Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lesson 22: Moral Theology (Part 1) BY FATHER ROBERT ALTIER
A VOICE IN THE DESERT ^ | 5/03/2006 | SOLDIEROFJESUSCHRIST

Posted on 05/03/2006 11:08:23 AM PDT by MILESJESU

Fundamentals of Catholicism by Father Robert Altier

Lesson 22: Moral Theology (Part 1)

Throughout the previous lessons we have been looking at the basics of the Faith, but now we have to look at the implications of that, how to put it into practice. In his letter in the New Testament, Saint James says, Faith without works is dead. It is not just enough to have faith. Jesus said, Not everyone who cries out “Lord, Lord,” will enter the kingdom of heaven. Well, they would not be calling Him “Lord” if they did not have some faith. In fact, Saint James even goes so far as to say, Even the demons believe and they tremble. It is not enough to be able to say, “I believe in God,” because so does Satan. We have to put it into practice. In order to be saved, we have to do more than just believe with our minds and hearts; we have to act upon our beliefs and strive to do the will of God in our ordinary everyday lives.

As we have seen many times now, our actions are expressions of our choices. When we make a choice, which is an act of the will, it is expressed physically in and through the body. Therefore, as images of God, we are created to reflect God in the physical order by the way we act, and we are the only beings who can do that. Animals cannot do that. Angels cannot do that. Animals have bodies, but they are not persons. Angels are persons, but they do not have bodies.

(Excerpt) Read more at desertvoice.org ...


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Ministry/Outreach; Prayer; Worship
KEYWORDS: fraltier; moraltheology; talks
Fundamentals of Catholicism by Father Robert Altier

Lesson 22: Moral Theology (Part 1)

Throughout the previous lessons we have been looking at the basics of the Faith, but now we have to look at the implications of that, how to put it into practice. In his letter in the New Testament, Saint James says, Faith without works is dead. It is not just enough to have faith. Jesus said, Not everyone who cries out “Lord, Lord,” will enter the kingdom of heaven. Well, they would not be calling Him “Lord” if they did not have some faith. In fact, Saint James even goes so far as to say, Even the demons believe and they tremble. It is not enough to be able to say, “I believe in God,” because so does Satan. We have to put it into practice. In order to be saved, we have to do more than just believe with our minds and hearts; we have to act upon our beliefs and strive to do the will of God in our ordinary everyday lives.

As we have seen many times now, our actions are expressions of our choices. When we make a choice, which is an act of the will, it is expressed physically in and through the body. Therefore, as images of God, we are created to reflect God in the physical order by the way we act, and we are the only beings who can do that. Animals cannot do that. Angels cannot do that. Animals have bodies, but they are not persons. Angels are persons, but they do not have bodies. We are the only creatures that can act as physical images of God to be able to express in and through the human body what it is to be in the image of God and to act as God would.

The idea, then, of moral theology is to put faith into practice. It is looking at the implications of faith with regard to our relationships to God and to others. Morality is concern with what is good for the human person in the area of personal relationships with others. That is what it is all about. It seeks what is truly good for the human person in all situations. And since it is the good which makes us happy, if we find the norms for living a good life, it will follow that we are going to be reasonably happy. If we reject what is moral then it is going to lead to unhappiness.

All you have to do is look around at people who you know. If there is somebody who is living a truly good and holy life, even if they are suffering terribly, there is going to be a certain joy there. There is a happiness. They know they are living the right way. And if you know somebody who is living in the throes of sin, even though they tell you how happy they are, they never are. There is pleasure, but pleasure and happiness are not the same thing. That, again, is where Satan has us bamboozled because he wants us to believe that pleasure and happiness are one and the same. Pleasure does not make anybody happy. It is momentary and fleeting and then it is gone. It leaves you empty if it is not proper. And so anyone who rejects what is moral is going to lead a very unhappy life.

Once again, just look around. How many happy people do you know? Not very many. It is one of the tragedies of our day. People are not happy because they are caught up in all kinds of other things that are not going to lead them to happiness, but they are leading to a lot of emptiness and unhappiness. We need to be able to find what is going to make us happy, and it is exactly the opposite of what society tells us is going to make us happy. What is truly going to make us happy is doing the will of God, as we have seen before, because God only wants what is the best for us.

Most of us, if we think about it, will say, “Oh, that doesn’t sound very fun.” Well, first of all, life is not about having fun. Secondly, I can tell you that I have never had more fun in my life than doing what God wants. When I used to try to do things the way I wanted, it was empty and miserable. But then you have a conversion experience and you start doing it God’s way and it is a blast! When I was not living the way I should have, nobody ever threatened to throw me out of a restaurant. But when I started living according to the way God wanted, we would go out to restaurants and we would be having so much fun that they would come and ask us to quiet down or tell us that we would have to be thrown out – because we were enjoying life, we were happy, we were praying and doing what God wanted. Isn’t that what the Lord said, that He would give us a joy that no one could take from us? That is what He provides if we are living the way we are supposed to. There is a deep and abiding joy. It is not fleeting pleasure. It is profound and it is deep. If we are willing to seek the will of God and live according to the way we are supposed to, we are going to be happy, not only in this life but forever in the next, which is what we are created for.

For Catholics, morality is more than just common sense. It is more than the results of philosophical or anthropological studies. And, thanks be to God, it is more than the results of opinion polls. That is what Americans like for deciding what is moral and what is not. “Let’s take a poll and see what the majority of people think.” It does not matter. In the first lesson we asked, “Why were the people of Israel right and everybody else was wrong when it came to the fact that there is only one God?” The whole world said there was a multiplicity of gods and this one little group of people said there is only one God. They were right and everybody else was wrong. It is not about opinion polls. It is not because everybody else is doing it. It is about what is right.

The wonderful thing is that when you know you are right, you know you cannot be wrong. It is not an arrogant statement because the truth is objective, not subjective. If we can conform ourselves to the truth of God as the Church teaches us, then we know we are doing what is right because it is not “my own opinion” and it is not “my own idea.” It is God’s teaching, it is His truth, and that is what sets us free. Jesus said: The truth will set you free. You were made for the truth and the truth will set you free. If we live according to the truth, we will have the freedom we are seeking and we will have happiness. On the other hand, He tells us that if we sin we become slaves to sin and we are unhappy. What does the devil tell us? “All these sinful things are going to make you happy.” They have never made anybody happy. All they do is lead to misery.

We think that if we do it God’s way we are going to be so miserable and unhappy and lonely, but it is just the opposite. When you are with God, you are never alone; you cannot be because you are with Him. The hermit who wrote the book The Hermitage Within had a profound statement when he said, “You’re never less alone than when you’re alone with God,” because you are with Him Who is all in all. If we do it His way, we are happy.

And it is an objective thing; it is not about opinions. Morality for Catholics flows from our faith in Jesus Christ. Jesus taught us about many things, but He also taught us how to live a good life. If you want to see it encapsulized, it is in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7). That is where He brings it all together. There are lots of teachings all over the Gospels, but He brings it all together right there for the moral teachings. Not only did He teach His disciples how to live a good life, but He did it Himself first. He lived a good life, and He becomes for us the model for all Christian living. Morality is based on the words and the deeds of Jesus Christ.

We see that Our Lord does not sit in an ivory tower and try to tell us what we are supposed to do. He does not ask anything of us that He was not willing to do Himself. He came into this world and He lived a moral life, and He asks us to do the same. He came into this world and He suffered so that when we suffer we can unite it with His sufferings. All these things He did for us and showed us the way. If we look at what He did and we listen to what He taught, we are going to find the way to happiness and fulfillment.

How do we achieve salvation and eternal life? By doing good and avoiding evil. That is simple if you think about it, until you try to put it into practice. It is extremely hard to live, needless to say. The most difficult part is to discern in a particular circumstance what is good and what is evil. This is why it is so important that we become familiar with some basic principles because morality is about making these decisions in the concrete, and being able to know what is right and wrong.

The first principle we have to know is that any act of a human person must be a conscious human act before it can have any moral quality at all. A human act is one which proceeds from knowledge and free will. If either adequate knowledge or freedom is lacking in the act of the person, then the act is not fully human, and therefore it is not fully moral. If you are having a dream about immoral things, it is not a sin because it is not freely willed. If somebody puts a gun to your head and tells you to do something, you are not freely willing it; you are being forced to do something. If you did not know that something was wrong then you are not responsible for it.

This also means that other things human beings do have no moral quality at all. These are things like digestion, breathing, and the beating of the heart. These are not human acts; these are acts of a human person. In order for anything to have any moral quality, it has to be a human act; it has to have knowledge and free will.

If there is an act which proceeds from knowledge and free will, the act then is either morally good or morally evil, one or the other. We can determine the goodness or the evilness of an act based on three points: the object, the circumstances, and the intention. We will look at each one of those.

The object is that with which the action is essentially concerned. To put it into one word or a brief phrase: lying, stealing, feeding the poor, praying the Rosary. It is the act you are doing. For an act to be morally good, the object must be morally good. That is, the thing with which the act is concerned must conform to the will of God. If you are doing something and you put a title on it and it is not something in accordance with God’s will, with His law, then it is not a morally good act.

The second determining factor in judging an act is the circumstances. The circumstances include things like the person involved, the time, the place, the occasion, all these different elements that go into the act itself. The circumstances are distinct from the object, but they can alter or change the moral tone of an action. Circumstances can either increase or decrease the culpability of an act. Take the exact same act, for instance, telling a lie, and ask if there is a difference between the teenage kid who thinks all the way home about what lie he is going to tell his mother to try to cover for what he did, so it is a large premeditated lie, as opposed to a little white lie to try to get yourself out of an embarrassing situation – it just popped up and you were not even thinking about it. Well, both of them are lies. One is a mortal sin and one is an imperfection probably; it would not even be a sin at all depending on the circumstances.

There are many things that are good in and of themselves, but they would actually become sinful depending on the circumstances. It is good to sleep; however, it is not good to sleep at work. If you are being paid to be a security guard, you are not supposed to be taking a nap. So while it is good to sleep, it has to be in the proper context. Eating is a good thing, but if you are breaking a diet or a fast then it is not good. If it is gluttonous, it is not good. Being disobedient to a superior or to one’s state in life is a sin, even if you are doing something good. Let us say that a young mother wants to go pray. She has three or four kids at home and she decides to close the door and lock it behind her and go off to the Blessed Sacrament chapel and pray, leaving her kids alone to wreak havoc on one another and the house. Going to pray is a good thing, but abandoning your state in life is not. You have to make sure you are being obedient to the duties of your state in life. You cannot walk away from what is proper even if it is to do something which seems good. Circumstances, therefore, always have to be considered when judging the moral quality of an act because all of our actions take place within certain circumstances: time, place, and so on.

The third point to consider is the intention. The intention is also the end or the purpose of the act. In other words, why did you do it? What was the purpose? Every human act, regardless of how big or small is always done for a reason. We never do anything without a reason. Usually, the reason is that somehow we see this as being good, whatever it might be. Even when we know that something is very bad, we look on it as somehow good because of the excitement that is involved or the fun or the pleasure. If you are tormenting your little sister, for instance, it is just for the sheer joy of watching the agony she is going through. It is sadistic. But somehow the teenage boy looks at that and says, “This will be fun. This will be good. Just watch what I’m going to do to my sister.” Even though he knows it is completely wrong, he is somehow looking at it as good, because everything we do somehow seems good to us.

For a human act to be morally good, the agent (the person who is performing the act) must have a good intention. The intention must be to accomplish something which is objectively good, not just because it seems good subjectively. If the teenage boy decides to torment his sister because he thinks it is going to be funny to watch what happens to her, that is not good, even though he has decided in his mind that it is a good thing because it is fun for him. It has to correspond to objective criteria. That is why morality is not left up to us subjectively, but there have to be objective criteria for determining the moral quality of an action.

Some actions are always wrong no matter how noble they might seem at the time. Things like stealing, blasphemy, murder, and fornication are always going to be wrong. There are distinctions that can be made. For instance, if there is a parent whose children are starving, if that parent goes to the store and steals some bread and peanut butter in order to feed the kids, is that going to be a mortal sin? The answer at that point is “no.” If you go to the store and steal lobster and steak to feed your kids, yes, that will be a mortal sin. If you are trying to provide the basics so your kids will continue to live and that is all you can do (it is not like you have money to afford it and you are going to steal the food instead), that would be wrong, but if they were starving and you had no means to feed them and all you could do was to try to steal the basics of what you needed, then that would not be a serious matter. The circumstances make the difference.

Other actions can be good or bad depending on why we do them. For instance, to have a drink is not a sin, but drinking with the intention to get drunk certainly is. The intention itself is something which can be a sin all by itself. Let us say that something happened and you were really upset, and you decided you were going to go out to the bar and get yourself completely plowed. You reach into your pocket and find that you have five bucks. Well, it probably is not going to happen then, is it? But your intention was to get drunk. That is already a mortal sin because it was your intention. Thanks be to God, you could not carry it out. It is not as serious a matter as if you had actually carried it out, but the intention to do something immoral is already a sin.

This is why Our Lord told us in the Gospel reading that anyone who looks lustfully at a woman has already committed adultery with her in his heart. That does not mean someone who looks impurely at a woman – that by itself is a sin – but looking at a woman with lust or committing adultery in the heart basically means that if you could, you would. In other words, while looking lustfully at this woman, if the man says in his heart, “If I had the opportunity to do something immoral with this woman, I would. I want to do this with her but I can’t because somebody’s watching. I would do this if I could.” That is lust in the heart, not just looking inappropriately at somebody, but actually having the intention to do something which is immoral. The intention itself is something sinful.

You have to consider the intention of what the person was doing when they committed the act. Oftentimes, the person will say, “I didn’t intend that. I just didn’t think.” That is going to decrease the culpability involved. You were not trying to do something wrong; you just did something stupid.

For an action to be morally good, the intention must be good. It is good to donate time or money to the poor, but if this is done out of vanity or revenge, the action is not good even though the poor are helped. I think about that guy from Minneapolis who used to throw dollar bills off the float just to see the people scramble for the dollar bills like a bunch of animals. There was nothing good in that. He was doing it for himself. Remember what the Lord said; he has already received his reward because he was not doing it for the good of the people. The Lord said, Do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing. If he is standing up there trying to draw attention to himself by throwing dollar bills off the float, there is nothing there that is going to deserve a reward from the Lord.

One of my favorite stories of revenge is the case of this wealthy man who decided that because his wife had a couple of wrinkles on her face she was not a trophy anymore. So he found a little chickee someplace and ran off. He was living with this woman in California, divorced his wife, but had left his Cadillac sitting in the garage. His ex-wife asked, “What do you want me to do with your car?” He said, “It would be awfully expensive to ship it down here, so why don’t you just sell it and send me the money?” So she put an add in the paper: “Cadillac for $50.” A teenage kid calls her up and asks, “What’s wrong with the car?” She says, “Nothing. It’s brand new. It’s only got a few hundred miles on it.” Then he says, “What’s the catch?” “Oh, there is no catch. If you want it, come over and get it. Fifty bucks.” She sold him the Cadillac for fifty bucks and sent her husband the money. The kid got himself a brand new Cadillac for fifty bucks and was happy as a lark, but she did it out of revenge. The kid was happy because he got a great deal, but it was not the right thing to do; and obviously, neither was what the husband did, to say the least.

We need to be careful we avoid the extreme of thinking that the whole of morality is based on the intention. The best intention cannot make an intrinsically evil act into something good. If a terrorist wants to change the government, to blow something up or to kill somebody is still wrong. Even if their idea to change the government might be correct, you cannot use immoral means. Being Robin Hood, stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, is still a matter of stealing and it is wrong. We have to make sure that we not only to have a good intention, but are doing the right thing. All three of these things – the object, the circumstance, and the intention – have to be taken into consideration when looking at the morality of an action.

One of the biggest problems we have today, and in fact have had throughout the centuries, is that people think the end justifies the means. It is a major problem we have today. Someone might have an idea that there is a real population problem in the world today, so they suggest we need to kill babies, that we need to allow abortion because we have this population problem. First of all, if everybody on the face of the earth right now stood front to back and shoulder to shoulder, we would all fit more than easily within the Twin Cities. Every human being on the face of the earth standing next to one another would fit into Jacksonville, Florida. If every human being on the face of the earth (not every family, but every human being) had an average-sized home, we would all fit into the state of Texas. There is not a major population problem. Now you can look at certain areas and say, “Look at the population in the cities.” Have you ever flown over Nebraska? Have you ever flown over North Dakota? There is not a population problem. There are more people living in the Twin Cities than there are in the entire state of North Dakota. Why? We do not have a population problem, but they try to tell us we do. Therefore, they try to tell us we need to kill babies in order to keep the population down. It is not a problem. They tell us we will not be able to feed the people. Guess what? They have been telling us that for centuries. God keeps providing. We have more food than we can deal with. Every day in America we are literally destroying tons and tons of food because it is cheaper to do that than put it on a boat and send it to people who are starving. In order to give aid to starving people in Third World countries, what does the United States do? We tell them that they have to accept our contraceptives and force that on their people or we will not give them food. How pathetic is that? There is not a population problem in the world.

There is a moral problem in the world, but it is not a population problem. Even if somebody wanted to suggest that there was, you cannot resort to something evil in order to try to bring about something that you think is truly good. Regardless of the goodness of the intention, that intention cannot and does not make something which is essentially evil into something which is good. An evil thing is always going to be evil. Again, the morality of an action has to be determined by the object, the circumstances, and the intention. If one of these three things is evil, then the action is to be avoided. We are to do only things that are good.

A fundamental difference between a human person and a plant or an animal is that we are held responsible for our actions. Both plants and animals act in accordance with their nature and they cannot do anything different. But we also have a nature. And as we have seen, human actions flow not from nature but from knowledge and freedom. To be able to know and freely choose is actually part of human nature. To be a person, remember, is to be a living being with a mind and a free will. To know and to choose is part and parcel of who we are. Responsibility, then, is related to free actions that flow from knowledge. This is why people who are mentally deranged are not held responsible for their actions. For people who do horrible things, even the court of law will recognize that. They will say they are not guilty because of mental illness. If they are mentally deranged, if there is something wrong with them, they are not held responsible for their actions.

Related to responsibility is the notion of imputability. Imputability means that a person may be declared the author of an action, and therefore is held responsible for the action. The more free an action is, the more imputable it is, and vice versa. In other words, if you ask the question: Who is responsible for this? It is the one who had the greatest freedom. The more freedom you had in doing something, the more the action can be imputed to you. That is also with regard to knowledge and free will. Lesser knowledge and the lesser freedom also restrict the responsibility and the imputability of an act. There are some factors which remove imputability. Those things would be such factors as ignorance, emotion, fear, bad habit, violence, hypnosis, drugs, mental illness, etc. If a person has a problem with some of these things, they might not be responsible for the actions they perform.

Let us say there is a person who is a complete alcoholic and they are living in the gutter, basically. Are they responsible for the fact that they are drunk? At that point, no. Before a person gets to that point and they make the free choice to get drunk, yes, they are responsible for that action. But when it becomes so habitual, and in fact such an addiction, at that point the imputability and therefore the culpability may even be removed entirely depending on the circumstances. If a person is on drugs and is completely messed up because of that, are they responsible for what they do? Not entirely. However, they are responsible for freely choosing to take the drugs. Therefore, they are held responsible for what follows from it. Even though when they are on the drugs they may not be responsible for what they do per se, they are responsible for having taken the drugs in the first place. So there are things that can reduce the person’s imputability of a particular act, even though you have to look at the larger picture.

Other things like ignorance, not in the pejorative sense but ignorance in the proper sense, you are not responsible for. If you do not know something, you are not responsible for it. If there is a great deal of fear, there are some people who just get frozen in the fear. They cannot act; they cannot do anything. If that is the case, then they are not responsible because they are frozen. Things like that get in the way. Because these things affect the person’s mind or the will or both, they also reduce the responsibility that was involved with the action.

This is why we are held responsible only for what we know, and that is a pretty wonderful thing. The law does not look at it that way. If you do not know what the speed limit is and you are going 20 miles per hour over the speed limit, try to explain to the officer that you did not know the speed limit, he is going to give you a ticket anyway. Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. However, with God, ignorance is an excuse.

Therefore, we need to make a very important distinction between ignorance which cannot be overcome and ignorance which can be overcome with a minimal effort. That which cannot be overcome is called “invincible ignorance.” And that which can be overcome fairly easily is called “vincible ignorance.” Since vincible ignorance can be cleared up if one desires it, the guilt involved in violating the law of God will depend upon the degree of neglect involved in the voluntary ignorance. The idea of saying “Ignorance is bliss” is just false. Ignorance is ignorance, plain and simple. To say, “Don’t tell me; don’t pass out that Examination of Conscience because if I look at that then I’ll have to change my life,” you are going to be held responsible for the fact that you did not look at it when you had the opportunity because you freely chose to remain in the ignorance. We have an obligation to learn and to put it into practice.

We have all experienced occasions where we or somebody else is invincibly ignorant about something, not because of any fault of their own. You try to explain something to somebody and they just do not get it and they are not going to; the light bulb never goes on. They can be very intelligent people, but for whatever reason, in this particular area you are trying to describe to them, they just do not get it. That is invincible ignorance. No matter how many times you try to go through it with them, they are just not going to grasp the concept. But if it is something which can be cleared up easily with a little bit of effort, that is called vincible ignorance, something which can be overcome relatively easily.

Emotions can certainly inhibit a person’s clear thinking; also, they can inhibit a person’s freedom in choosing. Sometimes emotions can be so strong that they remove all culpability, as I mentioned before. Fear is a mental anxiety due to an impending evil. It can lessen the imputability, but it can also increase the merit involved in performing a good act when one persists in the good despite the fear. If you look at something and you might be a little bit afraid of being able to address whatever the issue might be, but you persevere in that, even though you are afraid, that is going to increase the merit for what you have done. If, on the other hand, the fear freezes you, then you are not going to be held responsible. So it can decrease the responsibility and it can also increase the merit if you are willing to overcome it.

Violence, bad habits, mental illness, hypnosis, all these things either diminish moral responsibility or totally erase it depending on their influence over the mind and the will. If a person freely chooses to place an obstacle in the way of knowledge or freedom, then they are held responsible for that. As I mentioned earlier, you are responsible for taking the drugs or choosing to get drunk. If you do some stupid things while you are high or while you are drunk, while you may not be entirely responsible at the time for what you are doing, you are held responsible because you made a free choice to take the drugs that you knew were going to mess up your mind and then you acted out on them. Depending on the circumstances, the responsibility has to be imputed for what was done or for what was omitted.

This is a very important point to recognize with regard to the teaching of Our Lord. That is, with sins of commission (sins that we actually do that are wrong), He was very merciful with those sorts of things. With sins of omission (things that we should have done but did not do), the Lord was very intolerant, shall we say, with regard to those things. That is a point most of us miss. We are pretty good at picking up the sins we commit, the things we actually do. We can down the list and say, “I did this, and I did this, and I did this…” But we really need to look also at the things we needed to do that we did not do, the things that are part of our state in life that we have allowed to slip by because we just did not feel like doing them. Maybe they do not seem like a real big thing, but depending on what they are, things that we should have done but did not do, those are things the Lord is also going to hold us responsible for because we had knowledge that we should have done them but we made a free choice not to do them. We are also responsible for those sorts of things.

The Lord be with you. May the blessing of Almighty God, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, descend upon you and remain with you forever. Amen.

[End of Lesson 22]

1 posted on 05/03/2006 11:08:26 AM PDT by MILESJESU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah; sandyeggo; Siobhan; Lady In Blue; NYer; Pyro7480; livius; ...

Lesson 22: Moral Theology (Part 1) BY FATHER ROBERT ALTIER PING!

PLEASE FREEPMAIL ME IF YOU WANT ON OR OFF THIS LIST


2 posted on 05/03/2006 11:12:08 AM PDT by MILESJESU (JESUS, THE DIVINE MERCY I TRUST IN YOU.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SOLDIEROFJESUSCHRIST

I can tell right away that is one that really clicks with me.


3 posted on 05/03/2006 11:20:39 AM PDT by steve86 (Acerbic by nature, not nurture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BearWash

Dear Bearwash,

I take it then, that you like this specific lesson.

Have you Checked out Lessons 18-21 on The Holy Eucharsit as well as on The Holy Confession.

IN THE RISEN LORD JESUS CHRIST,


4 posted on 05/03/2006 12:40:47 PM PDT by MILESJESU (JESUS, THE DIVINE MERCY I TRUST IN YOU.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SOLDIEROFJESUSCHRIST
"In order to be saved, we have to do more than just believe with our minds and hearts; we have to act upon our beliefs and strive to do the will of God in our ordinary everyday lives."

Acts 16:29-31
Ephesians 2:7-9
jw

5 posted on 05/03/2006 1:04:42 PM PDT by JWinNC (www.anailinhisplace.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
1)Fundamentals of Catholicism by Father Robert Altier Lesson 1: The Unity of God

2)Fundamentals of Catholicism by Father Robert Altier Lesson 2: The Most Holy Trinity

3)Lesson 3: God’s Creation of the World

4)Lesson 4: Creation of the Human Person and Original Sin

5)LESSON 5: JESUS CHRIST- GOD AND MAN (PART 1) BY FATHER ROBERT ALTIER

6)Lesson 6: Jesus Christ – God and Man (Part 2) BY FATHER ROBERT ALTIER

7)Fundamentals of Catholicism by Father Robert Altier Lesson 7: Mary (Part 1)

8)Fundamentals of Catholicism by Father Robert Altier Lesson 8: Mary (Part 2)

9)Fundamentals of Catholicism by Father Robert Altier Lesson 9: The Church (Part 1)

10)Fundamentals of Catholicism by Father Robert Altier Lesson 10: The Church (Part 2)

11)Fundamentals of Catholicism by Father Robert Altier Lesson 11: Divine Revelation (Part 1)

12)Fundamentals of Catholicism by Father Robert Altier Lesson 12: Divine Revelation (Part 2)

13)Lesson 13: Grace and the Divine Life (Part 1)

14)LESSON 14: GRACE AND THE DIVINE LIFE (PART 2)

15)Lesson 15: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE SACRAMENTS)

16)Lesson 16: Baptism, Confirmation, and Anointing of the Sick)

17)Lesson 17: The Eucharist (Part 1) BY FATHER ROBERT ALTIER)

18)Lesson 18: The Eucharist (Part 2) BY FATHER ROBERT ALTIER)

19)Lesson 19: Confession (Part 1) BY FATHER ALTIER)

20)Lesson 20: Confession (Part 2) BY FATHER ROBERT ALTIER)

21)Lesson 21: Holy Matrimony and Holy Orders BY FATHER ROBERT ALTIER)

6 posted on 05/03/2006 1:46:00 PM PDT by MILESJESU (JESUS, THE DIVINE MERCY I TRUST IN YOU.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All

FUNDAMENTALS OF CATHOLICISM BUMP


7 posted on 05/03/2006 3:21:13 PM PDT by MILESJESU (JESUS, THE DIVINE MERCY I TRUST IN YOU.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: All

FATHER ALTIER'S TALKS BUMP


8 posted on 05/03/2006 11:59:32 PM PDT by MILESJESU (JESUS, THE DIVINE MERCY I TRUST IN YOU.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson