The sun is shining this morning, here and now.
That is an objective truth.
The sky is completely blue and that giant ball of light is in the sky, causing shadows to appear behind various objects. Even if some cannot see it shining, or if one asserted that the sun is really NOT shining, it would not change the objective truth that it IS shining, here and now. An objective truth cannot be true and not true at the same time. The sun cannot be shining and not shining at the same time, in the same place. And it is indeed shining.
It is a beautiful day. Thank you, God, for this beautiful sunny day by the Great Lakes.
That is a subjective feeling for me. I think this sunny day is beautiful.
Assuming that you also consider a day in which the sun is shining to be beautiful, that subjective feeling is true for you as well. But perhaps you are a farmer who is desperate for rain, and another sunny day is not “beautiful” for you. Subjective feelings can be true and untrue at the same time because they are dependent upon the view of the subject. While the farmer who wants rain cannot change the truth that the day is sunny, he can espouse the feeling that the day is not beautiful. The same applies to such statements as “Broccoli is delicious,” “Graeter’s has the best ice cream,” and “The Tigers will go to the Series.” We are free to disagree or discount these statements entirely because they can be both right and wrong. (Well, except for the Graeter’s—-just visit Cincinnati and try some.)
Why is this important?
In order to achieve a goal, to live healthfully, to govern fairly, to really do anything at all, we must understand and base our actions, first and foremost, upon the objective truths about things. Objective truth always begets objective truth because it is always true no matter what anyone else feels or what the polls say. Subjective feelings—what is just true for me—cannot beget objective truth, because subjective feelings can be true and not true at the same time. They can change. They are not dependable. Nothing permanent can be based upon mere subjective feelings.
If my house is not built properly, because it was not based upon objective truths of measurement, gravity, and weight distribution, it will eventually fail in some way. If I spend more money than I have, because I have not objectively assessed my income and expenses, I will run out of money, need to borrow from you, or perhaps go hungry. If I eat more calories than I use, because I am ignoring the objective truths regarding the calories I consume and expend, I will get fat(ter), become unhealthy, even, perhaps, to the point of death. Objective truth can serve as the basis for other objective truths because they are always true. Subjective feelings, because they can be true and untrue at the same time, can never be the basis of any sound planning.
Some in our society, unfortunately, have been portraying subjective feelings as objective truths, either out of sentimentality or a personal view of justice, and then stating that it is unfair if everyone else does not subscribe to the same subjective feelings. Sadly, when the media often promotes these subjective feelings du jour as objective truths, many people assume they are so without even thinking.
Recently, I saw an article in our local paper about a young woman who is very overweight. She wrote a book, made a video, and has started a blog to support other young women who are also very overweight. Her premise is that she is the way she is meant to be and that her weight is healthy and good for her. She wants to keep her weight as it is and the rest of the world is wrong to view things any differently. The newspaper writer presented this woman’s subjective feelings as objective truths for the purposes of promoting the self-esteem of such large-sized women. But the untruth of her statements is objectively clear. Humans were not built to carry 100+ pounds of extra weight for the long term, and such obesity is not good for one’s health. Eventually, unless she loses weight, her body will break down in some way, hurting herself and her family who loves her and depends upon her. By relying upon her subjective feelings as if they were objective truths, she will suffer.
When society enshrines a subjective feeling as an objective truth, the result can be dangerous and even deadly. The Nazi government’s declaration that certain humans were less than human led to the murder of millions.
Today, many subjective feelings, often based upon narcissism or self-absorption, are being treated as objective truths and resulting in suffering for all involved. Compare the following objective truths with currently popular subjective feelings:
There are truths which will always be true. Something is only true if I feel it is true.
The male and female sexes are determined by the existent DNA. My sex is determined by how I feel; my child’s sex is determined by how I think he or she feels.
A human cannot be anything but human. A human is not human if I feel it is not human.
A living human has the right to continue living. If I feel that a living human does not deserve to continue living, I have the right to kill it.
Each child is biologically created from two parents, a mother and a father, and has an inherent need and right, if possible, to be loved and raised by those parents. A child’s parents are determined by me, irrespective of biology, needs, or any rights of that child.
You may choose to live in a world of your own making, but don’t force that on our children. They deserve the truth.
(Thank you to Fr. Mike Schmitz for his video which inspired this essay. See, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68FQV0iLFeA)
40 thoughts on “Our Children Deserve the Truth”
Pingback: Google
Size is the last prejudice allowed, God made everything in different sizes and it is the same with people. Some people will never lose weight no matter how hard they try just as some will never gain weight no matter how hard they try. To call someone big or small is a form of prejudice and it is proven that people of every size pass as every age so one cannot say that we are going to die sooner because we are heavy. In fact, it has been stated that heave people live longer then skinny people. As for the sex, the male determines the sex of the child and it may depend on how active or inactive one was when the sperm hits the egg or it may all be up to God who wants this child conceived at a certain time in each couples’ life. As for people who claim to be born gay, maybe the Dad keep thinking he wanted to have a certain gender every time he had sex and the Mom keep wishing for a son throughout the pregnancy and the child has these thoughts that it should have been a boy or a girl. Have any studies been done on this theory. Imagine being in the womb and having your Mom thinking of how cute this dress would look on you or vice-versa what a great baseball player you would be. Many children who had parents that played music all the time of put a recorder on their belly have been born with great musical talents. It is just food for thought. Do you think that you child will be a doctor, lawyer, teacher or not have a chance in life?
As for marriage, “till death do us part” now those words can be very powerful because when people do get divorced the love between them had died. So in reality they are not really breaking their covenant, in some cases one party never kept the covenant made before God. In many cases, one spouse will pass into the next world and that love never dies and the spouse left behind never dates because they still believe they are still married and will be reunited in Heaven.
Another issue is that we also say “what God has joined together let no man part”. Again very powerful words because there have been many marriages that have been put together not by God but by others. Arranged marriages where the two people do not even know each other is one kind of marriage that may or may not be put together by God. When a forced marriage is held because one has gotten pregnant, again the marriage may not be put together by God. Or sometimes when the couple is very young and love is so blind that they do not listen to anyone, not their parents, friends or clergy can be more times when God does not have His hand in these marriages. That is why they have Annulments, because not every marriage is put together by God.
You forgot that in Jesus’ time polygamy was allowed under the law and men had the sole prerogative of divorcing their wives for a better model and this is what He was condemning.
I do like your point about what God joins together as opposed to what we think He does..
This is a really good article and you know, I really like Catholic Stand and the authors here, every time I come here I am so refreshed by the truths I read. The authors speak so clearly and simply, yet speak such profound Truths!!
Kids do need both parents, I raised mine by myself and had God, St. Joseph and and many other Saints annd some wonderful Priests and Nuns I relied on to help me, not intervened, it would not have worked out well for my children- or me. God had mercy on us because I loved and trusted Him, by His Grace, to help us. So for those who find themselves alone, there is hope always- because with God no person gets thrown out or goes unloved!
Oh and what is better than sunshine and the Great Lakes 🙂 I love it!
Thank you!! Sounds like you did a great job with your kids! Kudos to you! (And yes we are so lucky to have our Great Lakes!)
Cynthia, We will be using a part of Fr. Schmitz’s video today in a Pre-Cana retreat. He does a very good job explaining the difference between objective and subjective truth. This is a very difficult concept for young persons to grasp today and the root of so many problems. Thanks for the OP.
An objective Truth is a statement about reality which is true for all people, in all cultures, in a;; places at all points of history. If you find ONE exception to what you consider Objective Truth it is not an objective truth. A belief is never an objective truth unless it is held by all people, in all places, for all time in history. I really think that young people who read more, research more, are exposed to scientific facts, read conflicting explanations of realities are more able to decipher objective truth than older people who were indoctrinated in “truths.”
I think your definition of objective truth is off. An objective truth is one that is true regardless of what we think. In theory, everyone could be wrong but the truth would still be true.
You obviously did not read my comment thoroughly. As this author said, the sun rises every morning whether we see it or not. That is Objective Truth, true for all people, in all cultures, all places and all times. Christ is god for Catholics since 0 CE….not for people of first nations, not for Buddhists, Shintoists, Sufiis, etc. It’s a belief since his birth in the Christian world only. The Truth is readily discernible by the senses, by logic, by reason and by science. Belief is not discernible by reason of all people, by logic of all people through all ages.
Believing Catholics believe Catholicism is objectively true. It may or may not be objectively true. We hope our subjective belief lines up with reality. If it lines up with reality, then it *is* true for everyone, everywhere, regardless of their subjective beliefs.
yes, what you say is fine,,the caveat is “if it lines up with reality.”
Phil,
I submit that Christ is God as an Objective Truth, just as true as the sun appearing each morning. I understand that others may not agree, but for me, that is like others not agreeing that the sun appears each morning. I don’t just believe that Christ is God; I know that He is God based upon the use of my senses and logic. Hence I go farther than Kevin does below. I know Christ is God, objectively, and all of my other beliefs and actions follow that knowledge (hopefully—I fall short many times!). The point of Fr. Mike’s you tube (cited at the end of the essay) was that we should not base our faith on feelings but rather upon knowledge and logic.
Cynthia,
I know of no one who does not believe that the sun appears every day and sets every day…this is pure scientific fact. I respect the belief that you have that Christ is God and you believe that this is Objective Triuth.
To assert this, you tell every spiritual and religious person from all time and all cultures that they are wrong. Buddhists are good people yet they do not equate Jesus with God, nor do Shintoists, Taoists, Sufiis, People of the First Nations, peoples of pre-Christian eras. people who never heard of Christ, and on and on. To assert that Jesus is God is a belief not an objective Truth. All mankind’s logic and knowledge would not necessarily lead them to this conclusion. To assert this is an objective Truth is no deny the beliefs of hundreds of millions who have been raised in differing religions. As humans, all we have are beliefs….beliefs are not based upon empirical data. Beliefs are good, but they are beliefs only.
Phil,
First of all, thanks for always being respectful in your posts. I hope you are having a good Sunday.
The fact that someone does not KNOW a truth does not make that truth wrong. It merely means that the person does not know it. I do not know or understand the truths behind quantum physics, for example, but that does not make them any less true. There are millions who have not been exposed to the knowledge of Jesus Christ, so they do not believe in Him or are not even aware of Him. That does not make the objective truth of Him, His existence here on earth, His divinity, His resurrection and ascension any less true.
An objective truth cannot be disproved because it is always true. So, to summarize C.S. Lewis’ brilliant writings (and presented for kids in “The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe” when the Professor discusses Lucy), there are only three possibilities about Jesus Christ. 1. He never existed so it is all a big lie. 2. He existed but he was a delusional nutcase who thought he was God and was therefore crazy (or as Lewis say, “mad”), or 3. It’s all true.
Lewis goes into much more detail than I can go into here, but basically the first two statements can be easily disproved. 1. Independent documentation (e.g. the detailed Roman logs which state that Jesus of Nazareth was crucified, the contemporaneous historical writings of Flavius Josephus and other non-Christians) proves that there really was someone named Jesus Christ who performed amazing feats and was crucified and was said to have risen from the dead. So, based upon the historical proof that we would rely upon for any kind of ancient information, yep, he was here. 2. Crazy? Lewis basically disproves this by saying that a) he wouldn’t have been able to perform all of those miracles, b) somewhere along the line, people would have “outed” him by saying—yep, he never performed any of those miracles, he was just a charlatan, c) he never used his “magic powers” to gain power for himself—-a crazy or unbalanced person would have used his powers to seek glory for himself (or money or women or power, etc.) and would have wanted people to crown him King or do him favors (“a miracle for your daughter’s hand” kind of thing). Nope, he never did that….ever. In fact, he told people NOT to tell anyone about the miracles. (Now that’s crazy!) And he pointed all of the glory to God, His father. d) And this is the most powerful in my book: Eventually, is someone is a fake, eventually the truth is known and you turn away from him (think Adolf Hitler whom everyone eventually deserted). Yes, some people turned away from Jesus, not because he was a fake, but because he asked too much. But the Apostles and the Disciples GAVE UP EVERYTHING and WENT TO THE DEATH for Him. And thousands more after that. And thousands more after that…and so on.They died because they knew that He resurrected from the dead.
So, our job, as Catholic Christians, is to spread this Good News so that others can see the Objective Truth of Jesus Christ. : )
Your definition of objective truth is simply NOT TRUE.
Says you! You cannot assert a denial of my definition of objective truth by simply saying it’s not true. Come on now, anything asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.
So, Cynthia, are your religious beliefs subjective truths or objective truths. Are people who divorce and remarry without getting an annulment adulterers in an objective sense or a subjective one? Are homosexual acts subjectively disordered or are they objectively so? Are the resurrection, ascension and assumption objectively true? Talk about teaching your children the truth, who are you to distinguish between objective and subjective truths?
Let’s keep it very simple and straightforward. Objective truths:
1. In a marriage in the Church, you vow to stay married until death. Thus any divorce and remarriage is objectively adultery. You are still married to another person.
2. The human sex organs were designed to be used for procreation between a man and a woman. Without getting into the gritty details, any other use/misuse of them, heterosexual or homosexual, is disordered, meaning not used for the order or purpose for which they were created. (Similarly, food was designed for nourishment. Any other use or misuse of food is disordered.)
3. The resurrection, ascension and assumption are historical facts just as much as the Battle of Waterloo, the building of Stonehenge, and evolution are. No one is alive who actually witnessed them nor did anyone take a photograph, but they are all documented by writings, circumstantial evidence, and resulting consequences.
An objective truth either is or it isn’t. It can’t be both. If someone doesn’t believe it, it doesn’t make it untrue. It just means that someone doesn’t believe it, e.g., the person who says the sun is not shining when it is. Hope this helps.
evolution is only a theory – and one full of holes.
Not so. It is a scientific theory (different from conversational theory) based on multiple hypotheses from many different disciplines that have yet to be shown to be false. Do your homework.
your point is pointless – it is a weak theory full of holes – even according to Darwinian analysis.
1. In a marriage in the Church, you vow to stay married until death. Thus any divorce and remarriage is objectively adultery. You are still married to another person.
This is a very good reason not to get married in the Church, as not doing so avoids
the sin adultery and relegates it to its objective, universally understood status – one
who cheats on their spouse.
So.
1. It was Jesus’ opinion that if we divorce and remarry we commit adultery. That is his opinion which makes it subjective unless you take his word as THE objective truth. Otherwise, it is an opinion.
“2. The human sex organs were designed to be used for procreation between a man and a woman.”
Sex is nature’s way of ensuring that we pass on our genes. To enjoy any kind of sex that doesn’t hurt others even if it doesn’t lead to pregnancy is something we have learned to do. There is nothing wrong with that. Maybe to you there is. Not to most people.
“3. The resurrection, ascension and assumption are historical facts just as much as the Battle of Waterloo.”
Oh really. They are either facts or fiction. Whichever they really are would be an objective truth but we really do not know if Jesus rose and went up into the sky or if Mary was taken up to the sky and into heaven. You believe these things without evidence that these things really happen. A wise person would need more evidence than that this is what the Catholic Church teaches. They could be historical facts but they are no necessarily and there is little reliable evidence that these things truly happened.
Good morning, Frank! I hope you are having a good Sunday.
Note that I never said anything about right or wrong. I just gave definitions.
So, if you make a vow to be married to someone until death do you part, any sexual activity with another person outside of that marriage is technically and objectively adultery.
And, the purpose of sex is to create babies (or pass on your genetic info). That is the proper “order” or “function” of sex. Just like eating food is done for nourishment. If I have sex in a way that does not fulfill that function or order, it is inherently disordered. If I eat food and then make myself throw up, that is inherently disordered. No judgement here, just stating facts. (This is why homosexual activity is no more “sinful” than heterosexual activity which is purposely not open to life. Both are disordered.)
Finally, regarding the existence of Jesus Christ, the Resurrection, Ascension, see my reply to Phil below. Lots more has been written about this by people who are much smarter than me (C.S. Lewis is a great place to begin.) And the Assumption, again many people have written about it, but stop and think. Where is her body? We have the bodies of all of the Apostles which are enshrined in great basilicas and tombs—-don’t you think if Mary’s body were around (and John the Apostle lived with her in Ephesus, and Luke interviewed and wrote about her, so it’s not like she wasn’t around), it would have been buried somewhere and enshrined?
The point of this article is to help people to see that polls and opinions are not facts merely because lots of people currently believe them to be so. Slavery was once generally accepted in the United States. Segregation was too. The Nazi T4 program which killed thousands of disabled children and adults was supported by the majority of the German people. Yet all of these were always objectively WRONG.
The Catholic Church, just like the original 12 Apostles, is made up of humans who have made mistakes. This does not and should not take away from the eternal objective truths which the Church, created by Jesus Christ, contain.
All life is sacred and no one has the right to destroy it. Men and women were uniquely created to complement one another. Marriage is for the creation and protection of children for whom a mother and a father are a necessity.
Enjoy your day!
I appreciate your not being judgmental. Yes, in a sense, there being an order to the universe, sex that is not performed for the purpose of procreating could be considered “disordered” just as food eaten for a purpose other than giving us calories to burn in order to keep thriving and staying alive is what you could call disordered. If everything we did was in sync with the order that we see in nature, as it is with plants and other animals, there would be no birth control, abortion, homosexuality, gluttony, etc. If you are just calling these things “disordered” in the sense that they do not conform with the order that exists in nature, I can’t dispute you. I thought you were bringing up sin and judgment and punishment, etc. which I dislike about my faith and my church.
“I thought you were bringing up sin and judgment and punishment, etc. which I dislike about my faith and my church”
Your statement is exactly the frame of mind the author is addressing in her blog. You want your perception and your feelings to set the rule. They can’t. What happens when you get more data? What happens when you actually take the time to read the catechism and the Church Fathers and find out the historical truths and reasons behind the Church’s teachings? What if your feelings change because YOUR understanding of the truth changes? Would that not prove that feelings are an inappropriate measure of truth?
Your statement “homosexual activity is no more “sinful” than heterosexual activity which is purposely not open to life.” is incorrect. Homosexual activity is not only disordered in not being open to procreation, it is also disordered in perverting the other purpose of sexuality, to form a union of the two sexes of humanity.
Both food and sex were also designed for enjoyment…people would not eat or breed without the enjoyment and pleasure of these pastimes. People would neither have sex nor ear food and take drink unless if they were pain invoking activities.
Phil,
They were primarily designed to make babies and nourish our bodies. Of course if they were not fun, then we’d never have any babies and we would starve to death. God is pretty amazing! (Although I could do without Lima beans…..just saying.)
Objective truth must by definition be so for all people, in all places, in all cultures, and at all times from the introduction of the human primate on earth. If there is one exception, it is no longer objective truth….Sex is not a simple binary phenomenon, so I question the objective truth of the below statement
“The male and female sexes are determined by the existent DNA. My sex is determined by how I feel; my child’s sex is determined by how I think he or she feels.”
Rather than labor exceptions to your belief that DNA and sex designation is a binary objective Truth, allow me to direct you an analysis for professionals by the World Heath Organization which deals with gender and genetics from their genomic resource centre
http://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html
Usually, I would say “that that which can be asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence”
Hitchens. But, here is evidence. Children deserve to learn to read, to research, to inquire and to think and to draw conclusions….not simply to be told this is Objective Truth.
Some human beings are born with genetic defects.
Genetic drifting, genetic variations are not always defects…they simply contribute to the diversity of human primate. God forbid that we should all be clones…..human variation, species differentiation is an objective Truth.
The exception proves the rule.
You cannot have the argument go your way in one breath and support evolution in the next. Sexual reproduction involving a genetic male and a genetic female is where diversity comes from. Period.
Not all males and females are genetically “pure”. Your comment makes no sense. Diversity is a function of nature and nurture, both evolutionary processes. Period? Are you speaking “ex cathedra”? Great way to end a conversation. Period…..
Nope, sorry Phil. You should not argue from exceptions. An objective truth is that exceptions do exist as just that, exceptions, abnormalities, aberrations, anomalies, etc. They are not normal. They do not define the normal because they are ABnormal. Normal DNA defines a normal human being. Abnormal DNA defines a human being with a specific defect in the normal DNA structure. This is not rocket science, Phil. Abnormal will NEVER equal normal. As for human beings who have a genetic defect, they are just that, human beings with a defective DNA structure. How you TREAT someone with a defect is a different issue. But don’t confuse your subjective treatment of human beings with the objective truth of what that human being is made up of regarding their DNA structure.
Try telling a parent of a disabled child that a minor chromosomal deletion makes their son or daughter abnormal or not normal. It always humbles me to know that I am just 1.25 chromosomes different from bonobos …the difference lies in a union of split chromosome 2 in my genetic makeup. Objective Truth allows for no exceptions, 1+1=2, the earth revolves around the sun, etc. A human being is not simply DNA, a human being is nature and nurture….now that is an objective truth.
You argue from emotion, not truth. And I am telling a parent of a disabled child. Your son may have a genetic abnormality but he is still a son. And your treatment of him over the many years is to be admired and commended. You are a very good father, Phil. Your son is very fortunate to have a man like you for a father. God bless both of you.
1. Thank you for the kind words.
2. My son does not have a genetic abnormality (whatever that is). H was submerged in a river at a summer can when he was 12 (17 years ago) and was without 02 for 25 minutes
3. I speak from my truth which is subjectively objective….I do not speak from emotion.
“subjectively objective” – oxymoron.
There is no “my truth”, “your truth”, “his truth”, “her truth”. There is only truth and falsehood. Truth is not subjective.
And this is “true” because you say so?