What if you cannot reconcile your conscience with church teaching?

[tigers08]

Like I said, God IS truth - that which is not truth is not of God and He has no part in anything which is not truth.

It’s not so because He said so or not, it’s just inherent in the nature of an omnipotent, omnisicient and omnibenevolent deity (aka a supreme being) that He cannot lie nor deceive (ie by telling half-truth).

And what do you mean He never revealed Himself to anyone? In the person of Jesus He revealed Himself to us all! The Bible is full of people who spoke with Him and physically entered His presence. They weren’t all deluded, y’know.

You believe God is truth and he can never lie. That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true. Not agreeing or disagreeing here, just pointing out that logically, there is no reason that God could not (or would not) lie. And I was saying I don’t think he ever revealed himself to anyone. I don’t think Jesus was divine. How do you know they weren’t deluded? You believe everyone in the Koran was tricked, right? What’s the difference?

 

[tigers08]

I believe that you, of your own free will, have made a choice to walk a very sad
and very lonely dead-end road. God has promised faith to all who ask for it.

I don’t want faith. I’d rather think about what to believe. I think if God gave us our minds, he would want us to use them.

 

[jmcrae]

I don’t want faith. I’d rather think about what to believe. I think if God gave us our minds, he would want us to use them.

Faith is the beginning point of reason. Without faith, we cannot think, because we have nothing to think about.

What I have noticed in my own journey of faith is that the more faith I have, the more I think, and the more rational I become.

But before I began to have faith, I was always stuck on little treadmills of doubt that never went anywhere - is there a God or is there not? Round and round and round we go, until finally I decide, Yes, there is a God, and then all of a sudden, a whole world opens up of more things to think about - what is God like? Is God loving, or indifferent? Powerful, or weak? Intelligent, or random? But these can turn into little treadmills, as well, until you take the answers on faith, and then when you do that, even more things to think about turn up, until the next thing you know, you are reading some really heavy philosophy, and having a really wonderful time playing around with ideas, and figuring things out that you never even knew existed, before. (Did you know that there are nine choirs of Angels?)

It’s a great adventure - you should try it!! :dancing:

 

[estesbob]

What does you conscience tell you about slavery? For the longest time, the Church said it was fine, just like the bible did.

It did? I think if you do a little research you will find that it is not a cut and dried as you thinjk it is. First you need to und

 

[estesbob]

What does you conscience tell you about slavery? For the longest time, the Church said it was fine, just like the bible did.

It did? I think if you do a little research you will find that it is not a cut and dried as you thinjk it is. First you need to understand the distinction between Chatel slavery (as in the African slave trade and slavery as it existed during the time of Christ. you might be suprised to learn that qite often freedmen sold themsleves into slavery as it was the quickest way to advance themsleves. You will also be hard pressed to find the Church ever saying Slavery was “just fine”. In fact the very first european leader to condemn the African slave trade was the Pope.

BTW-welcome to CAF-did the Katy Tigers advance to State this year? My kids were Mustangs.

 

[LilyM]

You believe God is truth and he can never lie. That doesn’t necessarily mean it’s true. Not agreeing or disagreeing here, just pointing out that logically, there is no reason that God could not (or would not) lie. And I was saying I don’t think he ever revealed himself to anyone. I don’t think Jesus was divine. How do you know they weren’t deluded? You believe everyone in the Koran was tricked, right? What’s the difference?

Yes - if you believe in an omnibenevolent deity then yes, God can’t lie. If you believe in a deity who ISN’T omnibenevolent (in other words who sometimes wishes ill on people) then you don’t in fact believe in a deity at all, but a devil.

There was no ‘everyone’ in the Koran. Mohammed went to a cave on his own and allegedly saw the angel Gabriel there. He convinced everyone else that he had seen Gabriel, sure.

But Mohammed certainly didn’t convince anyone that he rose from the dead, or that he raised others from the dead, walked on water, turned bread and wine into his body and blood - nor that he was God incarnate. That takes some doing. Jesus did it.

And it takes much more doing for billions of people to still believe it 2,000 years later. How many people still believe in the old Norse or Egyptian or Roman gods, hmmm?

 

[catharina]

Yes - if you believe in an omnibenevolent deity then yes, God can’t lie. If you believe in a deity who ISN’T omnibenevolent (in other words who sometimes wishes ill on people) then you don’t in fact believe in a deity at all, but a devil.

There was no ‘everyone’ in the Koran. Mohammed went to a cave on his own and allegedly saw the angel Gabriel there. He convinced everyone else that he had seen Gabriel, sure.

But Mohammed certainly didn’t convince anyone that he rose from the dead, or that he raised others from the dead, walked on water, turned bread and wine into his body and blood - nor that he was God incarnate. That takes some doing. Jesus did it.

And it takes much more doing for billions of people to still believe it 2,000 years later. How many people still believe in the old Norse or Egyptian or Roman gods, hmmm?

Similar thought in reference to tiger’s posts. The Greek gods were well-known for their omnipotence and their trickery/duplicity. These “gods” with the Roman, Norse, Egyptian and animist gods are ideas modelled on humanity and the limitations of humanity.

In fact, God is all good. God is all powerful and all loving. In Scripture, God is defined as love; Love is patieint, love is kind, etc… We are to model ourselves in the image of God since we were created in the image of God. We cannot model or “create” a God to suit our own fantasies. God, through revelation, has given us truth. Without faith, we wander blinded and uncertain.

 

[tigers08]

Faith is the beginning point of reason. Without faith, we cannot think, because we have nothing to think about.

What I have noticed in my own journey of faith is that the more faith I have, the more I think, and the more rational I become.

But before I began to have faith, I was always stuck on little treadmills of doubt that never went anywhere - is there a God or is there not? Round and round and round we go, until finally I decide, Yes, there is a God, and then all of a sudden, a whole world opens up of more things to think about - what is God like? Is God loving, or indifferent? Powerful, or weak? Intelligent, or random? But these can turn into little treadmills, as well, until you take the answers on faith, and then when you do that, even more things to think about turn up, until the next thing you know, you are reading some really heavy philosophy, and having a really wonderful time playing around with ideas, and figuring things out that you never even knew existed, before. (Did you know that there are nine choirs of Angels?)

It’s a great adventure - you should try it!! :dancing:

You don’t have to have faith to think about these things. I think about all that too, but I’m not going to blindly believe one way or the other just because some organization and their book say it’s true.

 

[tigers08]

Yes - if you believe in an omnibenevolent deity then yes, God can’t lie. If you believe in a deity who ISN’T omnibenevolent (in other words who sometimes wishes ill on people) then you don’t in fact believe in a deity at all, but a devil.

Omnibenevolence is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as “unlimited or infinite benevolence”. It can mean perfectly just, all-loving, fully merciful, perfect goodness, etc. There is no qualification that God can’t lie in order to be all of these things. What if revealing his true nature to us caused us harm? All of this is completely hypothetical obviously, and I’m not saying I believe God lies, I’m just saying that omnibenevolence doesn’t mean He can’t lie.

Personally I don’t think he lies or tells the truth. I don’t think he revealed himself.

There was no ‘everyone’ in the Koran. Mohammed went to a cave on his own and allegedly saw the angel Gabriel there. He convinced everyone else that he had seen Gabriel, sure.

But Mohammed certainly didn’t convince anyone that he rose from the dead, or that he raised others from the dead, walked on water, turned bread and wine into his body and blood - nor that he was God incarnate. That takes some doing. Jesus did it.

Mohammed convinced people he split the moon in half, multiplied food and water, made rain, made a tree cry, healed people, made a wolf talk, etc.

And it takes much more doing for billions of people to still believe it 2,000 years later. How many people still believe in the old Norse or Egyptian or Roman gods, hmmm?

How many people believe Judaism or Islam? Neither the number of people that believe something nor how old the belief is has anything to do with whether it’s right or not.

 

[tigers08]

It did? I think if you do a little research you will find that it is not a cut and dried as you thinjk it is. First you need to understand the distinction between Chatel slavery (as in the African slave trade and slavery as it existed during the time of Christ. you might be suprised to learn that qite often freedmen sold themsleves into slavery as it was the quickest way to advance themsleves. You will also be hard pressed to find the Church ever saying Slavery was “just fine”. In fact the very first european leader to condemn the African slave trade was the Pope.

I know they never came out and said “Slavery is OK”. But their lack of definitive action against slavery speaks volumes on their opinion of it. And I know there are instances when Popes have condemned slavery, but if this was their true beliefs they would have added it to dogma much earlier.

BTW-welcome to CAF-did the Katy Tigers advance to State this year? My kids were Mustangs.

Thanks, and yep, we’re playing Pflugerville Saturday in the Championship.

 

[jmcrae]

You don’t have to have faith to think about these things. I think about all that too, but I’m not going to blindly believe one way or the other just because some organization and their book say it’s true.

Obviously not. I didn’t, either. I believe it because I found it to be true. But I didn’t find it to be true until I gave it a chance, to see if things would still make sense. I “took a leap of faith,” so to speak.

(The same leap of faith I take every time I switch on my computer, TV set, or lights - you can only read so many books on electricity before you decide, either it works, or it doesn’t, so, let’s see what happens! :newidea: )

 

[StevenFrancis]

Hi everyone…

It’s a simple question really…what if:

You cannot reconcile your conscience with church teaching?​

and you:

know you are morally obliged to follow you conscience (at all times?)

have fully, or to the best of your ability, informed your conscience

have read book after book and tried discussing this issue around other topics

have gone away from the forums for months to think and still feel the same way, but know that the church does not teach how you feel you should act on an issue
S

It’s not a simple question. It is the most complex question that man as a being is faced with. You need to pray, and in the end allow the Lord to guide you. If you don’t like the answer he gives, it’s still His answer.

You are the one accountable for you to the Lord God at the end of time, and ultimately, you have the free will and ability to disregard the Church’s teaching on any issue. I have not read through all the traffic on this thread, so for all I know you’ve already had this pointed out many times already, but faithful believing Catholics are set on the teachings of the Church. Period. It is from the FAITH that they have developed through life experiences and the teachings of the Church. They are not going to change their mind. So, your purpose isn’t to try to get Catholics to believe as you do on some topic or another, correct? You haven’t even posted the topic, so you already know the Church position on whatever it is. You not only already KNOW the Church teaching on the topic, but are unbudgably convinced that your “conscience” is correct. So, I guess, I’m a little puzzled what you are asking/stating? Is it rhetorical? Do you want to know why or how those with faith have it, and why we accept the whole slate of teachings, even if we have heartburn with some of it, sometimes?

The ultimate submission to doctrine is based on faith in the source of the doctrine. The source of the doctrine for the Church is very very good. Perhaps the best so far in man’s history. The Church has a magesterium to (a.) keep the teachings pure, and (b.) to keep them relevantly applied to new problems in humankind as they arise. The governing principles don’t change. The situations to which those principles are applied change steadily, so it’s all the more important to have a source you can trust. Your conscience is partially innate and partially formed. The innate part contains the basic moral codes that should be applied to the formed part of conscience. But the formed part can be tampered with through immoral conditioning, thereby setting up internal conflict. The innate part, for our conversation’s purposes, could be summed up probably in the 10 commandments. The formed part of conscience is from the people who told you how to apply those commandments to your living affairs.

Fortunately, you can pray for the conditioned conscience to be vetted against the innate conscience, and generally, if you’re prepared to accept God’s answer, with faith, regardless of the answers’ appeal to your vanity, God will provide.

This love and trust, (faith), is not willy nilly. It is because the Church position has proven to be right so many times, even in times when I THOUGHT I had a better way, that they have earned my faith and trust. Sadly, like Thomas, I had to actually see a thing or two before I got the message, but the end result is I now have faith. Trust God. Trust his Church. Pray and discern.

I don’t know what you’re particular dilemma is. I’d be happy to try to help you see the truth of the Church stance on any given issue using their documents and guidance via PM if you’d like. If you don’t trust it, however, and you’ve resolutely made up your mind on whatever it is, then, I’m unclear what you’re after with your post. Please don’t take this wrong. You’ve said yourself you’ve been here on these forums, then gone away and come back. You know what to expect from Catholics on the matter, whatever it may be. I promise you, no serious Catholic Christian is going to have had a change of heart all of a sudden and say: “Gee, you know, you’re right…hey…how about you go ahead and do it your way, and let the Vatican know so they can update the doctrines.” It’s just not going to happen.

I will pray for God to help you with your dilemma, and for your continued and ongoing conversion of heart. Please pray for me as well.

Peace be with you,

Steven

 

[tigers08]

Obviously not. I didn’t, either. I believe it because I found it to be true. But I didn’t find it to be true until I gave it a chance, to see if things would still make sense. I “took a leap of faith,” so to speak.

Oh, I’ve given it a chance. I spent most of my life believing that. It was only when I gave other ideas a chance that everything made sense.

(The same leap of faith I take every time I switch on my computer, TV set, or lights - you can only read so many books on electricity before you decide, either it works, or it doesn’t, so, let’s see what happens! :newidea: )

Assuming the lights will come on when you flip the switch to them isn’t faith. A better metaphor would be to have 1,000 light bulbs in front of you and one light switch. Faith is picking one of those lights and believing with no evidence that that light will come on when you flip the switch. (I’m just talking about the word “faith” here. Many people do have reasons for their beliefs, but then it’s not faith)

 

[jmcrae]

Many people do have reasons for their beliefs, but then it’s not faith)

Of course it’s faith if you know why you believe something. You don’t get to redefine the word “faith” into something that causes people to have to be idiots in order to have faith.

 

[tigers08]

Of course it’s faith if you know why you believe something. You don’t get to redefine the word “faith” into something that causes people to have to be idiots in order to have faith.

I’m talking about the “believing without seeing” definition of faith. Not just “confident belief”. There should really be different words. But I’m not redefining it, just using the definition I see fit in the context of this thread. And I never said having faith makes people idiots. It just makes them incredibly trusting of one set of beliefs without a reason.

 

[catharina]

I’m talking about the “believing without seeing” definition of faith. Not just “confident belief”. There should really be different words. But I’m not redefining it, just using the definition I see fit in the context of this thread. And I never said having faith makes people idiots. It just makes them incredibly trusting of one set of beliefs without a reason.

It sounds as if you don’t grasp the meaning of the virtue of faith.

 

[tigers08]

It sounds as if you don’t grasp the meaning of the virtue of faith.

I think I grasp the meaning, I just don’t see it as a virtue.

 

[jmcrae]

I think I grasp the meaning, I just don’t see it as a virtue.

Christians don’t “believe without seeing.” We believe in order to see. Remember the old song, “I was blind, but now I see!” (Amazing Grace).

Our faith is not about remaining blind; it’s about having the trust to open our eyes and really see what’s going on.

 

[dacoobob]

People like to cite the “doubting Thomas” episode (“Blessed is he who has not seen, and yet has believed”) as evidence that “faith” means “belief without evidence.” But is that really what the Lord was saying? I submit that it was not.

Remember, Thomas was not just some schmo off the street who had never heard of Jesus before and was now asked to believe in His resurrection. No, Thomas was one of the Twelve, one of Jesus’ inner circle of devoted followers, who had been with Him for years. He had heard Jesus’ authoritative teaching, he had witnessed countless miracles and confirmations of His power and mission, he had received His personal assurances that He would be killed and rise again… and yet after His execution, he couldn’t summon the faith to believe that his Rabbi had indeed kept His promise and risen from the dead, until he saw Him in the flesh.

With all that in mind, I think Jesus was saying something like this: “Blessed is he who has not seen [the proof of this **latest miracle], and yet has believed [based on ample past evidence of My trustworthiness and power].”

What do you think? I feel a bit nervous making statements like “I believe Jesus really meant X”… but the above interpretation makes the most sense to me in light of how faith is talked about elsewhere in Scripture. What does the Church say?

 

[dacoobob]

People like to cite the “doubting Thomas” episode (“Blessed is he who has not seen, and yet has believed”) as evidence that “faith” means “belief without evidence.” But is that really what the Lord was saying? I submit that it was not.

Remember, Thomas was not just some schmo off the street who had never heard of Jesus before and was now asked to believe in His resurrection. No, Thomas was one of the Twelve, one of Jesus’ inner circle of devoted followers, who had been with Him for years. He had heard Jesus’ authoritative teaching, he had witnessed countless miracles and confirmations of His power and mission, he had received His personal assurances that He would be killed and rise again… and yet after His execution, he couldn’t summon the faith to believe that his Rabbi had indeed kept His promise and risen from the dead, until he saw Him in the flesh.

With all that in mind, I think Jesus was saying something like this: "Blessed is he who has not seen [the proof of this **latest

miracle], and yet has believed [based on ample past evidence of My trustworthiness and power]."

What do you think? I feel a bit nervous saying things like “Jesus really meant X”… but the above interpretation makes the most sense to me in light of how faith is talked about elsewhere in Scripture. What does the Church say?