Why the Lack of Support & Exodus from the Church

[Spyridon]

But until “everyone” (a “consensus” to me) agrees, we shouldn’t pass a law imposing our morality on others.

That logic fails in a multitude of ways.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

I suppose that if no one can, in principle, ever be correct about “acting as if they are God,” then acting as God becomes a completely null proposition.

Correct. No one should act as if they were God. This has nothing to do with God acting as God. God has communicated his views through natural law and revelation. But communication requires a speaker (God) and a listener (man). If not all men get the message, or twist the message somehow, that’s free will in action.

 

[guanophore]

I’m getting really tired of this. I have said over and over and over: knock yourself out. Lobby. Petition. Give money to candidates. Run for office. Do whatever you can to convince those who believe that abortion is OK that it’s not. But until “everyone” (a “consensus” to me) agrees, we shouldn’t pass a law imposing our morality on others.

I understand your point, but we have other people’s morality imposed upon us daily by law. Christians must now bake cakes for gay weddings, or agree to take photos of their celebrations whether it goes against our beliefs or not.

I work with thugs who believe it is moral to kill their gang enemies, and they do so. They impose their morality on others, not just the victims, but those of us who must deal with the aftermath.

 

[GrandPaRay]

NoelFitz Hi Noel, You are truly a good person. I have tried to go through some of the responses and was tempted to respond but i just could not do what you are doing. It is unbelievable the level of knowledge and opinions that are presented. Searching for truth should be simple, a person makes a claim and it is either true or false. All that is left is to back up the claim. The only way society has progressed is because we have become more educated. The catholic priests seeking truth of reality can claim they started the process years ago with their focus on science. There is a natural conflict that the magisteria (spelling} have over ruled that is hurting the church as a whole. All of the advancements in society and science that have contributed to how good things are now came as a result of the scientific method of evaluating facts or reality. This brings into sharp focus the reason why educated young people are not accepting the traditional approach. I do not think it is too late, but it will be soon enough. Why is there no leadership from the clergy? No one should be afraid to
seek or speak trluth.

 

[HarryStotle]

Anyone who acts as if they are God belongs in an asylum, not in a position of power. Anyone.

You are shifting goal posts here. No one said anything about acting as if they are God, the question was about whether some or many can know with clarity what God wills.

I specifically brought up Jesus Christ as a human who did think he was God and authorized the Church to speak on behalf of God.

Was Christ God become flesh? Or was he a “usurper?”

Did he pass authority to the Apostles, and through them to the Church? Or is the Church also a collection of “usurpers?”

If Christ was God and Christ (God) gave authority to his Church, then the Church has authority from God and it can act in his stead as far as its authority permits.

So did Christ belong in an asylum for thinking he was God?

You said yourself that God gave us revelation and the natural law, which presumably are sufficient to permit most human beings to know what God wills to be the moral law expected of human beings.

There seems to be clear ways for human beings to know what God positively wills and reliably form their consciences with virtual certainty.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

we have other people’s morality imposed upon us daily by law. Christians must now bake cakes for gay weddings, or agree to take photos of their celebrations whether it goes against our beliefs or not.

Guess what? That’s why it’s a court case!!! It’s not clear cut either way. On the one hand, letting people opt out of things that they think make them complicit in immoral acts makes sense. On the other hand, anyone could then use that as an excuse to opt out of serving anyone they didn’t like for all sorts of reasons. Which is the worst evil? That’s why we have courts and judges.

I work with thugs who believe it is moral to kill their gang enemies, and they do so. They impose their morality on others, not just the victims, but those of us who must deal with the aftermath.

And that’s why we have laws–agreed upon by the overwhelming consensus of people–that these things should be illegal. If half the population thought killing opposing gang members was just great, and half thought it was immoral, you’d have the same problem you have with abortion. But that’s not the case.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

You are shifting goal posts here. No one said anything about acting as if they are God, the question was about whether some or many can know with clarity what God wills.

I specifically brought up Jesus Christ as a human who did think he was God and authorized the Church to speak on behalf of God.

Let’s go back and look at the videotape, your posts #258 and 270:

The problem is when you have usurpers who take the role of leadership as if they are God. That is a different story entirely from having God reign as King.

In response to that I wrote post #285: Anyone who acts as if they are God belongs in an asylum, not in a position of power. Anyone.

Actually you are incorrect here. Merely because some are usurpers does not imply that all are.

Was Christ God become flesh? Or was he a “usurper?”

Did he pass authority to the Apostles, and through them to the Church? Or is the Church also a collection of “usurpers?”

I’m sorry, I don’t see any goal posts moving. At some point you are talking about “God reigning as king.” Terrific. We’re talking now about the end of the world, not the present day. I’m not disputing God’s authority, etc. etc.

What I am saying is that anyone who acts as if they are God should be in an asylum. I THINK (could be wrong here) you are saying the Church “thinks it is God.” I addressed that earlier–I disagree. I don’t think the Church has ever thought it WAS God. It may claim to speak for God in certain specific circumstances. But that’s an entirely different thing.

So did Christ belong in an asylum for thinking he was God?

Some would say so, but as Catholics we believe Christ = God. But that’s totally off topic as far as I can see. I’m talking about ordinary people coming along and saying “My conscience is perfectly formed. I know exactly what is moral and what is not. I know God’s mind perfectly. And I am going to use my power to impose my ideas on everyone on earth.” These people are not only wrong, they’re dangerous.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

You said yourself that God gave us revelation and the natural law, which presumably are sufficient to permit most human beings to know what God wills to be the moral law expected of human beings.

There seems to be clear ways for human beings to know what God positively wills and reliably form their consciences with virtual certainty.

Yes. to your first sentence. MOST human beings have a pretty good idea of right and wrong. They differ in details.

No to the second sentence: “clear” ways? “reliably form their consciences with virtual certainty”? You could argue about the meaning of “clear” for a million years. “Reliably form their consciences with virtual certainty”? All you have to do is read the titles of half the threads on this web site–“Is it a mortal sin if I xxx?” “Is xxx a sin?” And 99% of the time it’s just nonsense. They mean well, but there is no way that a reasonable person could agree with these postings; anyone who knows Catholic teachings would say (sarcastically), “Yup. Their consciences are formed with “virtual certainty” and that’s why they have no clue as to what a mortal sin is, or sin in general for that matter.” You may not be such a person, and I certainly am not, but this is my point all along–people are different and believe different things, even if they are the same religion, let alone other religions.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Well, this has all been very charming. But I have broken my long-standing rule: Once I have said what I have to say, I move on. I have said what I have to say many, many times here. There is no point in repeating myself over and over. So I may see you on another thread at some point, but that’s it for me on this one. I’m out.

And my apologies to Noelfitz for taking his original topic way, way off track.

 

[guanophore]

Guess what? That’s why it’s a court case!!! It’s not clear cut either way.

I agree, but the outcome is that those who do not wish to participate in same sex "marriage’ are fined and may need to go out of business. This rule of law has been imposed upon them because the majority, or those in power, are inflicting their morals on the rest of us.

In response to that I wrote post #285: Anyone who acts as if they are God belongs in an asylum, not in a position of power. Anyone.

I think we are talking apples and charcoal. Jesus commissioned the church to act in His power and authority. That, by definition, excludes the Church as a “usurper”.

But I do agree, anyone who acts as if they are God has a mental health problem. The Church acts in the person of Christ, not “as if they are God”.

I don’t think the Church has ever thought it WAS God. It may claim to speak for God in certain specific circumstances. But that’s an entirely different thing.

yes.

anyone who knows Catholic teachings would say (sarcastically), “Yup. Their consciences are formed with “virtual certainty” and that’s why they have no clue as to what a mortal sin is, or sin in general for that matter.”

Good point!

 

[Catfish]

I believe the original question was, Why don’t Catholics get behind and support Catholic political candidates such as Pelosi and Biden? The answer, in my opinion, is because we are voting for the future political ideology of this country, and the two above-mentioned persons have a very liberal philosophy. Many people such as myself are old fashioned Catholics and conservatives, politically speaking. We see the direction that the liberal ideology is taking us, best expressed as a stampede of lemmings racing toward a high cliff to climax in millions of us being pushed, pulled, shoved over the edge to be dashed upon the rocks and drowned in the roaring ocean below. Pretty dramatic, yeah, that is what we see.
Or we can vote for conservative leaders, few as they are, and hope for a better outcome, such as government policy that supports traditional values, individual rights, and freedoms. And yes, we hope to stop the race to the precipice and the inevitable fall.

 

[HarryStotle]

And I am going to use my power to impose my ideas on everyone on earth." These people are not only wrong, they’re dangerous.

I’m not clear that they are any more dangerous than those who say, “We have no idea what God wants, so whatever you choose to do is as good as any other option.”

The truth, simply put, is by definition what God wants. Ergo, we need to have reasonable certainty concerning the truth (i.e., what God wants) before we act.

Everyone who “imposes” their ideas on others is essentially making a claim regarding the truth. That would include you, even when you claim uncertainty – i.e., you are saying something like “It is true that I am uncertain.” At that point, you wouldn’t impose your ideas because as far as you can ascertain, it is true that you are uncertain. However, any ideas that you do try to impose upon others you must necessarily be certain about them, unless you are a sociopath. For example: murder is wrong. You would impose your idea that those who try to commit murder ought to be stopped, even with lethal force where necessary.

This is not a matter of consensus, but of truth. Otherwise, you are merely echoing the sentiments of your society and have no independent means for validating moral claims. You are, then, not an autonomous moral agent, but a crowd-follower.

Whenever you act on the certainty that some thing is true – and that includes when you are certain that you are in a state of uncertainty – you are “acting in the place of God,” i.e., acting from the Truth. You may not want to admit that and you will explicitly deny it, but it is effectively what you are doing.

 

[HarryStotle]

I’m sorry, I don’t see any goal posts moving. At some point you are talking about “God reigning as king.” Terrific. We’re talking now about the end of the world, not the present day. I’m not disputing God’s authority, etc. etc.
…
What I am saying is that anyone who acts as if they are God should be in an asylum. I THINK (could be wrong here) you are saying the Church “thinks it is God.” I addressed that earlier–I disagree. I don’t think the Church has ever thought it WAS God. It may claim to speak for God in certain specific circumstances. But that’s an entirely different thing.

This is the precise point where you shift goalposts.
I never said, “the Church thinks it is God,” I said “acting as if it is God,” meaning acting in the place of God, as his “chief steward.” Notice that scare quotes were used in my post #273.

So this “conclusion” of yours is a straw man:

I don’t think the Church has ever thought it WAS God. It may claim to speak for God in certain specific circumstances. But that’s an entirely different thing.

Your arguments traffic in these subtle shifts of semantics.

 

[GrandPaRay]

Jansobieskilll A mystery will always be a mystery, I agree. Taking anything on faith is foolish when the subject in question can be researched and verified. History has shown us that the church fathers will change as new information becomes available. The good that has come from the catholic religion is because the catholic people are good. My goodness came from my parents and the Nun’s who helped shape our morals. catholic people are great and educated.

 

[NoelFitz]

Catfish
I read here:

‘… we are voting for the future political ideology of this country…’
[/quote]

As an Irish person, not in the US. I would tend to agree with this.

In the 2016 election one candidate was married several times, and seems to be a racist spreading hatred. The other candidate, in very difficult circumstances, remained married to her first husband, and did not discard him when the going was tough. I admire those who are faithful to their marriage vows, ‘for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health’.

This faithful candidate also has a great family. Some time ago with my grand-children I had coffee in our national art gallery in Dublin, where we sat beside an Americasn family and we got talking to them briefly. The mother, Chelsea Clinton (Mrs Mezvinsky) was feeding her two beautiful children, like many a good mother, and it was so impressive to see such a fine young family bringing their children to an art gallery where there was an exhibition of Vermeer paintings, now on loan to a Gallery in Washington (https://www.nga.gov/exhibitions/2017/vermeer-and-the-masters-of-genre-painting.html).

 

[NoelFitz]

GPR,

I agree you definitely seem to have goodness.

The arguments - nature or nurture - are perennial.

You are the most significant contributor here, since you explain how, at least one person, has apparently walked away from the Church.

I am trying to hang on in there, and hope I have not done anything to influence anyone leaving the Church.

I like your style and wish you well.

God bless!

 

[GrandPaRay]

NoelFitz, We just have lived long enough to see the problem. i was raised catholic and will die the way i was raised. i loved my life in the catholic community. i will never give up just because the people i have worked with were great. i am not afraid of facts and truth they make me feel powerful. why can’t the church fathers recognize what is happening and take the lead? we still have a chance but time is quickly passing us by. i haven’t left anything the clergy is stuck in the past. i just wish i could live long enough to help. lets keep in touch

 

[NoelFitz]

NoelFitz, We just have lived long enough to see the problem. i was raised catholic and will die the way i was raised. i loved my life in the catholic community. i will never give up just because the people i have worked with were great. i am not afraid of facts and truth they make me feel powerful. why can’t the church fathers recognize what is happening and take the lead? we still have a chance but time is quickly passing us by. i haven’t left anything the clergy is stuck in the past. i just wish i could live long enough to help. lets keep in touch

GPR,

Thanks again.

I understand that you hope to end up in the Church, because you met good people there, but are critical of the clergy. That position seems very Catholic to me.

You say you are not afraid of facts and truth and they make you feel powerful. My permanent problem is that I cannot see how God can be considered good if hell exists, but that is my problem, not yours or God’s. I also, as a retired scientist, cannot see how science makes us all happy and fulfilled.

In Ireland I am saddened by the huge exodus from the Church, hence this thread.

Let’s remember Julian of Norwich “All will be well, and all will be well and all manner of things will be well”.

 

[GrandPaRay]

I think it is the process of science that is so beautiful. It is the most democratic and not authoritarian which is the problem. Our weaknesses are also beautiful when we can see them and correct our thinking.

 

[davidv]

My permanent problem is that I cannot see how God can be considered good if hell exists,

Does this mean that you think God is not Just? It would seem that it would not be just for those who reject God be rewarded the same as those who accepted and obeyed Him.