Do I have to follow every church teaching? | Think Like a Jesuit, Episode 5

Please stop the music I don't hear anything

Had to listen to this again and they seem so uncomfortable about this topic and I sense they want to exclaim like I- of course you can! Prayers for them who are so educated and come off so conflicted. Peace 🙌

I would very much like to have such a conversation with one of your brothers, or perhaps someone else you might recommend. My local parish priests are not quite up to par, I feel, on some of these questions. Do you have someone on your staff, with a solid background in moral theology that could help me? I'm "stranded" behind the Redwood Curtain in northern California. In person spiritual resources are scarce here.

“I feel like I’m not worthy”

Well, we aren’t 🤷‍♀️

Ladies and gentlemen, the jesuits are at it again.

Is this at Xavier HS in NY? Class of '13

Wow, I wish that I had been taught Catholicism by the Jesuits! 👍👍

Has catholic soteriological inclusivism led to universalism? I am in a dilema. What can I do?
Did Vatican 2, in effect, reject part of the core dogma of the church? We must choose either to be catholic or reject any infallible de fide , ex cathedra decrees. Yet most of our hierarchy today reject the following:
These are the de fide dogmas of the church on salvation -binding on all Catholics (Cantate Domino 8s very explicit). It is not up to us to question the Holy Spirit who guided the church in the formulation of these dogmas. In short, only Catholics can be saved. You of course can reject these dogmas as you have freewill, but by rejecting de fide dogmas you place yourself outside the church under damnation:

“The universal Church of the faithful is one outside of which none is saved.” -Pope Innocent III, ex cathedra, Fourth Lateran Council (1215 AD)

“We declare, say , define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” -Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam (1302 AD)

“The Most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, also Jews, heretics, and schismatics can ever be partakers of eternal life, but that they are to go into the eternal fire ‘which was prepared for the devil and his angels’ (Mt. 25:41) unless before death they are joined with Her… No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ can be saved unless they abide within the bosom and unity of the Catholic Church.” -Pope Eugene IV, ex cathedra, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino (1441 AD)

I think you are making this way too complicated.

Y’all are totally impervious to how divisive this sort of rhetoric is. Not only does it fly in the face of what we know to be true based on the established doctrines of the Church, but it sows so much confusion that is otherwise easily avoided…

Being Modern Jesuits ,, they will say “yes!! Dissent on everything!!!0

A better question , can you have reservations about some of Vatican II’s documents?

I don’t think this video is capturing the real question. It’s not, “Can I accidentally or lazily fail to follow church teaching and still be Catholic?” Its, “Can I willfully reject church teaching and still be Catholic?”

The former is simple human frailty, where we’re trying to follow the teaching but come up short - not because we disagree with teaching, but because we all struggle with our fallen nature. The Fathers in the video are right, that’s what reconciliation is for.

But in the latter scenario - one in which you are willfully rejecting church teaching because you think it’s wrong or too hard for you to follow, and you are no longer open to having your mind and heart changed - you have effectively rejected Catholicism itself, and what it teaches about God’s will for us.

I don’t see how the latter can be acceptable for someone who wants to be called a Catholic.

I love the idea these presenters have of the church as a family heritage - the “faith of our ancestors”. The church is an inter generational passing down of a way of living that has been successfully tried and proven over thousands of years.

As an American I tend to follow the law 😂 ? Gimme a break !!

They are exactly right. It is not an either or issue. The teachings of the church are ideals to strive for rather than expectations we all need to meet. Unfortunately that is not why I see in my church. It seems like the bishops and priests have decided that church teachings are too hard for us so they won’t even talk about them anymore. Just show up, God loves you the way you are, put money in the basket and go on with your sinful life. That’s the message I get.

To be able to adhere to the Church teaching fully, to me, is the outcome or fruit of our perfect relationship with God. But perfection in terms of any relationship does not happen overnight.

Eg when we first enter into relationship with someone, we only know him/her by that much, but this does not mean we don't love each other or that the relationship is flawed but just that the two persons are still journeying in that relationship, striving toward maturity and perfection. [but if either or both parties decide to call it quit, then the relationship will become flawed]

God has loved us first (Romans 5:8) so to be able to abide by all the Church teachings is not the prerequisite to enter into our relationship with Him. (The Council of Trent did not deny the essentiality of 'imputed grace', but it expounded that our salvation also requires the realisation of infused grace - 'increase in justification')

But as we know Him more intimately and our relationship with Him deepens, then gradually we will gather the strength and attain spiritual maturity to be able to appreciate these teachings.

Thus, it is not about "You must adhere to these teachings in order to be loved by God" but rather "You will adhere to these teachings because God won't stop loving you."

Did Dr. Martin Luther King "think like a Jesuit?"

You have discern in yourself if such and such a teaching is actually healthy. Most of the time the answer is no.

As someone who was born catholic, attended Catholic and Jesuit schools, and has read, the Baltimore Catechism, the New Catechism, the Penny Catechism, etc. There are a lot of rules and a lot of teachings that simply don’t make sense.

Church says Adam and Eve disobeyed and God In His Mercy threw out his children after one offense. Imagine if a parent did that to their child.

And depending on the day, the church will declare the Big Bang because it’s hip to science. And say Adam and Eve is a myth or evolved.

In which case you have real problems because Jesus came to remove Original Sin.

The Jesuits who taught me were kind, loving, highly intelligent who taught us to question. Thank God for that! They fed the poor, they did manual labor, they taught, they were wonderful!

The Jesuits of the last 30 years are not known for pushing rigid rules. They didn’t believe you have to accept everything. They were not medieval.

Hi, guys. Watching this again and loving it. I do think that adult relatives (parents, grandparents) sometimes coerce us as adults. But I do think it is the experience of many people I know, especially (but not only in) in the GLBT+ world. This common experience is part of what makes it so hard to think with the Church or trust spiritual guides. I know you've thought about it. Thoughts?

Even the Jesuits do not have the guts to debate and discuss real issues such as sexuality, contraception, and the political stands of the bishops. The synod of bishops have caused more people to leave than the most eloquent atheist spokesman!!

Are they priests or philosophers ? I like them very charming monks

If your conscience tells you that abortion is OK, then your conscience is wrong. Our conscience is not absolute. We need to follow church teaching, even when we disagree with it.

don't give up willing to keep on dying to your old self, cos this, and yes no other, is the way Jesus is giving you his ever new truly universal self - don't give up dying to yourself cos that is the way God's life works you over into his communal self of the Trinity, where each divine person is fully given over to the other without holding back through some particularity held on to in exclusivity i.e what we should call our ordinary sinfulness.
Let's still dare use older, really clearer, formulations of ever illuminative revealed truths. The dying bit is the harsh wording in our snowflake lands, but snow flakes die rapidly anyway, and they will find out sooner than later, so why avoid or obscure the truly good way of entering into the inevitable. It's the dying that is the good part really, cos that's the way God's full otherness is received as a liberation of what will always be somehow our still sinfull life. No man more purified of sin than the Cardoner visionary, no man still so scrucupulous afterward. He received a full saintly gift, yet he had to hold on to what he had seen even if he could never ever forget it, as he was divinely blessed, but not yet divinised, right...? The already but still not yet kinda thing.
So, an altogether nice, correct, amiably intelligent conversation, true also, but I am not sure its kindly unstoppable need to somehow sweet talk wherever possible is as helpfull as it could....No offense though, dear brothers, and i hope none is taken where none was given, but i tend to believe ever more firmly, at 63, that some of the old language is like the good old language of the good old doctors of yonder years, language of the "stop kidding yourself"-injunction style. Not the overbearing commanding style neither, but yes, a clearer injunction style, as old damned earthquakes keep on happening also, with 8000 lives snapped like sticks in a moment's notice. And i am not saying God showed us some pent up anger here. But let's get somewhat clearer on the good dying part and some of it's urgency, given all this godddamned kinda dark dying in what one used to call, without resentment, acts of God. No woke whatsoever but yes more wakefulness in vigorous Jesuslike "cut he crap" -style, I guess.

Interesting analysis, but with a big hole in the logic. It is all very well theorising, as you do, that (a) church teaching is correct, (b) people cannot follow it because it is difficult, and (c) if you accompany them on the journey you will be with them when they come to accept them and lead them back to the church. But what if their lack of acceptance of a teaching is not because it is difficult, but simply because it is wrong, and their experience of life shows that even if male celibates in a church bubble don't know it? What happens if the problem isn't with them, but with you?

Church teaching has dramatically changed all through history when it realised, often long after everyone else, that it was wrong and ridiculous. Pope Gregory XVI in an 1832 encyclical condemned freedom of conscience in society as an "absurd and erroneous teaching or rather madness". The church u-turned on that. Vatican II threw that out, as it did Leo XIII's condemnation of equality and participation of citizens in civic and political life. Up to 1950 the church taught that using so-called natural family planning was a mortal sin in any cases. Then Pius XII did an about turn and taught the exact opposite. As late at 1860, the church taught that it was not a sin to own another human being so long as the slave was treated humanely. Leo XIII threw that out and declared slavery in any case a sin. The Church, influenced by St Thomas Aquinas, taught capital punishment was morally justified. Popes executed people in the Papal States. Then in 1995 Pope St John Paul II adopted the exact opposite, arguing that except in such limited cases as to make it almost impossible, capital punishment was morally repugnant and sinful. The decree Tametsi in the Council of Trent, about the need for a priest to witness a marriage for it to be valid, was an about turn of 1500 years of church teaching.

Few institutions have changed their doctrines and teachings more often than the Catholic Church, all while saying it is unchanging.

If your definition of "walking with people" is simply to walk along, eyes closed, ears closed, and try to lead someone back to the teaching, then you are wasting your time. Maybe by opening your eyes and ears to their experience you might find out that sometimes the problem isn't that church teaching is hard, but that in the experience of millions living real experiences, it is simply wrong. In other words, the fault isn't with them. It is with you and the church.

This is pathetic. Catholic Church teaching: DO NOT THINK FOR YOURSELF!

If I am not mistaken, Jesuits were created by st. Ignatius Loyola to defend and preach Catholicism. Not to destruct it and preach modernistic and protestant teachings.

Hello

I struggle with the idea that only the Holy Spirit convicts of sin. When I do it, it is ALWAYS from my teeny tiny, self-referential perspective.

Thank you.

Praying for the suppression of jesuits.

Blessing sodomite relationships? Blessing intrinsic evil? Is that a Jesuit thing? That's a harsh question isn't it. You know that's going to be discussed at the Sinodal meeting in Oct! Why is Father James Martin not laicized? How about that for an upfront question. That is something that really needs discussed! Father James Martin is praised and traditional Latin Mass suppressed. Sounds demonic doesn't it!

The question and title of this video is interesting, but I am afraid I found no meaningful answer to it.

Thank you 💕

Interesting. I’m watching this program for first time. We need a vocabulary to understand the new way of talk in the C. Church today: to listen- to accompany- all or nothing- freedom- sexual beings- inclusion-synodality-homosexual- transgender- women-pedofilia- love- conscience- body- freedom of conscience- perfection- judgment…etc. etc. In this vocabulary we have a nomenclature to understand each other when we talk so serenely and understanding. The problem begins, when we start questioning. The answer generally lead us to talk about perfection, since we are imperfect humans, then we have to accept the reality of exceptions then we make exceptions as the normal and what seems a common sense, what seems normal, is dump in the trash can of unreality, and end up living in fantasy.
These way of thinking and acting, has lead us in the Catholic Church to the creation of a New Church, that is trying to form a “new man” and “new women”.
“By their fruits you shall know them” the scripture tell us and “wide is the road that leads to perdition and narrow is the road that leads us to salvation” or Paul stab deep, when He tell us “do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed….” The Tower of Babel is always enticing. The Lord shall destroy, once more this fantasy.

It's outrageous that the same people who had fought for decades the Teachings of the Church regarding same-sex marriage and the impossibility for people in grave sin to receive Holy Communion; now that the Pope has changed these teachings, come out to tell us that we have to accept the Church's Teachings. It's also outrageous also because implicit in their position, is the lie that the Teachings of the Church regarding faith and morals can change or be changed by anyone, when the truth is that not even the Pope can change any of them. The truth is that once a Pope declares a truth, it can't be changed by any other Pope preciseluy because all the following Popes and the laity have to be obedient to what the previous Popes and the Church has taught. This is a basic principle that makes us what we have been for 2,000 years: CATHOLICS.

Daily I meet strangers, friends, intimates. Through those brief, incandescent Gospels, through Jesus, I know, with certainty, they are each the face of God. Through the church, via the pomp of its magisterial, 600-page catechism, I am told some of them are intrinsically disordered. They are not. God is not intrinsically disordered.

The Catholic Church's position on birth control is irrational, and any response the Church makes to this point is equally irrational.

But drawing others into your own sin and confusion is very dangerous because you are responsible for your neighbors sin by following your sin.

The Church IS God, he created the Church for your spiritual health, not for your controlling of it or molding it to suite your own wants and desires.
No human can one up the Trinity.
You never speak of prayer and obedience to it. What’s that about ?

Are the Jesuits developing a new Theology of compromises to the secular world?

I note that the focus here is on moral questions. What about doctrine? Is it possible for a Catholic in good standing to question transubstantiation? Gosh, I hope so because Pew Research tells us a majority of Catholics in the US, including those who go to mass regularly, do just that. Otherwise there’s going to be a whole of excommunication in our future.

I came for an answer and got sophistry

why do you want to be called a catholic if you do not believe in what the Church teaches? What is the point?

Your nuts!!!!!!!!!! Jesus said"those that say lord, lord shall not enter the kingdom of heaven! Only those you do the will of my father will go to heaven/!Have you ever heard of confession. We must obey God's will or we don't love God/first commandment.

MODERNISM. 101!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes

+JMJ The Jesuits are lost.

I grew up in a strict fundamentalist, Protestant church whose adherents bore a striking resemblance to the Pharisees. I became a Catholic as an adult because the church is the one, unbroken line of Christ’s teachings. But the divide I’m seeing in the American church scares me because the “back to pre-Vat II” Catholics are so much like the behavior of those in the church of my father. At the end of my RCIA class 34 years ago, the priest had us all stand up and recite the creed. Then he said, “All this time we’ve been talking about what the church doesn’t believe. This is what it does believe, and that’s about it.” But that attitude seems to be changing. Now not only do I have to love and honor the Eucharist, I have to sign on to loving Adoration. There’s a hundred things like that, and it makes me sad.