on the subconscious mind, it is as the intelligence of the soil that carries forth the seed whether wheat or weed. It matters not nor does it distinguish. Whatever you give it, it will act out. Hence, the reason so many people have saboteur patterns in their behavior that everybody can recognize but the person himself. Surely with your training you see people who carry out self-destructive patterns according to their own flawed maps. It is in the NLP presuppositions that if you change the map and give the person a better way to achieve the same results, that person will change.

Now, you say that the subconscious is a higher level of mind that can reason. That statement really does not conflict with the opinion that the subconscious will carry out its directive. That directive being in this case to find a solution to a problem. So what directs the subconscious mind to reason in one case and not the other? Why can it not figure this out on its own and save a world of people from themselves and their destructive thinking patterns?

Being tapped into the almighty through the subconscious does not necessarily have to be only in a state of grace, as God is never away from us, we are away from God in sin. Isn’t this a foundational teaching of the church, that God is always with us, we just turn from God when we sin? How can God not be in us at any given moment? Where can we go to leave Gods presence? So then it would all have to come down to a state of being, either in sync with God or not. In essence, we are always in Gods presence, we just cannot experience or express it, because we have chosen not to see Him. I don’t remember which of the saints described Hell as a state of being in the presence of God and not being able to receive or reciprocate his love. Then hating ourselves and Him for being in such a state. That would mean that even in hell we cannot leave the presence of God. But we cannot appreciate or enjoy it either.

I understand that this is all a far cry from Catholicism, but none the less, interesting to ponder. So I am left with the questions, is mind separate from spirit and where does God engage us, at what level? Surely no matter what part of us we look to, we can find his presence if we are in harmony with him, including the mind.

I also reserve the right to be wrong on any of the above statements concerning NLP. It has been a while, and my memory may need refreshing.
 
Wisemdome,

The Catechism is not useless, you will find many reading it and it appears that you do not. I can provide you a link. Explain why you appear not to have read it and why you say it is useless.
that is to be taken with a pinch of salt or not seriously…i think that 99 % of lay people here, do not or have not read it…catechism is limited upto the school level,there is no obligation that we must read it…
as for me, even were we to read it, with all its rules, regulations, clauses, it would require a whole lifetime at the end of which we will still not know the abc of it…just like any legal acts, rules, etc…couched in a terminology that is beyond one’s comprehension…
most importantly, i would prefer, or rather desire to enter Heaven with a heart full of, or even a litte of LOVE, than with a head full of theology!

my little knowledge of Catholic faith, as compared to your limitless knowledge, is obtained from the WORD!..and for those who don’t know, the Word is not rooted in or founded or based on catechism!
 
I would imagine that any suggestion to believing that your created subconscious is tapped into the almighty would only be, in my opinion, when filled with grace, for if you are to mingle sin with that which is not sin would not make sense, now would it?

for if you are to mingle sin with that which is not sin would not make sense, now would it? (quote)
**************************

egyptian catholic!

if I have understand the above correctly, I offer this response:

recently a Bishop on tv broadcast, gave an interesting ex. of assimilation that was profound………briefly, when we receive the Body of Christ our body is assimilated into His body and we become a part of Christ and it follows we are like Christ, being a member of his Spiritual Body…here sin mingles with holiness and we become holy, or are purified!!..is this nonsense?
As regards the natural assimilation of food into our body, quite the reverse takes place, which explanation is not being given, because it is or should be obvious………
 
Wisedom,

The proper question would be “What is the Church”…

Your Catechism will explain this.
are you questioning me?

in many ways, or at least in some ways, or most surely in this (way), i am reminded of St. Saul, when you refuse or fail to answer my question with the pronoun Who…

i can foresee what your reply would be…
 

hi
in cases where there is confusion, it is better to go with our CONSCIENCE; where there is conflict between one’s conscience and the teaching of the Church, we are entitled to listen to (obey) our conscience, for the former (conscience) never errs, being the VOICE OF GOD, within us.
one must also take into account and believe in the indefatigable and limitless mercy of God and not worry too much about doubts about mortal sin.

dominic.
The Church speaks with the authority of God. If one thinks their conscience is superior to that then one is mistaken.
 
Yes Jesus founded a Church and gave her authority (Peter and the Apostles and their successors) to teach etc down through the ages. We are to form our conscience according to such teaching.
 
The Church speaks with the authority of God. If one thinks their conscience is superior to that then one is mistaken.
Yes Jesus founded a Church and gave her authority (Peter and the Apostles and their successors) to teach etc down through the ages. We are to form our conscience according to such teaching.
Admittedly, we see less than christian acts in the history of the church that were intended to further and protect the faith. So it is without doubt that Jesus conferred authority on the church, but without a deeper understanding of some of these rules, they can seem a bit arbitrary. Looking in the Catechism does not always produce a complete or reasonable resolution. While many will follow the teach without question because the church said it on authority, others may need to be able to reason it out to give themselves wholly to the underlying principle. The case I listed above is a perfect example of the teaching sounding like it was designed to satisfy any case, but not fully and reasonably explained. “There is no salvation outside of the church” sounds quite specific and final. And then come the exceptions which seem to contradict the dictate.
 
Admittedly, we see less than christian acts in the history of the church that were intended to further and protect the faith. So it is without doubt that Jesus conferred authority on the church, but without a deeper understanding of some of these rules, they can seem a bit arbitrary. Looking in the Catechism does not always produce a complete or reasonable resolution. While many will follow the teach without question because the church said it on authority, others may need to be able to reason it out to give themselves wholly to the underlying principle. The case I listed above is a perfect example of the teaching sounding like it was designed to satisfy any case, but not fully and reasonably explained. “There is no salvation outside of the church” sounds quite specific and final. And then come the exceptions which seem to contradict the dictate.
Tis not really a question of rules. But of truth. Can something be misunderstood by someone? Certainly. Have Christians sinned? Yes. Did Judas the Apostle betray our Lord? yes. But such does not change of course the teaching authority of the Church given by Christ.

Yes of course deeper understanding is important – faith seeking understanding. Hence too the reason to go and read the Catechism and the article I posted above. et al.

To understand that the Church does not mean Y by “outside the Church there is not salvation” but means X. Etc
 
Admittedly, we see less than christian acts in the history of the church that were intended to further and protect the faith. So it is without doubt that Jesus conferred authority on the church, but without a deeper understanding of some of these rules, they can seem a bit arbitrary. Looking in the Catechism does not always produce a complete or reasonable resolution. While many will follow the teach without question because the church said it on authority, others may need to be able to reason it out to give themselves wholly to the underlying principle. The case I listed above is a perfect example of the teaching sounding like it was designed to satisfy any case, but not fully and reasonably explained. “There is no salvation outside of the church” sounds quite specific and final. And then come the exceptions which seem to contradict the dictate.
If one thinks their use of reason is better than the Church then one does not believe Christ is the authority behind His Church, right?
 
If one thinks their use of reason is better than the Church then one does not believe Christ is the authority behind His Church, right?
but i do believe that Christ is the authority of the Church, if not the Church itself…

and who, may i know is the Church?

in an earlier lr. responding to a boarder/poster who had doubts whether the sin is mortal or not, it is quite clear to us that it is not mortal because she had no certainty of it and who better than her conscience, can confirm that she has nothing to worry about, in the LIGHT of the boundless or limitless MERCY of God; rather than dwelling on it, which would only attract her to commit greater sins, it is prudent not to experience guilt feelings, but move on to more creative pursuits…for our God is a God of Mercy and his Mercy will prevail over his Justice; were it not so, there is none who will be saved, save the One Boarder/poster on this web-site!
the authorities are notorious for brain-washing the faithful/laity into believing that their petty sins are like SCARLET, while they themselves are immune to or shielded from their sins that are mind-boggling, that are condoned or overlooked by the infallible Church - which has committed grave errors of ommission/commission down the centuries- and attracts wide-spread attention the world over, FOR THE WRONG REASONS, OF COURSE.

also i may add, that my consience agrees with the Catechism maybe to about 99% or less and with the WORD OF GOD to about 99.9% or more!; however i cant be sure, since i have not read the cathechism manual in the first place; does it mean that i would be consigned to eternal fire, for want of full knowledge of Catechism.
TO MY CREDIT, I JUST DO NOT BELIEVE SO.

PRAISE THE LORD!
 
but i do believe that Christ is the authority of the Church, if not the Church itself…

and who, may i know is the Church?
The one established by Christ. There is a visible leader called the Pope.
in an earlier lr. responding to a boarder/poster who had doubts whether the sin is mortal or not, it is quite clear to us that it is not mortal because she had no certainty of it and who better than her conscience, can confirm that she has nothing to worry about, in the LIGHT of the boundless or limitless MERCY of God; rather than dwelling on it, which would only attract her to commit greater sins, it is prudent not to experience guilt feelings, but move on to more creative pursuits…for our God is a God of Mercy and his Mercy will prevail over his Justice; were it not so, there is none who will be saved, save the One Boarder/poster on this web-site!
the authorities are notorious for brain-washing the faithful/laity into believing that their petty sins are like SCARLET, while they themselves are immune to or shielded from their sins that are mind-boggling, that are condoned or overlooked by the infallible Church - which has committed grave errors of ommission/commission down the centuries- and attracts wide-spread attention the world over, FOR THE WRONG REASONS, OF COURSE.
also i may add, that my consience agrees with the Catechism maybe to about 99% or less and with the WORD OF GOD to about 99.9% or more!; however i cant be sure, since i have not read the cathechism manual in the first place; does it mean that i would be consigned to eternal fire, for want of full knowledge of Catechism.
TO MY CREDIT, I JUST DO NOT BELIEVE SO.
PRAISE THE LORD!
Christ said he who hears you hears Me. He who rejects you rejects Me.

Which teaching of Jesus through His Church do you not agree with?
 
“There is no salvation outside of the church” sounds quite specific and final. And then come the exceptions which seem to contradict the dictate.- “Quote”

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“there is no salvation outside of the church” implies that there is salvation outside of the Church,…………thanks to the exceptions.
“Every rule has an exception” and the catholic manual must be having many exceptions, so how can all the rules and regulations apply to ANY OR all cases despotically/absolutely; there should be any number of legitimate exceptional cases, that they may not apply to, or just will not.
 
The one established by Christ. There is a visible leader called the Pope.

Christ said he who hears you hears Me. He who rejects you rejects Me.

Which teaching of Jesus through His Church do you not agree with?
do you not subscribe to Christ’s own words: go into the world and preach the good news to the ends of the earth, are you sure that he excluded all the members of the Church, save the few leaders, who controlled the Church, without knowing the meaning of the Church, from this MISSION?
Are you sure that you do not know that we all are members of the Mystical Body of Christ, and the Body of Christ, is incomplete, without that one member?
As Bl. Mother Theresa said to this effect: each drop of water makes the ocean and the ocean will not be full, but for that drop…(from memory)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top