To what extent must a Catholic agree with Church politics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FaithBuild18
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you remove those basic precepts of responsibility to the poor you turn your back on what made it so great in the first place - you loose the soul of the system. We have seen it happen with banks - deregulation - they only answer to the stock holder now - all the protection to the system and the people have been removed . What made capitalism so great - which began in early Jewish times is slowly being removed from the system which is making it sole less and the same thing cannot happen to the Church the Holy spirit will not allow it.The teachings of Christ come first - as he said you cannot serve both.
 
We are all required to adhere to the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” in its harmonic wholeness (not just sections that we like), or picking one statement over another because we like it better.
The CCC is from the Magisterium of the Church.
(Not trying to derail the thread or be a troll) but what makes Catholics required to adhere to the Catechism? I mean, I do also, but what makes it necessary to believe what is in it? Would it be part of the ordinary and universal magisterium (and I was told on another thread it wasn’t, so maybe not)? I just don’t understand. :o
 
Even our Pope has said that it is acceptable to vote pro-choice in some cases (washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3534-2004Sep7.html), what you are contesting here is the difference between a good idea and a good set of morals. A Catholic is required to believe that abortion is murder and that stopping abortion is as important as stopping any genocide.

Now if a Catholic were to be convinced somehow that the best path to stopping abortion was one separate from the legal system they could be called foolish or ignorant, but being intelligent and making wise choices is not a requirement of the Church. You for instance purposed the idea that people should not have taxes forced upon them to pay for medical care and safety nets for the less fortunate, yet one could easily point out that without forced payments many people, especially in the highly individualized western society, are not likely going to be giving up X% of their salary. Even I would be tempted to use excuses such as “Well I plan to invest this my business plan and that could result in the employment of one of these needy people down the line” in order to avoid helping to establish an infrastructure that assists the poor. So you say the abortion idea doesn’t seem practical to the point that it can be labeled as being supportive of abortion, but I in turn can say your idea doesn’t sound practical and more than likely enhances the principle of greed.

This is why the Church welcomes discussion, encourages education, and publishes ideas on how to activate its beliefs and social platforms. The Church’s solutions may not always be the best, but they constitute a ration starting platform formed by wise individuals.
NEVER take as true what you read in the mainstream media. They have an agenda and color everything through that.

Killing a child in the womb is an intrinsic evil. Voting for a politician who supports that because you like their interpretation of social justice (which, BTW, is almost never that of the Catholic Church), is NOT justified.
 
FaithBuild18 #1&3
I’ve been informed that a Catholic must adhere to Church teaching, or else they are basically a heretic….what about economic issues? Well what constitutes dissenting? I can’t read all of those documents right now, and being on a forum, I hope somebody can help fill me in on what they say.
And finally, is it really fair to say the Church has a conservative social stance and a liberal economic stance?
These are good questions, and the Church has spoken.

Catholic Social Teaching on economics is not the same as dogma or doctrine on faith and morality.
Popes have warned explicitly against thinking that they have unique insights into specific matters of economic policy:
“If I were to pronounce on any single matter of a prevailing economic problem, I should be interfering with the freedom of men to work out their own affairs. Certain cases must be solved in the domain of facts, case by case as they occur…[M]en must realise in deeds those things, the principles of which have been placed beyond dispute…[T]hese things one must leave to the solution of time and experience.” [Pope Leo XIII. Quoted in The *Church And The Market, Dr Thomas E. Woods, Lexington Books, 2005, p 4].

Pius XI wrote of “matters of technique for which [the Church] is neither suitably equipped nor endowed by office.” Quadragesimo Anno, 41]….“economics and moral science employs each its own principles in its own sphere.” [QA, 42]. The Pope went on to deny that “the economic and moral orders are so distinct from and alien to each other that the former depends in no way on the latter.” [QA, 42].

“It goes without saying that part of the responsibility of Pastors is to give careful consideration to current events in order to discern the new requirements of evangelization. However, such an analysis is not meant to pass definitive judgments since this does not fall per se within the Magisterium’s specific domain.” [John Paul II, *Centesimus Annus, 3. Italics added].

Further, John Paul II adds: “The Church has no models to present; models that are real and truly effective can only arise within the framework of different historical situations, through the efforts of all those who responsibly confront concrete problems in all their social, economic, political and cultural aspects, as these interact with one other. For such a task the Church offers Her social teaching as an indispensable and ideal orientation a teaching which, as already mentioned, recognizes the positive value of the market and of enterprise, but which at the same time points out that these need to be oriented towards the common good.….” [CA, 43. Italics in original].

The huge difference is that rather than the “Word of God”, “The Church’s social teaching proposes principles for reflection; it provides criteria for judgment; it gives guidelines for action:…” [CCC 2423]. Never will anyone find that the social teaching is equated with the Sacred Scriptures as the Word of God.

Surely no Catholic teaching is “liberal” or “conservative” on anything, as these terms are political and may be interpreted in multitudinous ways.
Swiss Guy #22
what makes Catholics required to adhere to the Catechism? I mean, I do also, but what makes it necessary to believe what is in it? Would it be part of the ordinary and universal magisterium (and I was told on another thread it wasn’t, so maybe not)? I just don’t understand.
The Apostolic Constitution by which Bl John Paul II issued the CCC states that it is “a sure and authentic reference text for teaching Catholic doctrine…” There are no serious “mistakes” that misinterpret doctrine or dogma.
That should be enough.
 
FaithBuild 18
Public opposition to the Magisterium is dissent – “The freedom of the act of faith cannot justify a right to dissent. In fact this freedom does not indicate at all freedom with regard to the truth but signifies the free self-determination of the person in conformity with his moral obligation to accept the truth.” Donum Veritatis, (Instruction On The Ecclesial Vocation Of The Theologian) CDF, 1990, 36].
 
(Not trying to derail the thread or be a troll) but what makes Catholics required to adhere to the Catechism? I mean, I do also, but what makes it necessary to believe what is in it? Would it be part of the ordinary and universal magisterium (and I was told on another thread it wasn’t, so maybe not)? I just don’t understand. :o
Legitimate questions like yours, do not derail anything, but deserve an answer.
I don’t know what you read from other threads. Please remember that posts are subject to human error. Most errors are accidental. Occasionally errors can be purposeful.

So please go to the thread under “Evangelization” called “POPES Statements on CCC 2nd Ed

Get your answer directly from Pope John Paul II, and Pope Benedict.
Yes, Catholics are required to adhere to the CCC.
 
Public opposition to the Magisterium is dissent
Not exactly. Opposition to doctrine may be dissent but opposition to prudential judgments is not and since the Magisterium may make both kinds of comments it is incorrect to claim that opposition to anything the Magisterium says is dissent. Regarding this topic, statements from the Magisterium regarding political choices constitute prudential opinions and we have no obligation whatever to accede to them.

Since the Christian revelation tells us nothing about the particulars of contemporary society, the Pope and the bishops have to rely on their personal judgment as qualified spiritual leaders in making practical applications. Their prudential judgment, while it is to be respected, is not a matter of binding Catholic doctrine. To differ from such a judgment, therefore, is not to dissent from Church teaching. (Cardinal Dulles, 2001)

Ender
 
Ender #23
Opposition to doctrine may be dissent but opposition to prudential judgments is not and since the Magisterium may make both kinds of comments it is incorrect to claim that opposition to anything the Magisterium says is dissent.
Yes, public opposition to defined doctrine is dissent, and as explained in post #24, “Catholic Social Teaching on economics is not the same as dogma or doctrine on faith and morality…. The huge difference is that rather than the ‘Word of God’, ‘The Church’s social teaching proposes principles for reflection; it provides criteria for judgment; it gives guidelines for action:…’ [CCC 2423].”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top