Orthopraxis vs. Orthodoxy

[cmotherofpirl]

Depends on how you define [i]assent.[/i].

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Jan 25 2005, 08:00 AM'] Depends on how you define [i]assent.[/i]. [/quote]
In the case of teachings that are [i]de fide credenda[/i] or [i]de fide tenenda[/i] the assent must be a full and irrevocable assent of faith.

God bless,
Todd

[Good Friday]

And what is the teaching on homosexuality? I know that it's not a dogma. Is it [i]definitive tenenda[/i] or is it a teaching of the Authentic Magisterium? Besides answering with one answer or another, can you also explain? I'm not asking you to explain in order to "prove it," but because I'm not familiar with this distinction between teachings and don't understand the difference. I'd like to understand why the teachings on homosexuality are either [i]definitive tenenda[/i] or the teaching of the Authentic Magisterium.

A couple more questions . . .

1. What precisely does it mean not to be in full communion with the Church? Does that mean that one is excommunicated or what?

2. What does the phrase "[i]tuto doceri non potest[/i]" mean?

3. What is the effect of denying a teaching or prudential judgement of the Authentic Magisterium?

Edited January 25, 2005 by Good Friday

[hyperdulia again]

for whom is belief something that one can willfully give/withhold as he likes? i can give my obedience, but what i do and don't believe is beyond my grasp, i cannot control it in the way apo's post seems to presuppose.

[Guest Aluigi]

one should not be content with private disagreement with Christ's Church, but practicing the teaching and not actually opposing it I believe is assent. Meaning I cannot accept this, but I will trust the Church and follow it. I may not go out and try to convince people it is true, but I also will not go out to convince people it is not true. I will stay publically silent because I trust that the Church is wiser than me, I will practice it, and I will continue to strive to be a better Catholic. Not believing something because one cannot bring oneself to believe it does not constitute heresy at all. This is simply about what a person's fallen emotions and fallen intellect refuse to accept as true, but through grace they are able to follow it anyway. Orthopraxis is the important thing, and it is not seperable from orthodoxy. But by that I do not mean one cannot be orthoprax without being orthodox, I mean that if one truly does become orthoprax on an issue they will eventually, through the working of grace through that faith they have placed in the Church, become orthodox. That may be a period of 50 years, or a period of 10 or 5 or whatever, but orthopraxis breeds orthodoxy. Orthodoxy without orthopraxis is hypocrisy, but orthopraxis without orthodoxy is holy obedience that God will work through with His grace to bring about the orthodoxy.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='hyperdulia again' date='Jan 25 2005, 02:18 PM'] for whom is belief something that one can willfully give/withhold as he likes?  i can give my obedience, but what i do and don't believe is beyond my grasp, i cannot control it in the way apo's post seems to presuppose. [/quote]
The act of faith most certainly involves an act of the will on a man's part, and so to withhold assent, that is, to fail to give positive assent to a definitive teaching of the Church, is to no longer be a Catholic. Therefore, not opposing the teaching of the Church is not enough; rather, one must actively assent to the Church's teaching.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Aluigi' date='Jan 25 2005, 08:17 PM'] I may not go out and try to convince people it is true, but I also will not go out to convince people it is not true. I will stay publically silent because I trust that the Church is wiser than me, I will practice it, and I will continue to strive to be a better Catholic. Not believing something because one cannot bring oneself to believe it does not constitute heresy at all. [/quote]
Quite the contrary, to withhold assent to a dogma that has been proposed by the Magisterium as divinely revealed is to fall into the sin of heresy. To withhold assent to a doctrine that has been proposed by the Magisterium as [i]definitive tenenda[/i] is to fall into theological error, and one who fails to give assent to a teaching proposed in this way is no longer in full communion with the Catholic Church.

If a man privately refused to assent to the dogma of the Trinity, such a man would be a heretic and would no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church, and this would be the case in spite of the fact that his error was not public knowledge.

God bless,
Todd

[jiyoung]

is it not orthodoxy, though? i mean what he would hypothetically be doing is, though he cannot understand, he follows anyway. isn't that how we are in ANY aspect of the faith? how can we even begin to try and comprehend God in all His glory? we start out going "i dont understand and i dont even know if i can accept it [intellectually] but i will practice it." but as we put our faith in God and practice the faith He gives us, though we may not understand, we are in effect obeying Him. it's faith like a child, i suppose. and this faith, by nature, seeks understanding (though does not require it). even though we don't UNDERSTAND it intellectually, we put our faith in the Church that God gave us, and in the infallibility of the pope.

this is my own fallible reason though...i'm sure the wisest thing to do is see the Church's official stance.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='jiyoung' date='Jan 25 2005, 11:46 PM'] is it not orthodoxy, though? i mean what he would hypothetically be doing is, though he cannot understand, he follows anyway. isn't that how we are in ANY aspect of the faith? how can we even begin to try and comprehend God in all His glory? we start out going "i dont understand and i dont even know if i can accept it [intellectually] but i will practice it." but as we put our faith in God and practice the faith He gives us, though we may not understand, we are in effect obeying Him. it's faith like a child, i suppose. and this faith, by nature, seeks understanding (though does not require it). even though we don't UNDERSTAND it intellectually, we put our faith in the Church that God gave us, and in the infallibility of the pope.

this is my own fallible reason though...i'm sure the wisest thing to do is see the Church's official stance. [/quote]
Certainly a person may be invincibly ignorant of theoretical aspects of a specific doctrinal proposition, but a person may not withhold assent to a dogma of divine and catholic faith or a truth of catholic doctrine, because to do that is to cease being Catholic.

The thing that must be borne in mind is that living a certain way cannot save a man; instead, he is required to make an act of faith assenting to all that God has revealed or that has been definitively proposed by the Church's Magisterium, for to hold that orthopraxy without orthodoxy is salvific is to fall into the Pelagian heresy. Orthodoxy and orthopraxy are inseparably bound together.

God bless,
Todd

[Apotheoun]

The teaching that homosexual acts are gravely immoral is a doctrine [i]de fide tenenda[/i].

[cmotherofpirl]

We have to obey church teaching, we do not necessarily have to [i]like[/i] it.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Aluigi' date='Jan 25 2005, 08:17 PM'] one should not be content with private disagreement with Christ's Church, but practicing the teaching and not actually opposing it I believe is assent. Meaning I cannot accept this, but I will trust the Church and follow it. I may not go out and try to convince people it is true, but I also will not go out to convince people it is not true. I will stay publically silent because I trust that the Church is wiser than me, I will practice it, and I will continue to strive to be a better Catholic. Not believing something because one cannot bring oneself to believe it does not constitute heresy at all. This is simply about what a person's fallen emotions and fallen intellect refuse to accept as true, but through grace they are able to follow it anyway. Orthopraxis is the important thing, and it is not seperable from orthodoxy. But by that I do not mean one cannot be orthoprax without being orthodox, I mean that if one truly does become orthoprax on an issue they will eventually, through the working of grace through that faith they have placed in the Church, become orthodox. That may be a period of 50 years, or a period of 10 or 5 or whatever, but orthopraxis breeds orthodoxy. Orthodoxy without orthopraxis is hypocrisy, but orthopraxis without orthodoxy is holy obedience that God will work through with His grace to bring about the orthodoxy. [/quote]
It is not sufficient to merely avoid public or private dissent from doctrines taught as definitive by the Magisterium. Therefore, those things proposed by the Magisterium as divinely revealed or as definitively to be held must receive a positive assent of faith. Orthopraxy without orthodoxy is not sufficient, and would be a form of the Pelagian heresy. In the case of those things proposed as divinely revealed the act of faith is based on the word of God itself, while in the case of those things proposed as definitive tenenda the act of faith is based upon the Holy Spirit's guidance of the Magisterium, and on the doctrine of the infallibility of the Magisterium. To fail to give positive assent to teachings definitively proposed by the Magisterium, either Ordinary or Extraordinary, is to no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church.

God bless,
Todd

[MC Just]

Orthopraxis and Orthodoxy go hand and hand.

[Oik]

Oh Todd, your great! Trinity East represent!



[quote]The thing that must be borne in mind is that living a certain way cannot save a man; instead, he is required to make an act of faith assenting to all that God has revealed or that has been definitively proposed by the Church's Magisterium...[/quote]

This is an integral part in establishing some reasoning.
Look, you may not like what the Surgeon is doing, but that why the nurse(our Blessed Mother) is there, to assisst and comfort.

You may not like something, but the reason you don't is directly related to you will. You MUST conform your will and needs to be your prayer to like.

To purposely withhold this assent is basically to dissent.

[Good Friday]

But how does one make himself believe that which he does not believe, in order to give internal assent?

[Q the Ninja]

Actually, I have a feeling with external consent you're actually internally consenting too, though you don't realize this...I didn't want to say this at first, but deep down I think you'd have a true conscience, though to you you'd think you have a false conscience.


If a suicide bomber is taught all his life that that's right, and that's what he thinks, but when it comes time to bomb, it seems as though he has a bad conscience, meaning he's not following what he believes as true. He has a false conscience, meaning he believes something to be good that's really bad...A false conscience is just that, false or wrong. A bad conscience is not listening to your conscience, whether it's true or false. Now in all this mess, the guy seems to have a false and bad conscience....he's wrong, and doesn't listen to himself. But yet, his action is still good, and one might wonder why...

I propose that deep down he had a true conscience, and a good one, though he didn't realize it. That's how I think it would be in your case.

[Q the Ninja]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Jan 26 2005, 06:19 AM'] We have to obey church teaching, we do not necessarily have to [i]like[/i] it. [/quote]
We do still have to agree with and believe it, whether we like it or not.

--Vatican II

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Good Friday' date='Jan 27 2005, 07:56 PM'] But how does one make himself believe that which he does not believe, in order to give internal assent? [/quote]
you do it, and you leave yourself open to learning why you should believe it. If you go to Mass every Sunday because you know you are required to, eventually you will find you are going to Mass every Sunday because you want to worship God. If a person stops having premarital sex because they know it's wrong, eventually they will avoid sexual situations because they don't want to displease God, among other reasons.

The belief grows with the practice. That has been my experience as one who started out fearing Hell, now desires to please God.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Good Friday' date='Jan 27 2005, 04:56 PM'] But how does one make himself believe that which he does not believe, in order to give internal assent? [/quote]
It is brought about by God's grace. A man cannot make an act of faith, nor can he live as he should live, except by the power of God's uncreated grace. In other words, it is grace that brings about the required conversion of heart (metanoia) which enables a man to assent to all that God has revealed.

God bless,
Todd

[hyperdulia again]

So, I'm not Catholic?