The Crisis in the Catholic Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter oppositeman13
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It’s the Pope’s job.
There is no scandal in trying to learn something. Not in trying to teach something. He has the authority to do both. Before people get all bent, maybe they should read, listen, and pray.
The document is meant for the Bishops. Not for laymen to murmur about, as PO said.
People are fast forwarding to “worst case scenario” and speculation.
The Pope is not advocating anything contrary to solid Catholic teaching. This is a smear tactic form those who simply don’t like him or the choices he has made on appointments and reassignments.
Look at the list of people who are “confused”. They are all people that the Pope has dealt with regarding their jobs.
Starting a panic in the Church is not good.
Pope Francis will speak. When he is ready.
 
pianistclare said:
The document is meant for the Bishops. Not for laymen to murmur about, as PO said.
Click to expand...
This is not true. The document was addressed to the lay faithful just as much as it was addressed to the Bishops. It is important for the Pope to understand how this document is being received by those to whom it is addressed.
 
oppositeman13 said:
Pope does not have the authority to teach contrary to official catholic teaching.
Click to expand...
Absolutely true, although when that is happening just begs the question, especially considering his role of being the “official” in official Catholic teaching, though I am betting you are thinking more of traditional Catholic teaching.
 
Last edited:
pnewton said:
Absolutely true, although when that is happening just begs the question, especially considering his role of being the “official” in official Catholic teaching, though I am betting you are thinking more of traditional Catholic teaching.
Click to expand...
Sir - I would like to know if you agree with Dr. Feser - would you mind reading what he says? Because if I understand what you are saying then I would say you are absolutely wrong - or Dr. Feser is wrong and I really doubt that since he is a respected catholic philosopher and teacher.
 
Last edited:
I do not read blogs people link here. I will read Church documents or clergy. But the problem with reading and communicating the way you suggest is that it is not a dialogue. I read the first few paragraphs and agreed with everything he said. If he adds new premise later on, I may or may not agree with it. Surely you are not claiming blogger infallibility.

I do not have enough time to let people here dictate huge chunks of my time to further their desire to persuade others to agree with them. Now if you will narrow it down to one point, that would be helpful.
 
It was once official Church teaching that the remarried are excommunicated and can never receive Communion.
So am a little confused why you assume Pope Francis may not be doing his job.
 
This might offer insight.

An intellectual debate with an audience of 2100 who decide.

 
That was a good show, although it was not a fair fight.

None of them are great intellectuals by any means but two very eloquent and well known anti-theist rhetoricians vs an eccentric MP and a bishop who doesn’t seem to have a confident grasp of English?

I assume the Church can put up better defenders than that.
 
Last edited:
that is right I believe - one’s conscience which can and is infected with satan, cannot have primary consideration above official catholic dogma, doctrine, and teaching. We all may have to accept something that our church says is true regardless of what we personally think. When this happens we should automatically consider ourselves in error and take it to intense pray and beg our Lord to teach us His Truth.
 
oppositeman13 said:
… one’s conscience … cannot have primary consideration above official catholic dogma, doctrine, and teaching. We all may have to accept something that our church says is true regardless of what we personally think.
Click to expand...
Sounds extreme to me.
A certain conscience must be followed whether in error or not.
The difficulty, if any, is only in determining whether our conscience is certain or doubtful in concrete situations. Alleged variance with Church teaching does not mean that conscience cannot be certain or as well informed as is humanly possible.

To think otherwise is to believe in totalitarianism…something the Church is not promoting.
 
Last edited:
oppositeman13 said:
When this happens we should automatically consider ourselves in error and take it to intense pray and beg our Lord to teach us His Truth.
Click to expand...
BlackFriar said:
A certain conscience must be followed whether in error or not.
Click to expand...
You may be thinking of divergent circumstance. Obedience of certain conscience is applied universally, outside the Church. However. part of our faith in the Church is to have enough faith to accept at least with the assent of will that which the Church has declared as dogma. A person who cannot do that for the sake of conscience has a deficiency in the Catholic faith that should be addressed first, or is not a Catholic.
 
pnewton said:
You may be thinking of divergent circumstance. Obedience of certain conscience is applied universally, outside the Church. However. part of our faith in the Church is to have enough faith to accept at least with the assent of will that which the Church has declared as dogma. A person who cannot do that for the sake of conscience has a deficiency in the Catholic faith that should be addressed first, or is not a Catholic.
Click to expand...
What authoritative source is this coming from?

Actually what you state does not really disagree with the standard moral theology principle I provided.
It is quite possible that a certain conscience may require us to leave the Church or at least suffer excommunication, though not Christ. For example, if the Pope forced the issue of infallibility with an excommunication penalty for those who cannot assent.

It may be healthy to recall that memership in the Catholic Church (or any belief organisation with authority) is a fundamental personal choice for those not on a conveyor belt. Certain conscience hopefully directed that choice. If certain misunderstood joining understandings were operating…if these are later adversely clarified…that may well bring about a certain conscience demanding one leave the organisation because God is not really there. It matters not if the certain conscience is mistaken, it must be followed.

The real issue is I suggest:
  1. discerning a certain conscience
  2. properly educating it.
Both would appear to be the work of a lifetime.
 
Last edited:
All of it actually.
I see no obvious reason why practical issues inside the Church of ones affiliation are especially immune to the judgements of a certain conscience anymore than those outside…apart from the obvious “tautological” fact of previous assent already given by that same conscience to already understood matters at time of joining.
However ones understanding, even of the most basic matters, at a past point in history is not always complete or comprehensive. And authority figures are also involved who may later differ substantially in their “clarifications” as to what is of God and what is not so as to cause a crisis of faith for a member.
 
Last edited:
I don’t see why people are afraid of this document. Is it infallible dogma or not?
 
If you are talking about Amoris Laetitia - no it is not - what people are afraid of is the our Pope many be overstepping his authority. To properly understand what a Pope can and can’t do I suggest you read Dr. Feser’s article on the fallibility of a Pope - he is a Catholic philosopher and teacher -

 
Last edited:
It should be noted that not all of us are afraid of it or even concerned about it. There is a small, vocal group in the Church who are concerned about it and do not like the Pope’s handling of it. I have never lost any sleep over it one way or the other.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top