Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free
A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for general discussion that doesn't specifically fit into one of the other CatholicMatch rooms. Topics should not be overly serious as this is to be more of a "cafe setting."

Saint Peter's Square was created so that more people could be in the presence of the Pope and was named after Saint Peter, one of Jesus's apostles.
Learn More: Saint Peter

I wanted to open up a post to deal with an important issue, that is how we can know truth.

The catechism speaks of the Law, the Natural Law, the moral law, eternal law, old law, new law (law of the gospels). How does concupiscence affects us. How inclinations can blind our conscience.

Can pride harm our ability to learn. Is pride selfish? Can a person determine truth by feelings? What is the difference between subjective and objective reasoning? Is truth a matter of subjective feelings or is truth objective? Are our beliefs built on solid arguments or do they fall against objective facts?

If a person is going to use subjective reasoning to defend their beliefs, when it comes to objective truth then it is pointless to argue with them...

What about using the word argument? Matt Fradd has on Catholic Answers Live did a talk on this. He says,

"Argument is a set of propositions which we call premises from which the arguer seeks to establish a conclusion."

A biblical example is: St. Paul arrives in Thessalonica in Acts 17:1 argued with them for 3 weeks in the Temple. One can argue and it does not mean one is argumentative.

I open this up for others thoughts, I want us to argue our position. :-)

I am not claiming that I do this well at all times, I admit this. We are all learning and I appreciate anyone's argument I may not agree but if I disagree it is not going to be based on their feelings. Some things are subjective, like if you like a certain color. This is a preference, which is subjective. There is no correct answer. However, Jesus is the Truth, Way and Live according to scripture. If we miss it on the truth, we can miss it on the Way and if we miss it on the way, it can impact our life and having eternal life in us. We miss it on love. So let's argue away.... :-)

I would like us to look at what the Catechism of the Catholic Church has to say on conscience, Natural law, eternal law, the moral law, old law and new law and perhaps Divine Revelation and whatever else pertains to this....

I did this to get us to focus on these issues and to take the focus off any person on the forums.

God bless,

Gary

Mar 8th 2014 new

I forgot to add this to my post. I think it can help all of us, me too!!! I know I will listen to it again

How to Win an Argument Without Losing a Soul

Monday, Jul 29, 2013 - 6pm ET

www.catholic.com

Mar 8th 2014 new
Meant to say "life" not "live" oops... lol
Mar 8th 2014 new
Ahhh, Gary, I was trying to give up deep, academic, philosophical debate for Lent :-(((. As it is almost impossible for me to be short winded, I will have to take this one and ponder it a bit -- research a bit -- before I venture an answer and while that is far more entertaining than housework -- housework not only beckons it is having a total screaming fit.

I will say this, however, the two methods -- deductive vs. inductive -- both have their merits. But, they are ultimately limited in their power - being confined to the human realm and the human mind. Often when arguing Truth with another -- two assumptions play a role in causing the talking past each other phenomenon. First, if we are arguing Truth relative some accepted but arbitrary Absolute the absolutes may not be the same between the debaters. A good example of this is -- the point at which life becomes life. And, second despite our pride in our reasoning capabilities it is very easy to lead or trip down the merry path from following logical fallacies -- they sound good but really are not.

I suspect pride can play a role in our inability to discover Truth --- I would suggest hubris and individualism are even more potent energies which keep people from being able to recognize or accept Truth.

A third error that some make is the idea that we can PROVE something. In science, we can never prove a hypothesis or a theory for that matter -- we can only support it or reject it. Therefore, we are always open to the possibility that a factor not yet identified or considered could totally destroy the truth we thought we had identified.

While I believe that God reveals His Truth through many paths, it is still filtered through the imperfect human realm and the human mind which can in and of itself -- fail to recognize a revelation right before it, reject it completely, fail to seek it in the right place to begin with or distort it into something untrue to varying degrees.

Have to go now, the cats have opened the bag of cat food I just brought in. . . ugggg.
Mar 8th 2014 new
(quote) Lauren-927923 said: Ahhh, Gary, I was trying to give up deep, academic, philosophical debate for Lent :-(((. As it is almost impossible for me to be short winded, I will have to take this one and ponder it a bit -- research a bit -- before I venture an answer and while that is far more entertaining than housework -- housework not only beckons it is having a total screaming fit.

I will say this, however, the two methods -- deductive vs. inductive -- both have their merits. But, they are ultimately limited in their power - being confined to the human realm and the human mind. Often when arguing Truth with another -- two assumptions play a role in causing the talking past each other phenomenon. First, if we are arguing Truth relative some accepted but arbitrary Absolute the absolutes may not be the same between the debaters. A good example of this is -- the point at which life becomes life. And, second despite our pride in our reasoning capabilities it is very easy to lead or trip down the merry path from following logical fallacies -- they sound good but really are not.

I suspect pride can play a role in our inability to discover Truth --- I would suggest hubris and individualism are even more potent energies which keep people from being able to recognize or accept Truth.

A third error that some make is the idea that we can PROVE something. In science, we can never prove a hypothesis or a theory for that matter -- we can only support it or reject it. Therefore, we are always open to the possibility that a factor not yet identified or considered could totally destroy the truth we thought we had identified.

While I believe that God reveals His Truth through many paths, it is still filtered through the imperfect human realm and the human mind which can in and of itself -- fail to recognize a revelation right before it, reject it completely, fail to seek it in the right place to begin with or distort it into something untrue to varying degrees.

Have to go now, the cats have opened the bag of cat food I just brought in. . . ugggg.
You get a Gold Star! You get a Gold Star! You get a Gold Star!
Mar 9th 2014 new

I am impressed Lauren.. nice start.... Hopefully no debate but good Catholic wisdom spoken here....

I would like clarification on one thing... Did you say that science cannot prove anything that we either can accept or reject the evidence? I know you quickly belted out what you wrote. If you can clarify what you meant, thanks...

After reading what you wrote, I said to myself, this woman's mind is a thinker and knowledgeable.. so thank you for sharing, it is a good start. I don't see this post as one to debate, but to share information that could make some Me and God alone Catholics wake up and realize they need to educated their mind with information ,that is if they are open to information. If they are not open to information, well, nothing more can be said that would be helpful. You can lead a horse to the water but you cannot make him drink..

Have a great day...

Gary

Mar 9th 2014 new

CHAPTER THREE
GODS SALVATION: LAW AND GRACE

1949 Called to beatitude but wounded by sin, man stands in need of salvation from God. Divine help comes to him in Christ through the law that guides him and the grace that sustains him:

Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.1

ARTICLE 1
THE MORAL LAW

1950 The moral law is the work of divine Wisdom. Its biblical meaning can be defined as fatherly instruction, Gods pedagogy. It prescribes for man the ways, the rules of conduct that lead to the promised beatitude; it proscribes the ways of evil which turn him away from God and his love. It is at once firm in its precepts and, in its promises, worthy of love. (53, 1719)

1951 Law is a rule of conduct enacted by competent authority for the sake of the common good. The moral law presupposes the rational order, established among creatures for their good and to serve their final end, by the power, wisdom, and goodness of the Creator. All law finds its first and ultimate truth in the eternal law. Law is declared and established by reason as a participation in the providence of the living God, Creator and Redeemer of all. Such an ordinance of reason is what one calls law.2 (295, 306, 301)

Alone among all animate beings, man can boast of having been counted worthy to receive a law from God: as an animal endowed with reason, capable of understanding and discernment, he is to govern his conduct by using his freedom and reason, in obedience to the One who has entrusted everything to him.3

1952 There are different expressions of the moral law, all of them interrelated: eternal lawthe source, in God, of all law; natural law; revealed law, comprising the Old Law and the New Law, or Law of the Gospel; finally, civil and ecclesiastical laws.

1953 The moral law finds its fullness and its unity in Christ. Jesus Christ is in person the way of perfection. He is the end of the law, for only he teaches and bestows the justice of God: For Christ is the end of the law, that every one who has faith may be justified.4 (578)

I. The Natural Moral Law

1954 Man participates in the wisdom and goodness of the Creator who gives him mastery over his acts and the ability to govern himself with a view to the true and the good. The natural law expresses the original moral sense which enables man to discern by reason the good and the evil, the truth and the lie: (307, 1776)

The natural law is written and engraved in the soul of each and every man, because it is human reason ordaining him to do good and forbidding him to sin... But this command of human reason would not have the force of law if it were not the voice and interpreter of a higher reason to which our spirit and our freedom must be submitted.5

1955 The divine and natural law6 shows man the way to follow so as to practice the good and attain his end. The natural law states the first and essential precepts which govern the moral life. It hinges upon the desire for God and submission to him, who is the source and judge of all that is good, as well as upon the sense that the other is ones equal. Its principal precepts are expressed in the Decalogue. This law is called natural, not in reference to the nature of irrational beings, but because reason which decrees it properly belongs to human nature: (1787, 396, 2070)

Where then are these rules written, if not in the book of that light we call the truth? In it is written every just law; from it the law passes into the heart of the man who does justice, not that it migrates into it, but that it places its imprint on it, like a seal on a ring that passes onto wax, without leaving the ring.7

The natural law is nothing other than the light of understanding placed in us by God; through it we know what we must do and what we must avoid. God has given this light or law at the creation.8

1956 The natural law, present in the heart of each man and established by reason, is universal in its precepts and its authority extends to all men. It expresses the dignity of the person and determines the basis for his fundamental rights and duties: (2261)

For there is a true law: right reason. It is in conformity with nature, is diffused among all men, and is immutable and eternal; its orders summon to duty; its prohibitions turn away from offense.... To replace it with a contrary law is a sacrilege; failure to apply even one of its provisions is forbidden; no one can abrogate it entirely.9

1957 Application of the natural law varies greatly; it can demand reflection that takes account of various conditions of life according to places, times, and circumstances. Nevertheless, in the diversity of cultures, the natural law remains as a rule that binds men among themselves and imposes on them, beyond the inevitable differences, common principles.

1958 The natural law is immutable and permanent throughout the variations of history;10 it subsists under the flux of ideas and customs and supports their progress. The rules that express it remain substantially valid. Even when it is rejected in its very principles, it cannot be destroyed or removed from the heart of man. It always rises again in the life of individuals and societies: (2072)

Theft is surely punished by your law, O Lord, and by the law that is written in the human heart, the law that iniquity itself does not efface.11

1959 The natural law, the Creators very good work, provides the solid foundation on which man can build the structure of moral rules to guide his choices. It also provides the indispensable moral foundation for building the human community. Finally, it provides the necessary basis for the civil law with which it is connected, whether by a reflection that draws conclusions from its principles, or by additions of a positive and juridical nature. (1879)

1960 The precepts of natural law are not perceived by everyone clearly and immediately. In the present situation sinful man needs grace and revelation so moral and religious truths may be known by everyone with facility, with firm certainty and with no admixture of error.12 The natural law provides revealed law and grace with a foundation prepared by God and in accordance with the work of the Spirit. (2071, 37)

Mar 9th 2014 new
(quote) Gary-916309 said:

I am impressed Lauren.. nice start.... Hopefully no debate but good Catholic wisdom spoken here....

I would like clarification on one thing... Did you say that science cannot prove anything that we either can accept or reject the evidence? I know you quickly belted out what you wrote. If you can clarify what you meant, thanks...

After reading what you wrote, I said to myself, this woman's mind is a thinker and knowledgeable.. so thank you for sharing, it is a good start. I don't see this post as one to debate, but to share information that could make some Me and God alone Catholics wake up and realize they need to educated their mind with information ,that is if they are open to information. If they are not open to information, well, nothing more can be said that would be helpful. You can lead a horse to the water but you cannot make him drink..

Have a great day...

Gary

I have to "chuckle" at the idea of debating good catholic wisdom. As you mentioned, God gave us a brain to educate ourselves. Amazing when a person truly looks at his body and realizes that God made each individual part with a complete purpose in serving Him. Without writing a novel on what each part was so carefully created by God, I'd leave it at let's take a look at our brains....

A great book (since in your comment you spoke about educating our minds) is called "The Spiritual Brain"

Do religious experiences come from God, or are they merely the random firing of neurons in the brain? Drawing on his own research with Carmelite nuns, neuroscientist Mario Beauregard shows that genuine, life-changing spiritual events can be documented. He offers compelling evidence that religious experiences have a nonmaterial origin, making a convincing case for what many in scientific fields are loath to considerthat it is God who creates our spiritual experiences, not the brain.

Beauregard and O'Leary explore recent attempts to locate a "God gene" in some of us and claims that our brains are "hardwired" for religioneven the strange case of one neuroscientist who allegedly invented an electromagnetic "God helmet" that could produce a mystical experience in anyone who wore it. The authors argue that these attempts are misguided and narrow-minded, because they reduce spiritual experiences to material phenomena.

Many scientists ignore hard evidence that challenges their materialistic prejudice, clinging to the limited view that our experiences are explainable only by material causes, in the obstinate conviction that the physical world is the only reality. But scientific materialism is at a loss to explain irrefutable accounts of mind over matter, of intuition, willpower, and leaps of faith, of the "placebo effect" in medicine, of near-death experiences on the operating table, and of psychic premonitions of a loved one in crisis, to say nothing of the occasional sense of oneness with nature and mystical experiences in meditation or prayer. Traditional science explains away these and other occurrences as delusions or misunderstandings, but by exploring the latest neurological research on phenomena such as these, The Spiritual Brain gets to their real source.


We educate ourselves in so many ways, and yet we are all guilty of allowing society to dictate the pattern in which we lead our lives. We make deciding factors for ourselves what we should believe in and what we shouldn't. We say to our ourselves, "oh I believe in the Eucharist, but I don't believe in confession, or I believe in the churches teachings on sanctity of life, but I don't believe in contraception. We have to be careful on our own beliefs and take it to the church or be willing to spend the time to find out what God says and not what society says or what we say or think. I know for myself in posting some forums, I was amazed at being attacked for standing up to what the church teaches and our wonderful Catechism which is one of our greatest instruments along with God's word. Our greatest gift, of course, is the gift of the Eucharist! But one needs to understand in receiving Him on His tongue and voicing/stating "I'm catholic" without one educating himself in the teachings and fully understanding how in receiving, one condemns himself.


Again, I will always take it back to some great apologists as I am no way educated as they are. They have spent years in mastering theology. Scott Hahn, Patrick Madrid, Tim staples, jimmy Akin and so many other great ones out there.

here is a link to some of the "journey home" stories

www.youtube.com


also listen to Immaculate heart radio, visit Catholic Answers on line (great forums/videos/apologists) and visit some great apologists on you tube.


blessings,

Sharon




Mar 9th 2014 new
Let's get a hammer and beat our version of the truth into people who disagree with us. How's that? Is that what we want? The world will always reject God and God's truth. By living it rather than preaching it, we stand a chance of changing the hearts and minds of others. But we can't swing the truth around like a stone ax and say we're doing God's work. Christ didn't do that, and neither should we. In fact, the only times Christ railed and spoke forcefully was to admonish the "religious people" of his day. With sinners, he was simple, direct, compassionate, and loving. But he had no patience for the Pharisees. As people of faith, we must always remember this and take care never to act like the very people who tried Christ's patience.
Mar 9th 2014 new
(quote) David-364112 said: Let's get a hammer and beat our version of the truth into people who disagree with us. How's that? Is that what we want? The world will always reject God and God's truth. By living it rather than preaching it, we stand a chance of changing the hearts and minds of others. But we can't swing the truth around like a stone ax and say we're doing God's work. Christ didn't do that, and neither should we. In fact, the only times Christ railed and spoke forcefully was to admonish the "religious people" of his day. With sinners, he was simple, direct, compassionate, and loving. But he had no patience for the Pharisees. As people of faith, we must always remember this and take care never to act like the very people who tried Christ's patience.
Morning David,

Why get the hammer and beat each other? duck Our "beef" isn't with each other, truly our "beef" is with God. hissyfit

So it's okay to debate each other on "Gods" desires, teachings, etc., but when one wants to hammer the beef to make it more tender, our knocking or hammering should be at God's door so he can "tenderize" us shhh

blessings,
sharon
Posts 1 - 10 of 63