Church pews emptying because

[ThornGenX]

The first option comes closest to the reason I usually have, I give in to temptation and put whatever lame excuse ahead of my love for The Lord.

 

[Brad]

Richardols:

Your associating those of us who hold some liberal views with Satan is wholly uncharitable and I wonder how seriously you take your Catholicism when it comes to other Catholics who do not believe the same as you.

I will no longer respond to your posts.

I would, however, for the sake of others who are not reactionaries, note that in the 19th and 20th centuries, the Catholic Church was transformed from a passive accomplice of authoritarian regimes to a powerful advocate of the principles of democratic liberalism and of human rights reform. No longer the steadfast opponent of political liberalism, the Church is a vital institutional advocate for progressive social change, promoting a broad vision of political, economic, and cultural rights. Read Leo XII, Pius XI, Pius XII, John XXII, and John Paul II.

I’m not sure what you mean completely by liberal. It means different things to different people which is why I don’t like the term either. However, there are many dangers with liberalism, which is a defined set of beliefs that has been condemned by the Church. Liberalism defined in this way puts the rights of the individual above all else, rather than submission to the will of God. This has been outright condemned.

Other dangers include:

People that consider themselves “liberal” theologians, which essentially just means trying to prove portions of the Bible and, in being unsuccessful, declaring them not to have occurred. This has also been condemned.

Others consider themselves “liberal” that want the Church to change it’s teaching on doctrines and morals. This has never been done and can never be done. These people are trying to climb a mountaint that leads to nowhere.

If you think of yourself as liberal just in terms of helping your fellow man who is poor, sick, hungry etc. then no harm done there.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

the Catholic Church was transformed from a passive accomplice of authoritarian regimes

Ummm, source please? That’s quite an accusation to make. . .

 

[fix]

Brad:

IIf you think of yourself as liberal just in terms of helping your fellow man who is poor, sick, hungry etc. then no harm done there.

The problem is that is not a liberal notion, but what faithful Catholics do and believe. Liberalism is not Catholic.

 

[Richardols]

Tantum ergo:

Ummm, source please? That’s quite an accusation to make. . .

Please read about the relationship of the Church to pre-revolutionary France, to Franco’s Spain, the Church’s relationships with South American dictatorships in the last two centuries, etc.

 

[Richardols]

Brad:

However, there are many dangers with liberalism, which is a defined set of beliefs that has been condemned by the Church. Liberalism defined in this way puts the rights of the individual above all else, rather than submission to the will of God. This has been outright condemned.

Indeed. Has been. The Church in the late 19th century, for example, was particularly annoyed with the political system in the United States, which it found wrong. In Longinqua Oceani Leo XIII said that “it would be erroneous to draw the conclusion that in America is to be sought the type of the most desirable status of the Church, or that it would be universally lawful or expedient for State and Church to be, as in America, dissevered and divorced.”

The Pope firmly rejected the proposition that the American system of government could ever receive the Church’s imprimatur. The Church preferred a Church-State union, which was contrary to the American liberal ideal.