Which Church teachings do you struggle to accept?

[Rau]

… If one takes the time to read through my years’ worth of posts here on CAF, I’m sure you’ll see that I’ve been there and done that already.

Grace, I took up the challenge and did review your posts on the subject! . And it appears that even when you previously stated your rationale for favouring the morality of same sex sexual acts and SSM, you declined to engage in any substantive debate or defence of that rationale. To my surprise, I found one of my own posts challenging the bases you put forward in support of your position - but you didn’t reply further (which of course is your right). So, it just seems to me your position in opposition to the Church is one you wish to hold, but not debate. Thus, the reason(s) you find the Church teaching on homosexuality hard to accept are quite unclear to me.

 

[gracepoole]

Grace, I took up the challenge and did review your posts on the subject! . And it appears that even when you previously stated your rationale for favouring the morality of same sex sexual acts and SSM, you declined to engage in any substantive debate or defence of that rationale. To my surprise, I found one of my own posts challenging the bases you put forward in support of your position - but you didn’t reply further (which of course is your right). So, it just seems to me your position in opposition to the Church is one you wish to hold, but not debate. Thus, the reason(s) you find the Church teaching on homosexuality hard to accept are quite unclear to me.

Then you haven’t read all of my past posts, Rau. Again, I responded to the OP’s question because it’s an interesting one and not because debate interests me. That’s a different approach from those here who are ready to engage in argument with others about the Church teachings with which they’re struggling. Notice I even explained earlier in this thread that I am not intending to challenge those who accept the Church’s teachings or the Church herself. Give people some room to breathe and express opinions with which you don’t agree without immediately jumping to convince them they’re wrong. No one here is stupid – we can all read the Church’s documents and theological writings without any help from others.

 

[Rau]

Then you haven’t read all of my past posts, Rau. Again, I responded to the OP’s question because it’s an interesting one and not because debate interests me. That’s a different approach from those here who are ready to engage in argument with others about the Church teachings with which they’re struggling. Notice I even explained earlier in this thread that I am not intending to challenge those who accept the Church’s teachings or the Church herself. Give people some room to breathe and express opinions with which you don’t agree without immediately jumping to convince them they’re wrong. No one here is stupid – we can all read the Church’s documents and theological writings without any help from others.

OK. I just found it odd that you set out a rationale (in another thread) but appeared not to wish to prosecute that argument after it was challenged. I accept that you don’t wish to debate the matter.

 

[gracepoole]

OK. I just found it odd that you set out a rationale (in another thread) but appeared not to wish to prosecute that argument after it was challenged. I accept that you don’t wish to debate the matter.

:tiphat:

If you really want to understand my views, you could always read this post. The only info I might add to what I included there is that I’ve been married to a full-time philosopher for going on 19 years – I am well-versed in philosophy, basic theology, and arguments for and against so-called natural law. And I still struggle with its faults.

God bless, Rau!

 

[JimR-OCDS]

The concept of the Trinity. This is by far the most difficult thing to come to terms with for Jewish and Muslim converts. In Judaism and Islam, God is God, the omnipotent being. Nothing more, nothing less. The idea that God is actually three persons united as one God simply isn’t something that people raised in that school of thought can wrap their heads around. Usually they just think of it as polytheism. While I believe fully now, it was a very sticky issue during my early days as a catechumen.

The best way for me to understand it is, we are made in God’s image body, soul and spirit(when we die).

So God would be one being with three divine persons as follows;

The Father = Soul

The Son Jesus = Body

The Holy Spirit = Spirit

Another way is the way St Patrick used a three leave clover.

Three leaves but one clover.

Jim

 

[Burdock]

Someperson555, homosexuality is NOT a mental disorder, where on earth did you get that from.

 

[kozlosap]

Someperson555, homosexuality is NOT a mental disorder, where on earth did you get that from.

 

[kozlosap]

What a surprise, it’s the stuff that directly affects people, the stuff that directly sets limits on personal freedom. And what explanation do you offer - a reference to the education of people. “How could an educated person accept that stuff”, eh? That’s right up there with catch cry of “marriage equality” and “the right to choose”.

Maybe I should have included cultural differences too. I know there are many varied reasons for believing or not believing in the social dogmas of the Church. Education happens just to be the main sore thumb that stands out. If you use Africa as the third world example and Canada as the Industrialized West example, what stands out to you as the difference in percentages of Catholics who follow (just as an example) the rules on use of ABC?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Maybe I should have included cultural differences too. I know there are many varied reasons for believing or not believing in the social dogmas of the Church. Education happens just to be the main sore thumb that stands out. If you use Africa as the third world example and Canada as the Industrialized West example, what stands out to you as the difference in percentages of Catholics who follow (just as an example) the rules on use of ABC?

A couple of things. Education as a vehicle for Truth or the pursuit of knowledge and Truth is no real education if it does not lead to the Ultimate Truth. For if you are educated in the unholy then how can you claim to know anything? If “education” leads away from God and his Church then it is not education at all but rather indoctrination. Which is a form of ignorance.

Mental and spiritual superiority in the “west” is a lie that all too many of us believe. I’ll pit an African Tribesman against a Jersey shore star, any day. Even on matters of significant importance, like medicine, or theology.

There are many reasons that ABC is practiced and not practiced in certain areas. A big misconception is this has to do with “education” But that is not really the case. It has to do with availability and a culture that thinks sex is some sort of human need that surpasses our other rights and needs every day. But it all goes back to education vs. indoctrination. And what we choose to be indoctrinated into. With ABC, it is the lie of hedonism. Be educated in a lie all you want, it makes one no less ignorant of the Truth.

 

[kozlosap]

A couple of things. Education as a vehicle for Truth or the pursuit of knowledge and Truth is no real education if it does not lead to the Ultimate Truth. For if you are educated in the unholy then how can you claim to know anything? If “education” leads away from God and his Church then it is not education at all but rather indoctrination. Which is a form of ignorance.

Mental and spiritual superiority in the “west” is a lie that all too many of us believe. I’ll pit an African Tribesman against a Jersey shore star, any day. Even on matters of significant importance, like medicine, or theology.

There are many reasons that ABC is practiced and not practiced in certain areas. A big misconception is this has to do with “education” But that is not really the case. It has to do with availability and a culture that thinks sex is some sort of human need that surpasses our other rights and needs every day. But it all goes back to education vs. indoctrination. And what we choose to be indoctrinated into. With ABC, it is the lie of hedonism. Be educated in a lie all you want, it makes one no less ignorant of the Truth.

Why the vitriol against education? So, if you are educated and do not agree absolutely 100% with Church social dogma it’s indoctrination (evidently educated humans cannot think for themselves), but if you are from a third world country with little or no education but do not question Church social dogma, then you are not “indoctrinated”? Personally, I could care less what Jersey Shores people do or think, but I would really prefer that my neurosurgeon be educated and not a witch doctor.
One of the major components, if not the main one, that acceptance of LGBTQ individuals has come so quickly is that personal relationships are evolved. When the perverbial closet was flung open 25 years ago Westerners had family members, friends and bosses who were LGBTQ and the realization came about that there is no differences in our shared humanity. In a place such as Africa where social mores have not changed because of life threatening consequences for gay individuals, society has not changed.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Why the vitriol against education? So, if you are educated and do not agree absolutely 100% with Church social dogma it’s indoctrination (evidently educated humans cannot think for themselves), but if you are from a third world country with little or no education but do not question Church social dogma, then you are not “indoctrinated”? Personally, I could care less what Jersey Shores people do or think, but I would really prefer that my neurosurgeon be educated and not a witch doctor.
One of the major components, if not the main one, that acceptance of LGBTQ individuals has come so quickly is that personal relationships are evolved. When the perverbial closet was flung open 25 years ago Westerners had family members, friends and bosses who were LGBTQ and the realization came about that there is no differences in our shared humanity. In a place such as Africa where social mores have not changed because of life threatening consequences for gay individuals, society has not changed.

If you pulled vitriol against education out of that, then I guess I am just banging my head against a wall.

 

[kozlosap]

A couple of things. Education as a vehicle for Truth or the pursuit of knowledge and Truth is no real education if it does not lead to the Ultimate Truth. For if you are educated in the unholy then how can you claim to know anything? If “education” leads away from God and his Church then it is not education at all but rather indoctrination. Which is a form of ignorance.

Mental and spiritual superiority in the “west” is a lie that all too many of us believe. I’ll pit an African Tribesman against a Jersey shore star, any day. Even on matters of significant importance, like medicine, or theology.

There are many reasons that ABC is practiced and not practiced in certain areas. A big misconception is this has to do with “education” But that is not really the case. It has to do with availability and a culture that thinks sex is some sort of human need that surpasses our other rights and needs every day. But it all goes back to education vs. indoctrination. And what we choose to be indoctrinated into. With ABC, it is the lie of hedonism. Be educated in a lie all you want, it makes one no less ignorant of the Truth.

It must be education since learning is taking place if you believe that ABC is not an impediment to the Truth and, in retrospect, if you believe that using ABC is a mortal sin equivalent to murder, that is also learning. One question to ask - Do you beleive that most Catholic priests, educated in the West, in reality, think it is a mortal sin to use ABC?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

It must be education since learning is taking place if you believe that ABC is not an impediment to the Truth and, in retrospect, if you believe that using ABC is a mortal sin equivalent to murder, that is also learning. One question to ask - Do you beleive that most Catholic priests, educated in the West, in reality, think it is a mortal sin to use ABC?

Yes, I do believe that. I have no idea what your point or insinuation is though.

As a former ABC user I have confessed it hundreds of times to maybe a hundred priests, ranging across 3 diocese. Only a handful probably disagreed with the Church. And only one told me flat out to do it.

 

[Rau]

:tiphat:

If you really want to understand my views, you could always read this post. The only info I might add to what I included there is that I’ve been married to a full-time philosopher for going on 19 years – I am well-versed in philosophy, basic theology, and arguments for and against so-called natural law. And I still struggle with its faults.

God bless, Rau!

Yes, I saw that one. It’s the very post I ‘challenged’ in the other thread, but you didn’t reply further. Hence my comments above.

This points to a similar post of your I challenged
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=12604040&postcount=101

 

[gracepoole]

Yes, I saw that one. It’s the very post I ‘challenged’ in the other thread, but you didn’t reply further. Hence my comments above.

This points to a similar post of your I challenged
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=12604040&postcount=101

Ah, but the same thing happened there that happened here. As I noted on that thread, I only responded because the question asked by the OP “purport[ed] to speak to everyone but really only [spoke] to those who view same-sex marriage as the OP does.” To demonstrate that yes, “[someone] here, that believes in God, actually think that God accepts gay marriage,” I felt a need to post. So again, the point of my post there was not to engage debate. Same thing happened here in this thread, it seems.

Whew. Got that cleared up. And now again, God bless, Rau.

 

[Rau]

Ah, but the same thing happened there that happened here. As I noted on that thread, I only responded because the question asked by the OP “purport[ed] to speak to everyone but really only [spoke] to those who view same-sex marriage as the OP does.” To demonstrate that yes, “[someone] here, that believes in God, actually think that God accepts gay marriage,” I felt a need to post. So again, the point of my post there was not to engage debate. Same thing happened here in this thread, it seems.

Whew. Got that cleared up. And now again, God bless, Rau.

Not cleared up for me! Is there any thread where you prosecuted your argument that God extends his Favour to same sex sexual relationships. Is there any thread where you debated this argument, as opposed to simply expressing it ?

 

[gracepoole]

Not cleared up for me! Is there any thread where you prosecuted your argument that God extends his Favour to same sex sexual relationships. Is there any thread where you debated this argument, as opposed to simply expressing it ?

I meant “cleared up” in terms of understanding why twice I posted about this subject but did not engage you with debate.

And yes, over the past 4 years’ worth of posts, my arguments are in there somewhere. No idea where specifically but I used to get into it with folks around here all the time.

I’m much happier these days since I’ve severely curbed this kind of engagement.

 

[Rau]

I meant “cleared up” in terms of understanding why twice I posted about this subject but did not engage you with debate.

And yes, over the past 4 years’ worth of posts, my arguments are in there somewhere. No idea where specifically but I used to get into it with folks around here all the time.

I’m much happier these days since I’ve severely curbed this kind of engagement.

You’ve debated much on the topic generally Grace, but usually on related issues where your stance was against injustice, hate and thd like (rightly so of course). But I’ve now read a lot of your posts (126 of them mentioning homosexuality), and I find no defence of your fundamental position. You eschew defending it.

Why am I so interested? I think it’s because your avatar/picture is so damn mysterious!

 

[Rau]

It must be education since learning is taking place if you believe that ABC is not an impediment to the Truth and, in retrospect, if you believe that using ABC is a mortal sin equivalent to murder, that is also learning. One question to ask - Do you beleive that most Catholic priests, educated in the West, in reality, think it is a mortal sin to use ABC?

Priests also understand God’s mercy and how an individual’s culpability may be altered by difficult circumstances.

As I read you comments on education, they could be understood to suggest that just as education leads to the extinction of a belief in witches and sorcery, so it eliminates a belief in certain pesky moral truths. For some forms of “education”, that may be directly so. But more likely, the effect is entirely indirect. While education may reveal that there is nothing in sorcery but fear, more generally it exposes the individual to a wide range of cultures, thinking and “opportunity”. These things may well compete with the beliefs engendered through religion.

An education is not incompatible with Chtistian faith.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

Marriage annulments. A couple is married for 15 years and have several children. There is never any question about the validity of the marriage until the wife gets herself a boyfriend while the husband is at work with two jobs trying to support the family. Her new boyfriend convinces her that 15 years ago when she took her marriage vows that she really did not give full consent and that there was something defective about it 15 years ago. She then applies for the annulment and the Church declares that she was never married. Is this the way that Jesus wanted marriage to be set up? And we are told that it is very difficult for a couple to have a valid marriage even if you are married in the Catholic Church. Actually, the statistics show that in many dioceses in the US, 95% of all applications to have your marriage annulled are approved. In some years there have been more than 50,000 marriages declared null and void. The results are that fewer people are getting married these days because even if they do get married in the Catholic Church, 15 years down the line, the Church can declare that they never were really married.

Well, is the above an actual case with accurate facts as you laid out? No need to answer, as it is posed to elicit an analysis.

This recent Q&A on the Apologetics Section below gives us a perspective.

Is there a possibility that the Church Tribunal could mistakenly grant an annulment?