R
Rence
Guest
Yes, I have that too, thanks 
- Status
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Why is it important for anyone to believe truth? Well, because it is truth.
So itâs not important that you âbelieve what I sayâ as though Iâm only offering my âopinionâ on the topic of the Churchâs position regarding its not having authority to ordain women. Iâm not just saying âI believe X and you should because I say so.â
Iâm saying, "X is the truth, therefore all should believe it. " The truth will always lead us to Jesus (who is All Truth). . .and to reject the truth will only take us AWAY from Himâand I donât want that for anyone.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Umm, Rence⌠.no. Really.
As Catholics, we do need to believe what we are taught as Church dogma and doctrine. We may not fully understand it, but we must believe it. The most we can do is say, âGod, I just donât understand it and in fact, it seems hard to me, but since You have decreed it, I must believe and trust in you to make this clear to me in time.â
âJust need to follow the rules?â Thatâs not true. We do need to follow the rules. . .but youâre putting this in opposition to "believe everythingâ. You canât. Itâs both-and, not either-or.
Otherwise, you become like the Scriptures of "this people honors me with their lips but rejects Me in their heartâ. If youâre âfollowing the rulesâ but in your heart youâre disagreeing with teaching (and even going so far as to say so, both to fellow Catholics and also presenting this as a âlegitimateâ way for a âgoodâ Catholic to act,) youâre presenting an incorrect picture of Catholic teaching, confusing to yourself and to others, and potentially being an issue of scandal. Iâm sure that you have no intention of doing such, and in fact, I totally understand that to the ârugged individualistâ of this age, the Catholic teaching of humility and obedience even when one finds a teaching âhardâ to accept is anathema. In any **other **"worldlyâ arena, weâre supposed to exert âour willâ and âour reasonâ above everything. But. . .hereâs the thing. We canât exert âour will and reasonâ over Godâs.
Iâm sorry, this is not quite correct.
As Catholics, we do need to believe what we are taught as Church dogma and doctrine. We may not fully understand it, but we must believe it. The most we can do is say, âGod, I just donât understand it and in fact, it seems hard to me, but since You have decreed it, I must believe and trust in you to make this clear to me in time.â
âJust need to follow the rules?â Thatâs not true. We do need to follow the rules. . .but youâre putting this in opposition to "believe everythingâ. You canât. Itâs both-and, not either-or.
Otherwise, you become like the Scriptures of "this people honors me with their lips but rejects Me in their heartâ. If youâre âfollowing the rulesâ but in your heart youâre disagreeing with teaching (and even going so far as to say so, both to fellow Catholics and also presenting this as a âlegitimateâ way for a âgoodâ Catholic to act,) youâre presenting an incorrect picture of Catholic teaching, confusing to yourself and to others, and potentially being an issue of scandal. Iâm sure that you have no intention of doing such, and in fact, I totally understand that to the ârugged individualistâ of this age, the Catholic teaching of humility and obedience even when one finds a teaching âhardâ to accept is anathema. In any **other **"worldlyâ arena, weâre supposed to exert âour willâ and âour reasonâ above everything. But. . .hereâs the thing. We canât exert âour will and reasonâ over Godâs.
A
Advocatus_Fidei
Guest
Catholicism is a set of beliefs, all religions are, you canât be a Catholic and not believe what Catholics believe, it is what we believe that makes us who we are.
It is not important for you to believe what I say, but I think once you grasp the fact that it is God who speaks through the Church the importance of accepting what the Church says becomes obvious.
It is not important for you to believe what I say, but I think once you grasp the fact that it is God who speaks through the Church the importance of accepting what the Church says becomes obvious.
R
Rence
Guest
Originally Posted by Rence
Nope. I said I donât believe it, that Iâm not convinced. Therefore it is neither truth nor lie, but merely something I donât understand, or accept. Ah. HERE is the problem. Let me see if I can make it clear.
Tantum_Ero says:
THAT is your difficulty. You see, something does not âbecomeâ truth (or lie) simply based upon your understanding or acceptance. I think you actually know this but you expressed it in a way that is confusing. . . as if you actually thought that so long as you donât âmake the judgmentâ on a concept, it isnât truth or lie. And of course, that isnât correct. The teaching of the Church is truth. Now, you can be, and you are, questioning the teaching. . .and you âcanâ in the sense of saying, âGee, I donât fully understand this.â But you canâtâreally, you canâtâsay, "Because I donât understand or accept it, it isnât a truth, and it isnât a lieâ.
**Below is one of my posts, one of the ones that propagated so many questions for the purpose of clarification. I did say that I didnât understand it. Many times. And I never said it wasnât the truth. I Said I didnât understand or accept it. See one of the posts. So, I have remained unchanged in my position. **
Nope. I said I donât believe it, that Iâm not convinced. Therefore it is neither truth nor lie, but merely something I donât understand, or accept. Ah. HERE is the problem. Let me see if I can make it clear.
Tantum_Ero says:
THAT is your difficulty. You see, something does not âbecomeâ truth (or lie) simply based upon your understanding or acceptance. I think you actually know this but you expressed it in a way that is confusing. . . as if you actually thought that so long as you donât âmake the judgmentâ on a concept, it isnât truth or lie. And of course, that isnât correct. The teaching of the Church is truth. Now, you can be, and you are, questioning the teaching. . .and you âcanâ in the sense of saying, âGee, I donât fully understand this.â But you canâtâreally, you canâtâsay, "Because I donât understand or accept it, it isnât a truth, and it isnât a lieâ.
**Below is one of my posts, one of the ones that propagated so many questions for the purpose of clarification. I did say that I didnât understand it. Many times. And I never said it wasnât the truth. I Said I didnât understand or accept it. See one of the posts. So, I have remained unchanged in my position. **
R
Rence
Guest
I am Catholic, and I still would love it if women were to be ordained as priests. Really, itâs not your place to judge meâŚ
R
Rence
Guest
So when the Church makes mistakes or bad decisions, or behaves in a cruel way, we accept that as handed down by God? Really? Iâm sorry, I donât think thatâs true.
A
Advocatus_Fidei
Guest
Iâm not judging you I am explaining to you that to be Catholic you must believe as Catholics believe, the definition of a Catholic is someone who believes as the Catholic Church teaches.
A
Advocatus_Fidei
Guest
The Church does not make mistakes in matters of Faith and Morals as it is protected by the Holy Spirit.
You are basicly saying that every Catholic from Christ through 2000 years till our present time are wrong, and you know better. Who are you to judge them all?
C
crazzeto
Guest
Yep, this is another trap of modern thought which people fall into. The Church is protected from error:
drbo.org/chapter/47016.htm
From the Catechism:
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
this is an example when the Church begin allowance for changes.
this was an interview by CNN on women being ordained as priest in the CC. Sungenis and howarth.
**HOWARTH: Well, in practice, however, our church goes through many changes, and they generally well up from the ground, so to speak.
We started out not permitting women to serve on the altar, and over time we gradually introduced that, until the point of which the pope said, oh, sure, you can have girls on the altar. So, thatâs a very minor example of change.
But we do things sacramentally in practice, and often the teaching follows the actual implementation.**
catholicintl.com/epologetics/dialogs/priesthood/priesthood-cnn.htm
this was an interview by CNN on women being ordained as priest in the CC. Sungenis and howarth.
**HOWARTH: Well, in practice, however, our church goes through many changes, and they generally well up from the ground, so to speak.
We started out not permitting women to serve on the altar, and over time we gradually introduced that, until the point of which the pope said, oh, sure, you can have girls on the altar. So, thatâs a very minor example of change.
But we do things sacramentally in practice, and often the teaching follows the actual implementation.**
catholicintl.com/epologetics/dialogs/priesthood/priesthood-cnn.htm
R
Rence
Guest
A
Advocatus_Fidei
Guest
The Pope cannot err on this issue Rense. Even bad Popes cannot introduce false teachings when it comes to Faith and Morals because God does not allow it, they can set bad examples but they cannot officially promulgate false doctrines. Furthermore this teaching concerning the Priesthood has been the teaching since the very beginning of the Church till our present day its not a case of just one Pope making a decision it has been the teaching since Christ founded the Church.
R
Rence
Guest
But why not? If the Pope can err in other areas and fall to his human nature, why canât he? Why canât the Pope read something and say, âwell Iâll be durned, I didnât see that! I think it means this instead.â
I mean, for years and years Mary Magdalene was taught to us as being a Prostitute but with more reasearch and reading and study, in the 60s they took that back and said that the prostitute in question was not Mary Magdalene, but different woman. Thatâs a big errorâŚif they can make that error, and fix it with more reading and reflecion, then why canât they?
R
Rence
Guest
If the Pope decreed that it was right and proper to burn someone at the stake for not agreeing with the Church, how is that not erring in morals?
A
Advocatus_Fidei
Guest
R
Rence
Guest
Thank you for the link, I appreciate it
A
Advocatus_Fidei
Guest
Did the Pope decree that?
R
Rence
Guest
Quote:Originally Posted by Rence
If the Pope decreed that it was right and proper to burn someone at the stake for not agreeing with the Church, how is that not erring in morals?
If the Pope decreed that it was right and proper to burn someone at the stake for not agreeing with the Church, how is that not erring in morals?
Thatâs what I was told in Theology class. If not the Pope, who could have? Who did? and if the Pope didnât sanction it, what did he do about it?
S
StillWondering
Guest
Would you grab us a citation that shows this decree?
- Status