Calling Oneself Catholic While Rejecting Church Teaching

[Lilllabettt]

Geez, what is it now? I alternate between Native American and First Nations. In ten years I will sound like someone's wacky old grandparent that still talks about "that nice coloured man over there" while everyone frantically shushes him.

 

 

If you  really want to show you are being self conscious and respectful you say "first people." Believe it or not, "american indian" has made a strong comeback.

[Credo in Deum]

http://youtu.be/4ZBSGaWrEn4

[superblue]

Listen, no one here is claiming to be a super Catholic. I'm a terrible Catholic! I sin, I'm weak, I fall all the time... but what I don't do is make EXCUSES. I don't say, "Nah, the Church is wrong on that", I say, "I failed and I'm getting my butt to confession!" That's the difference. Weakness is one thing, heresy is another. If you say, "The Church teaches contraception is wrong but the Church is misguided and I feel it's ok," then you're a heretic and not a Catholic. If you say, "The Church teaches contraception is wrong but I used it last night and need to go to confession", then you're an orthodox Catholic whose fallen. So stop confusing the two. There is nothing wrong in defending the doctrines of our holy religion against people who attack it and seek to undermine it from within. If you don't believe, then move along, find a religion that is more consistent with your lifestyle. But if you choose to remain and call yourself Catholic, then strive to live like one!

 

lol I am not confused about anything I am just lucky to be so blessed to finally have found such enlightened perfect individuals as yourselves who truly understand every single detail of the teachings of the church and then furthermore go out of your humble way of life to beat anyone over the head who does not fit into your definition of what " truly being catholic " is.

 

Bravo good sir ! you are living by all the rules and truly understand what it means to be catholic you get a Gold star, and congrats on figuring everything out so us mere peons in the faith can thusly be educated by yourself an the like.

 

 

:notworthy:  grazi grazi

 

 

we need you an the other enlightened ones here to get ahold of as many Catholic teenagers as possible and explain what you all have shared here and also explain to them why the better go with what you say or else, and why having premarital sex is a sin.

 

I just cant figure out why you an your enlightened team are not some kind of religious ed council for so many diocese across the country, they could sure use such brains as yours and others like you.

 

I am still amazed at the self righteous bs that flows on in this thread, but what ever, Thank God the millions of other catholics are too busy not paying attention to this and are actually living the faith and not trivializing their life over the issues here and running around going oh no oh no woe is me.

 

:winner:

 

 

:dead:  yall enjoy the rest of this insane self righteousness that ya'll created, and make sure to pat each other on the back for doing such a great job and knowing the real way to be a catholic, keep up the good fight and keep spreading those labels of unity and healing.

 

:bravo:

 

:rabbit:

[John Ryan]

Alas, it is so difficult to make analogies work.  I was saying that the unitive and procreative aspects of sex are just as much parts of its nature as one's arm's are part of one's body.  I was comparing something abstract to something physical.  I was not claiming that something physical is destroyed in non-procreative sex.  

 

The sex act is not merely something physical.  It has a nature.  It has meaning.  It has ends.  I was using an analogy to something physical to explain these things.

 

I sympathize with the difficult nature of analogies. As the good Hegelian that I am, I definitely believe that there is reason in nature from a philosophical point-of-view. I assent that sex has a nature, a meaning and a telos. I merely disagree what this essence of sexuality is. 

 

Sounds like you're at least making some progress.  I'll keep praying for you.

 

 

If anyone can simply decide for himself which moral teachings to accept and reject, the Church's moral teaching has no real binding authority.  Every man becomes in effect his own little magisterium, which renders the real magisterium pointless.  (Please see my post on the previous page.)

 

I am always welcoming of prayers. Yet, I reject your black and white thinking. The Magisterium has obviously not been pointless in my life, since Roman Catholicism has been a dominant impact on my moral, religious, and philosophical outlook.

 

Thwarting the procreative aspect degenerates sex into a base act. Think about it, putting a condom on means I want the pleasure without the responsibility. I want to gratify my lower self, taste a moment of pleasure, but I don't want to enter into a relationship that would lead to another life sprouting. How about this, if you don't want to use sex for what it's meant for in a marital bond, then don't have sex! I know this will be shocking but guess what, you don't need sex! And if you feel you do, your passions are unbridled, perhaps from too much porn or decades of subtle sexual advertising. 

 

 

No, *you* are the one that is misguided. We're talking about sex and not relationships. Sex is not about the emotions, if it were men would not have to worry about putting on condoms, but it just so happens that for every healthy male this act carries with it an unavoidable and intrinsically connected procreative aspect, so much so that active measures must be taken to reduce it the "emotional" experience you refer to. What does this mean? It means sex is a procreative act, and this is so not most of the time, but *all* of the time. Sex *is* procreative. If you like someone and want to "emotionally connect" but not procreate with them, then sex is not for you! You can emotionally connect by holding hands while walking in the park instead, or drinking a glass of wine while watching Friends. If you do decide to enjoy the pleasure without the responsibility, realize that you are *corrupting* what sex is, and in fact is no longer sex in a formal sense. It's no longer unative either, because deep down there is a selfishness rooted in fulfilling your own desire. So yea, stick to holding hands.

 

 

 

How long has it been, like a week? ;)

 

(against paragraph i.) Does that mean that my putting on a coat on in the winter equals me wanting the pleasure of a winter without the responsibility of the cold?

(against paragraph ii.) I find this kind of narrow interpretation of natural law to be misguided. So, for example, the mouth can be said to have two manifest purposes. The first is eating and the second is speaking. Given the logic you deploy, this should mean that using the mouth for kissing is fundamentally disordered, because it does not coincide with the most fundamental telos of the mouth. The Vatican's argument would be more consistent, then, on this point, if it maintained that contraceptives were immoral for artificially blocking the telos of vaginal penetration, but that oral, anal and manual acts are still natural alternative methods of the sex act, just as kissing is for the mouth; which means that homosexual acts are perfectly acceptable. However, I still reject the argument against contraceptives on the grounds of the multi-teleological nature of the sex act and that we have a vested interest in restraining the procreative and unitive functions of the sex act. 

(against paragraph iii.) Much, much longer than that my friend.

[superblue]

P.S, don't forget to let all the Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists that they are probably going to hell you can inform them that you have plenty of knowledge from your catechism , an doctrine, an tenants ,etc an make sure to show them your badge that authorizes you and forces you to go running around being the police of the Church and defending everything it teaches.

 

They will appreciate way more than myself and the rest of us who have an opinion other than yours.

 

:bounce:

[Credo in Deum]

lol I am not confused about anything I am just lucky to be so blessed to finally have found such enlightened perfect individuals as yourselves who truly understand every single detail of the teachings of the church and then furthermore go out of your humble way of life to beat anyone over the head who does not fit into your definition of what " truly being catholic " is.

 

Bravo good sir ! you are living by all the rules and truly understand what it means to be catholic you get a Gold star, and congrats on figuring everything out so us mere peons in the faith can thusly be educated by yourself an the like.

 

 

:notworthy:  grazi grazi

 

 

we need you an the other enlightened ones here to get ahold of as many Catholic teenagers as possible and explain what you all have shared here and also explain to them why the better go with what you say or else, and why having premarital sex is a sin.

 

I just cant figure out why you an your enlightened team are not some kind of religious ed council for so many diocese across the country, they could sure use such brains as yours and others like you.

 

I am still amazed at the self righteous bs that flows on in this thread, but what ever, Thank God the millions of other catholics are too busy not paying attention to this and are actually living the faith and not trivializing their life over the issues here and running around going oh no oh no woe is me.

 

:winner:

 

 

:dead:  yall enjoy the rest of this insane self righteousness that ya'll created, and make sure to pat each other on the back for doing such a great job and knowing the real way to be a catholic, keep up the good fight and keep spreading those labels of unity and healing.

 

:bravo:

 

:rabbit:

 

 

You're still confused.  Catholics do not have to understand every teaching of the Church to be orthodox.  They just have to assent to it.   Assent is not dependent on understanding. 

 

There is a difference between saying; "I believe it all" and "I know it all".

Edited June 26, 2014 by Credo in Deum

[Lilllabettt]

 

P.S, don't forget to let all the Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and Buddhists that they are probably going to hell you can inform them that you have plenty of knowledge from your catechism , an doctrine, an tenants ,etc an make sure to show them your badge that authorizes you and forces you to go running around being the police of the Church and defending everything it teaches.

 

They will appreciate way more than myself and the rest of us who have an opinion other than yours.

 

did you see that in a movie?

 

 

[superblue]

You're still confused.  Catholics do not have to understand every teaching of the Church to be orthodox.  They just have to assent to it.   Assent is not dependent on understanding. 

 

There is a difference between saying; "I believe it all" and "I know it all".

Actually I am not confused, but thanks for pretending to be the authority of knowing if I am or not.

[superblue]

did you see that in a movie?

pft hardly, I just figured this is the brigade that will be marching out into the world to the other religions with their vast authoritative knowledge and force them to conform or die, it worked well in the Crusades so why shouldn't all the enlightened ones here give a shot now ?

 

An I mean come on we all know only True Catholics are going to get into Heaven.

Edited June 26, 2014 by superblue

[Credo in Deum]

Actually I am not confused, but thanks for pretending to be the authority of knowing if I am or not.

 

You're posts say otherwise, since no one here is claiming to understand every doctrine of the Church or claiming to be perfect practitioners of them.  Those who have taken an orthodox stance have claimed they believe everything the Church teaches and that Catholics are called to do this.

 

"“If you don't behave as you believe, you will end by believing as you behave.”--Archbishop Fulton J Sheen.

[John Ryan]

Just to add to my previous post in the section (against paragraph ii), since it won't let me edit it the post. 

 

It might be fruitful to compare the vested interest in the relational dimension of our human sexuality over against its procreative telos (through either non-procreative sex acts or through contraceptives) with the removal of human hair. That is, human beings have a vested interest in eliminating their hair to certain extents. Not all men want the naturally occurring Karl Marx beard. St. Paul himself tells men to keep their hair unnaturally short. Females commonly shave hair under their arms and on their legs. Both men and women commonly remove pubic hair. 

 

It is a shoddy comparison, but not necessarily worse than the other comparisons made in this thread.

[Perigrina]

Just to add to my previous post in the section (against paragraph ii), since it won't let me edit it the post. 

 

It might be fruitful to compare the vested interest in the relational dimension of our human sexuality over against its procreative telos (through either non-procreative sex acts or through contraceptives) with the removal of human hair. That is, human beings have a vested interest in eliminating their hair to certain extents. Not all men want the naturally occurring Karl Marx beard. St. Paul himself tells men to keep their hair unnaturally short. Females commonly shave hair under their arms and on their legs. Both men and women commonly remove pubic hair. 

 

It is a shoddy comparison, but not necessarily worse than the other comparisons made in this thread.

 

I am getting from that analogy that you think the procreative aspect of sex is as essential as hair is to the human body, i.e. not at all.  Did I miss anything?

[Perigrina]

Not to overshare here but after I had a colectomy I developed that superpower as well. we should audition for a spot on the avengers.

 

While it is a useful superpower, it does not make for a good origins story.  

But, yes, Avengers ....

 

[CrossCuT]

I said "men" as in plural of "man" as in "human." You're about 2 cycles behind. Still referring to "native americans" are we? 

 

What part of kumbaya fembot dont you understand?

[Nihil Obstat]

Wow, Superblue sure is pwning us with his wit and logic. . .

 

Superblue, every post you make does not have to be a convoluted sarcastic rant. We are actually trying to discuss this stuff. Not sure if you noticed.