Defending the Roman Catholic Faith: Catholic Apologetics (vanity)

Oct. 19 | Global2010

[Conservative til I die]

Well, giving clean needles to addicts will prevent the spread of AIDS and would be humane. But I suppose you would say that would be thwarting Gods will, eh?

Blowing their heads off with a 12-gauge would also stop the spread of AIDS. Doesn't make it moral.

You're arguing from a utilitarian point of view that eschews morality in favor of what helps the most people/hurts the least people.

If I was the one being asked the question, I would have said the right thing to do would be to help the heroin addict kick his addiction, and if he was sick with AIDS, give him access to food and medication so that he could be as healthy as possible for as long as possible. The funny thing is, you still would be preventing the spread of AIDS, without shoving someone further into the Hell of addiction.

Of course, this doesn't take into account that your solution in no way stops the spread of disease, since a person who is in the haze of addiction isn't necessarily the most aware or considerate person in the world. How many gays with AIDS do we read about who knowingly or neglectfully spread it to others?

[Conservative til I die]

Contraception is not the same as abortion, but you must follow the teachings of your church so you will disagree. Why continue this?

You are right, they are not the same. However, they are both associated forms of sin.

And my opposition to contraception and abortion is not due to a slavish, zombie-like following of my Church's commands.

[BipolarBob]

At least I use my reason and not blindly follow the teachings of anyone (or group). Isaiah 1:18 Says the Lord "Come let us reason together". As least God says I should use my mental faculties. Did Jesus or the Apostles subject themselves to the Churchs authority? No they did not. I hope you don't think they fell into the secular pit by not doing so. Why continue this? The Holy Spirit has blessed me, thank you for your thoughts.

[Conservative til I die]

I just realized I had fallen into the pit of thwarting the main purpose of a thread and not sticking to the subject requested of sources for apologetics.

I will cease posting on this contraception/abortion theme.

Thank you, God, for taking me back to the Catholic Apologetics theme. My apologies.

Brother, you did nothing wrong. Our friend has asked for help in apologetics. Someone else has come and opposed Church teaching. You're simply defending it. I think that's a great example of apologetics in action.

Our friend gets to see both sides of the debate and hopefully, it is clear that the Catholic position is more logical than the other position.

[BipolarBob]

If I was the one being asked the question, I would have said the right thing to do would be to help the heroin addict kick his addiction, and if he was sick with AIDS, give him access to food and medication so that he could be as healthy as possible for as long as possible.

We can agree on this and then you rant on afterwards. I will not dignify the strawman about the shotgun. Have a good day.

[Conservative til I die]

At least I use my reason and not blindly follow the teachings of anyone (or group).

So this is where you want to take the discussion, eh?

So let me understand this: as long as a Catholic shares your position on abortion, they're being logical and free-thinking. Yet the Church also mandates that we be against abortion. So aren't we really just blindly following the Church here? Because that's what you're saying about Catholics who are against contraception.

You're also ignoring the possibility that maybe the Church has also used their reasoning abilities to be against both contraception and abortion.

You're setting yourself up as the arbiter of what is and isn't a reasonable position and being condescending to boot.

[William Terrell]

I think your practices are dangerous when contrasted against the scriptures.

If you ask someone to pray for you, they are before you and you see them. When you pray to those who are dead, it requires an act of faith. One doesn't have faith in men, whether living or dead; one has faith in God and His son Jesus Christ.

Jesus made it clear that He was the only way to the father. You pray to God through Christ directly, not through some dead man regardless of how much that man loved God.

The whole point of the second covenant is belief and faith. You are saved thereby. It is scriptural that a righteous man's prayer avails much with God.

Go to God directly; it is your right and your heritage. To pray to men is idolatry through the act of faith it requires.

If you pray for intercession through anyone not God and not the Christ, you are in fact praying to that one and asking for that favor.

[Salvation]

Information on infalliability.

2051 The infallibility of the Magisterium of the Pastors extends to all the elements of doctrine, including moral doctrine, without which the saving truths of the faith cannot be preserved, expounded, or observed.

 

891 "The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful - who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. . . . The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter's successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium," above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine "for belief as being divinely revealed," and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions "must be adhered to with the obedience of faith." This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.

 

2035 The supreme degree of participation in the authority of Christ is ensured by the charism of infallibility. This infallibility extends as far as does the deposit of divine Revelation; it also extends to all those elements of doctrine, including morals, without which the saving truths of the faith cannot be preserved, explained, or observed.

 

889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a "supernatural sense of faith" the People of God, under the guidance of the Church's living Magisterium, "unfailingly adheres to this faith."

 

890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium's task to preserve God's people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church's shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms:

[Conservative til I die]

We can agree on this and then you rant on afterwards. I will not dignify the strawman about the shotgun. Have a good day.

If you want to dismiss what I say as a rant and then run away, it's your perogative but it just reflects poorly on you. You're the one who proclaimed your enlightened reasoning ability. Don't be afraid to show it!

Anyways, the shotgun argument is no strawman argument. It's a somewhat extreme argument, but not much different than giving clean needles to a heroin addict. The only difference is helping to kill someone more quickly or more slowly.

Let's try a slightly different direction. Suppose you see a homeless person. Probably has a drug or alcohol addiction and maybe some mental illness that is most likely not being treated with medication. What's the more Christian thing to do? Give him a dollar every day which he might use to support his habit, still sleeping in refrigerator boxes in the dead of winter? Or buying him a sandwich and a coat and trying to get him in for treatment of his illness and addictions, in the hopes of making him self-sufficient one day?

[BipolarBob]

Let's get this straight. I do think you may have fallen into the secular pit of reasoning. May the Holy Spirit enlighten your logic.

Whenever I challenge one of you on a position I am accused of using my own faulty reasoning and that I have no authority or right to make such decisions. Past arguments were centered on my inabilities or lack of guidance just like I'm stupid or something. They weren't flattering to me. God gave me reasoning abilities, the Holy Spirit and a soul to take care of and with His help I shall. So don't lets turn this around and say you're the victim, okay?

[Salvation]

More from the Catechism:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2322 From its conception, the child has the right to life. Direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, is a "criminal" practice (GS 27 § 3), gravely contrary to the moral law. The Church imposes the canonical penalty of excommunication for this crime against human life.

2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."

2319 Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and likeness of the living and holy God.

2323 Because it should be treated as a person from conception, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed like every other human being.

2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.

My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.

1711 Endowed with a spiritual soul, with intellect and with free will, the human person is from his very conception ordered to God and destined for eternal beatitude. He pursues his perfection in "seeking and loving what is true and good" (GS 15 § 2).

[Salvation]

2399 The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).

 

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil:

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.

[Conservative til I die]

If you ask someone to pray for you, they are before you and you see them. When you pray to those who are dead, it requires an act of faith. One doesn't have faith in men, whether living or dead; one has faith in God and His son Jesus Christ.

You've subtly confused definitions of the word "faith". You are correct that asking for prayer from someone who is dead requires faith. However, faith means in this instance a belief in something that has no rational explanation. It is not the same as faith in God, which relates to His message and promises of Salvation if we believe in Him.

However, in both cases faith in the former feeds off faith in the latter. We Catholics believe the saints are alive in Heaven in spirit but not body, simply because we believe the Trinitarian God exists and that Christ meant what He said when He said that those that believe in Him will be alive with Him in Heaven and never die, even if their bodies should expire and decay. And conversely, we have faith that God listens to our prayers, even those brought to His attention on our behalf by His beloved saints.

[Conservative til I die]

Whenever I challenge one of you on a position I am accused of using my own faulty reasoning and that I have no authority or right to make such decisions. Past arguments were centered on my inabilities or lack of guidance just like I'm stupid or something. They weren't flattering to me. God gave me reasoning abilities, the Holy Spirit and a soul to take care of and with His help I shall. So don't lets turn this around and say you're the victim, okay?

Let's get real. Nothing like what you describe happened on this thread. You said you had the ability to reason. But it seems when challenged with reason you are now playing the victim card.

This is also hypocritical since you're the one who has dismissed on two occasions in this thread that Catholics who disagree with you are merely blind followers of Rome. If anything, you're the one dismissing others as if they are "stupid or something".

[BipolarBob]

I've been on other threads where I have been talked down to.

You're setting yourself up as the arbiter of what is and isn't a reasonable position and being condescending to boot.

God gave me free will. I plan on using it. I don't plan on denying it to someone in desperate circumstances on what to do with their life. I hope they make good ones with Gods help.

[Conservative til I die]

God gave me free will. I plan on using it. I don't plan on denying it to someone in desperate circumstances on what to do with their life. I hope they make good ones with Gods help.

Similar to how faith without works is dead, reason and free will without morality is also dead.

Talk to 500 people of differing and disparate backgrounds and you'll probably get about 500 different approaches to a particular moral issue. Some will be very moral. Most will be in the middle. And some will be very immoral, hateful, and destructive.

Yes, God gave us reason, but reason is a means to reaching God's ends, not for its own supremacy.

To paraphrase Fr. Corapi, freedom is not doing whatever you want. Freedom is doing whatever we want within the context of what is moral according to God's will.

Freedom as we describe it, "Doing whatever we want" is not freedom. It is licentiousness. It is vice. And ultimately, it is slavery to sin.

[BipolarBob]

"Freedom as we describe it, "Doing whatever we want" is not freedom. It is licentiousness. It is vice. And ultimately, it is slavery to sin."

Now you are misrepresenting my words and intent. I did not say do whatever we want. I am not in disagreement with Fr. Corapis statement. I do not consider contraception a form of sin and you do. This will not change.

[William Terrell]

Faith is belief in those things not seen, Hebrews 11:1-13. A person living is before you and requires no faith. A person dead and vanished from sight requires faith.

Pray to God through Christ, and let the saints attend to their own business. If you are a righteous man, your prayer availeth much, but if you are not, a dead saint will not help you.

[TradicalRC]

Some would think imposing your morality upon on another is evil in the sense of them thinking ahead of what dangers to a child in certain enviroments would bring and you not.

Morality gets imposed no matter what. Christ's or Stalin's or Liberal's or Bipolar Bob's. There is no such thing as a morality-free zone.

Not everyone thinks contraception is evil. Not like abortion - where a life is already in existence.

Not everyone thinks that abortion is evil. Not everyone thinks that killing newborn's is evil, for that matter.

We have already went out and propagated and replenished the earth. Now we need to make it a better place to live. Not mindlessly reproducing with no thought of the consequences.

Whatever you say Margaret Sanger. Cheerio.

[Conservative til I die]

Some would think imposing your morality upon on another is evil in the sense of them thinking ahead of what dangers to a child in certain enviroments would bring and you not.

Morality is absolute. It is not situational. If abortion is immoral under no circumstances because it is the killing of a human life, how can that be moral if a situation is not ideal? Is it no longer killing? Is there no longer a human life involved?

I'm not a moral imperialist, but I'm not going to sit on my hands and say that I have no right to tell others what is moral or not.

To say we have no right to impose morality is silly. We have laws. Those laws most certainly do (usually) impose morality on others. One cannot simply say "Well I believe human sacrifice is moral" and then get away with sacrificing someone's heart to their local god. It's a very slippery slope to say we can't judge what others do as moral or immoral solely because of their lot in life. And that goes for abortion, contraception, murder, theft, drunk driving, or what have you.