Are dissenters "in the Church"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter James_2_24
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

James_2_24

Guest
I was wondering the following: Are groups who dissent, for example, Catholics for a Free Choice, still “in the Church” ?

If they are, then this would mean that Catholics can believe different things and still be Catholic. From someone looking on the outside in, they will say, "See, Catholics aren’t united at all, they believe various different things about such things as abortion, homosexuality, etc.

To me it would seem that they have put themselves outside the Church. This would make sense, then one can claim “true” Catholics who are “in the Church” all believe the same…
 
The Church will include both the wheat and the tares until the last day when the angels separate the harvest.
 
Joe Kelley:
The Church will include both the wheat and the tares until the last day when the angels separate the harvest.
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand this, but what does “in the Church” mean? Of course there will be those in the Church who will not live up to what the Church teaches and thus will live sinful lives.

But what about those who claim “abortion” is what the Church teaches and thus not displeasing to God? And those who teach that “homosexuality” is obedience to God? That is a much different story. I don’t know that these people can be called “Catholic” any much longer. What they believe and teach is not “Catholic”. I believe they are anathema. BTW, anathema means “outside the body”, separated.
 
James_2:24:
Yes, I understand this, but what does “in the Church” mean? Of course there will be those in the Church who will not live up to what the Church teaches and thus will live sinful lives.
Click to expand...
That would account for 100% of us.
But what about those who claim “abortion” is what the Church teaches and thus not displeasing to God? And those who teach that “homosexuality” is obedience to God? That is a much different story. I don’t know that these people can be called “Catholic” any much longer. What they believe and teach is not “Catholic”. I believe they are anathema. BTW, anathema means “outside the body”, separated.
Click to expand...
For one thing, they are mistaken if they think the church teaches abortion is OK. While I don’t believe the Church teaches against “homosexuality” per se, as in the state of “being” a homosexual, she does teach against engaging in homosexual activity. If they teach otherwise, they are wrong.

Now if they think the Church is wrong, then they have separated themselves in a way. Whether their hearts are evil I don’t know; I can’t judge. I do know this; if the only Catholics who presented themselves for Communion were those who did, in fact, agree with all Church teachings and made an honest attempt to abide by them, we would save a WHOLE lot of money on wafers. Actually I’ve thought about starting a thread related to this; if it weren’t for “cafeteria Catholics” there would probably be very few Catholic churches.

Alan
 
James_2:24:
I was wondering the following: Are groups who dissent, for example, Catholics for a Free Choice, still “in the Church” ?

If they are, then this would mean that Catholics can believe different things and still be Catholic. From someone looking on the outside in, they will say, "See, Catholics aren’t united at all, they believe various different things about such things as abortion, homosexuality, etc.

To me it would seem that they have put themselves outside the Church. This would make sense, then one can claim “true” Catholics who are “in the Church” all believe the same…
Click to expand...
I really do not know anything about CFFC, etc. But I kind of agree that issues such as abortion, divorce, gay marriage, etc are too delicate to be taken care by mere law. Law can define it’s sinfulness but it fails to answer the next question “what are you going to do about it ?”

To know “sin as sinful” is one thing. But to decide whether we should deliver the sinner to court is another. I really think that what you call “dessenters” are usually talking about the latter.

The question is always about : to condemn or to love the sinner? The same question was asked by the people who brought to Jesus an adulterer woman. Her sinfulness was obvious to her for the law told her. But did she understand God’s mercy? It happened that the latter freed her.

May God bless us all.
 
40.png
francisca:
I
To know “sin as sinful” is one thing. But to decide whether we should deliver the sinner to court is another. I really think that what you call “dessenters” are usually talking about the latter.

May God bless us all.
Click to expand...
Actually, dissenters like the CFFC, in practice, deny that abortion is intrinsically evil, and hence is not in itself sinful, which blatantly contradicts what the Church teaches on this matter. Hence they really accept it [abortion] as not being inherently sinful in the first place. Thus it is not simply a question of whether to punish abortionists or not, but rather the very assumptions these dissenters hold with regards its essential morality.

Gerry 🙂
 
Originally Posted by RobedWithLight
Actually, dissenters like the CFFC, in practice, deny that abortion is intrinsically evil, and hence is not in itself sinful,
Click to expand...
I see. Then we need to pray for them.
which blatantly contradicts what the Church teaches on this matter. Hence they really accept it [abortion] as not being inherently sinful in the first place. Thus it is not simply a question of whether to punish abortionists or not, but rather the very assumptions these dissenters hold with regards its essential morality.
Click to expand...
Gerry
Click to expand...
I do not know how they can operate under the bishop if this is the case…

I feel like I need to add :

In the case of abortion for instance, it is more efective if the church-- the representative of God’s love-- give financial help for hospitalization, or adopt the unwanted child, or help to find adoption parents, or even give mere consultation, support groups, etc.

In politics, it is good to have a government who would have funding for caring unwanted child to lessen the number of abortion (instead making anti abortion law in the civil line, hence, to deliver the faithful to the hand of to civil authority, which is forbidden by St Paul). I don’t know anything about US politics though… just want to give an example of how we can love the sinner.

God bless
 
40.png
RobedWithLight:
Actually, dissenters like the CFFC, in practice, deny that abortion is intrinsically evil, and hence is not in itself sinful, which blatantly contradicts what the Church teaches on this matter. Hence they really accept it [abortion] as not being inherently sinful in the first place. Thus it is not simply a question of whether to punish abortionists or not, but rather the very assumptions these dissenters hold with regards its essential morality.

Gerry 🙂
Click to expand...
I see. Then we must pray for them.

God bless you Gerry.
 
40.png
francisca:
I do not know how they can operate under the bishop if this is the case…
Click to expand...
CFFC doesn’t “operate under the bishop.” If you asked them for a copy of their membership list, first of all, they wouldn’t give it to you. Second, if you did get it, you would likely find no Catholics on it, or at least no active Catholics. They receive most of their funding from pro-abortion groups such as Planned Parenthood. Just because they put “Catholic” in their name doesn’t mean that they are a Catholic organization. Certainly they have no ties to the Church.
 
The fact that CFFC and related groups like the Call to Action are dissenting groups means that they likewise may reject the authority of any bishop, and even the Pope, if it suits their purposes. They are doing it right now.

Gerry 🙂
 
We are incorporated into the body of Christ (the Church) through our baptism. Thus, all those baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, are “in” the Catholic Church. The question of their perfect or imperfect communion with that Church is a different matter. Since one cannot undo baptism, however, they will remain “within” the Church until they are sifted out by Christ.
 
Hello,
We are incorporated into the body of Christ (the Church) through our baptism. Thus, all those baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, are “in” the Catholic Church. The question of their perfect or imperfect communion with that Church is a different matter. Since one cannot undo baptism, however, they will remain “within” the Church until they are sifted out by Christ.
Click to expand...
That’s the answer!

John
 
Please explain then, the often used phrase, “Catholic in name only”… That seems to imply that a person in that status is outside of the Church…

Also, those who incur excommunication or anathema (i.e. separated from the body) would be outside of the Church. I believe those who are with CFC or support them also support abortion, which I believe incurs automatic excommunication.

I don’t see how someone can claim no sin in homosexual ACTIVITY and abortion… and still be “Catholic”.

If someone believes in abortion, homosexual activity, that the Church can err in faith and morals, are indifferent between religions (i.e. islam is just as good as Christianity), the Eucharist is a symbol… where is the Catholicism of this person? I don’t see how they can be “Catholic” or “in the Church”…

Maybe I’m missing something… I’m not trying to go against any Church teaching by saying they ‘‘aren’t Catholic’’… Just trying to understand…

Thanks…
 
so far no one at the Vatican has appointed me the church police, so my opinion (and yours) is irrelevant, let Jesus handle it.
 
40.png
puzzleannie:
so far no one at the Vatican has appointed me the church police, so my opinion (and yours) is irrelevant, let Jesus handle it.
Click to expand...
I understand where you are coming from with this statement, but at the same time it isn’t wrong to want to know these things. It is a part of theology… What separates one from the Church?

People actually want to know these things and sometimes it does even affect there Faith in some way…

As far as “let Jesus handle it”… tell that to the Church Fathers and councils and thelogians who talk about this… Nothing wrong with thinking once in awhile…
 
James_2:24:
I understand where you are coming from with this statement, but at the same time it isn’t wrong to want to know these things. It is a part of theology… What separates one from the Church?
Click to expand...
The answer is nothing separates one from the Church, not even anathema or excommunication. Those who are excommunicated cannot take the Sacraments, but they are still in the body of the Church.
 
40.png
jennstall:
The answer is nothing separates one from the Church, not even anathema or excommunication. Those who are excommunicated cannot take the Sacraments, but they are still in the body of the Church.
Click to expand...
Why do the early Fathers speak of Heretics of being OUTSIDE the Church? Anathema means “separated from the body”.

Also excommuncation is defined as:

1 : an ecclesiastical censure depriving a person of the rights of church membership
2 : exclusion from fellowship in a group or community
 
James_2:24:
Why do the early Fathers speak of Heretics of being OUTSIDE the Church? Anathema means “separated from the body”.

Also excommuncation is defined as:

1 : an ecclesiastical censure depriving a person of the rights of church membership
2 : exclusion from fellowship in a group or community
Click to expand...
I apologize. You do appear to be correct about anathema. I think excommunication is still up in the air though and I’d be interested to put it to the apologists at Catholic Answers because according to one of them, excommunication does not mean exclusion from the body of the Church.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=13296
 
James_2:24:
Why do the early Fathers speak of Heretics of being OUTSIDE the Church? Anathema means “separated from the body”.

Also excommuncation is defined as:

1 : an ecclesiastical censure depriving a person of the rights of church membership
2 : exclusion from fellowship in a group or community
Click to expand...
Those definitions of excommunication actual help reinforce the position that the excommunicated are still “within” the Church because excommunication is only a deprivation of rights and exclusion of fellowship - note that neither one of these is a removal from the Body of Christ.
As far as the Fathers go, I would have to have a lot more context to endorse any interpretation of what they meant by “outside the Church”.
For the last point of anathema, “separated from the body” I can only offer my speculation. Because of the baptismal theology I used in my earlier post, I would interpret the separation in reference to the physical existence of the Church - anathematized individuals are to be physically separated from the flock in order to prevent them from leading others away into heresy. Of course, if a heretic had never been validly baptized one could quite legitimately refer to him as separated from the body because he never would have been incorporated to begin with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top