Dissenters: Why do you call yourself a Catholic?

[St_Aloysius]

The simple reason is that we humans aren’t naturally predisposed to belief in any one Church’s dogma.

A Catholic may be wholeheartedly devoted to his/her faith but still find the Church’s prohibitation of contraceptives a bit troubling at times in terms of practicality–even if he/she understands why the Church takes this position.

Likewise, a Catholic who is close to individuals experiencing SSA (like myself) may fully comprehend the rationale behind the Church’s position on homosexuality, but at the end of the day still feel a legitimate dissent.

A Catholic may be 100% pro-life but still feel some sympathy toward those in difficult positions (maternal endangerment, rape or incest, etc.) and even agree with certain aspects of the pro-choice movement–or may simply believe economic and societal change are the first steps toward eradicating abortion.

The fact is, if you find yourself wholly and totally in agreement with all Church teachings, I am forced to suspect either super-human faith (praise God!) or complacent self-deception. That’s not to say the Church is necessarily wrong–only that we by our various subjective dispositions are dissenters. It’s ingrained. We should never cease to question things and promote positive change.

Not all Catholics are super-orthodox, or even orthodox at all. Many are simple sinners that legitimately disagree in some areas and are striving to better align their consciences, as well as their actions, with God’s will.

Orthodoxy isn’t easy. Give people the benefit of the doubt, that they’re trying, really trying, for something worth trying for. Sympathize with what may be a weak faith or simply a strong and opinionated personality.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

i did not experience it during my time in the midwest. i have experienced it repeatedly in new england…and it depresses the hell out of me.

My experiences were 2 in Michigan, 1 in Connecticut and 1 in Iowa. I found there was no apparent split of the congregation. To be sure, there are always a couple of “nitpickers” (Not my word, but the phrase used by my priest) who are calling all the time worrying about this and that being “correct” but that is as far as I’ve seen known in every parish I’ve been in. Most everyone knew who the “troublemakers” were, and as I said, it was usually only 1 or two per parish. They of course always ran for council and annoyed the heck out of the priest and other staff.

I’m sorry you find New England so different. As I said, CT was no different from all the others I have experienced. I would assume NE would be more liberal than the midwest, but perceptions are often incorrect. What has been your experience?

 

[SpiritMeadow]

yes there sometimes is a lack of Christian charity on all sides of various issues, but unfortunately you are falling into the same trap with your words here. You are complaining about lack of charity while being uncharitable.

Oh I can be uncharitable and I’ve been called on it a couple of times here. But there is only so much being called names that a person can take before erupting back. So many of the threads are designed so uncleverly to start arguments with those they disagree with. I’ve been called plenty of names. I have only complained to management once in all that time. I can give as good as I get, but I do tone it down. I recognize that I am a minority on this forum and figure my lease is a bit shorter. But I accept your criticism. Do you not find the thread itself uncharitable in nature? i sure did.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

The simple reason is that we humans aren’t naturally predisposed to belief in any one Church’s dogma.

A Catholic may be wholeheartedly devoted to his/her faith but still find the Church’s prohibitation of contraceptives a bit troubling at times in terms of practicality–even if he/she understands why the Church takes this position.

Likewise, a Catholic who is close to individuals experiencing SSA (like myself) may fully comprehend the rationale behind the Church’s position on homosexuality, but at the end of the day still feel a legitimate dissent.

A Catholic may be 100% pro-life but still feel some sympathy toward those in difficult positions (maternal endangerment, rape or incest, etc.) and even agree with certain aspects of the pro-choice movement–or may simply believe economic and societal change are the first steps toward eradicating abortion.

The fact is, if you find yourself wholly and totally in agreement with all Church teachings, I am forced to suspect either super-human faith (praise God!) or complacent self-deception. That’s not to say the Church is necessarily wrong–only that we by our various subjective dispositions are dissenters. It’s ingrained. We should never cease to question things and promote positive change.

Not all Catholics are super-orthodox, or even orthodox at all. Many are simple sinners that legitimately disagree in some areas and are striving to better align their consciences, as well as their actions, with God’s will.

Orthodoxy isn’t easy. Give people the benefit of the doubt, that they’re trying, really trying, for something worth trying for. Sympathize with what may be a weak faith or simply a strong and opinionated personality.

A note of rationality! Refreshing.And I agree. It’s terribly sad to see folks basically asking others to leave the Church because they don’t agree with THEM. Some have actually aluded to the fact that the Church would be better off if it were 90% smaller. Such is how sects develop and split off and form new Christian denominations. We have somewhere like 35,000 now. The rabidness of some here is so unlike any Catholic I’ve ever known, its beyond the pale. It’s nearly violent in its anger, and such is simply not the way of Catholicism. I cringe when i see some of what passes as discourse. A visitor wondering about the Church would surely flee in disgust and fear at such outright uglyness.

I admit, as I have that I can be quite sarcastic, but I sure draw the line at calling people liars and Satan followers. Some of it is undoubtedly youthful immaturity, but still, it’s unconscionable and is so counterproductive of their stated aims.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I don’t anymore, mostly because of comments like this one.

I called myself a Catholic because a Catholic priest baptized me.

I stopped calling myself a Catholic because people like you don’t think I pass the purity test. And maybe I don’t.

What was once one church has become thousands upon thousands of cults, sects and denominations of people who call themselves Christian. Each division was caused by disagreements between people who believed in Christ. It is human nature to cause divisions and rifts between people, I suppose. I cannot imagine that the divisions and disagreements will stop any time soon.

If the collection plate feels light next week, it’s probably because another dissenter has stopped calling himself a Catholic.

I am deeply saddened to hear of this. May you find solace in God’s love and I pray your spiritual journey finds a home. I am sorry that some in this faith turned you away. It is not Christian,nor Catholic in my opinion.

 

[SoCalRC]

The fact is, if you find yourself wholly and totally in agreement with all Church teachings, I am forced to suspect either super-human faith (praise God!) or complacent self-deception. That’s not to say the Church is necessarily wrong–only that we by our various subjective dispositions are dissenters. It’s ingrained. We should never cease to question things and promote positive change.

Well said. This is what I meant to convey when I stated that we are all dissenters. The Church, like Christ, sets an incredibly high standard.

The important thing is to keep our dissent in the proper context. That is, that we are attempting to follow the absolute moral certainty of our conscience while being mindful that our own conscience can be incorrect.

Once we engage in moral relativism of this nature - (ex. ‘Hey, all you dissenters, why aren’t you great Catholics like me?’) We risk losing sight of our own unworthiness and need to constantly strive and improve in our relationship with God for the sake of our own salvation.

 

[Mea_Culpa]

They dissent that one is obliged to follow Church teaching at all costs AS THEY INTERPRET IT, yet ignore actual black and white statements of both the CCC and both recent popes that one’s own conscience is in the end controlling.

Relativism is not a Catholic doctrine. The Church teaches that there are things that are

GOOD
marriage
procreation
obedience
humility

and things that are

EVIL
homosexuality
abortion
dissent
pride

Why someone would be on a Catholic website arguing for abortion, homosexuality, etc. is beyond me. The Church has SPOKEN on those issues. The Church is guided by the Holy Spirit in teaching on faith and morals. That means that the Church’s teachings on homosexuality, abortion, etc. are not up for debate - they are the word of GOD!

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

The simple reason is that we humans aren’t naturally predisposed to belief in any one Church’s dogma.

A Catholic may be wholeheartedly devoted to his/her faith but still find the Church’s prohibitation of contraceptives a bit troubling at times in terms of practicality–even if he/she understands why the Church takes this position.

Likewise, a Catholic who is close to individuals experiencing SSA (like myself) may fully comprehend the rationale behind the Church’s position on homosexuality, but at the end of the day still feel a legitimate dissent.

A Catholic may be 100% pro-life but still feel some sympathy toward those in difficult positions (maternal endangerment, rape or incest, etc.) and even agree with certain aspects of the pro-choice movement–or may simply believe economic and societal change are the first steps toward eradicating abortion.

The fact is, if you find yourself wholly and totally in agreement with all Church teachings, I am forced to suspect either super-human faith (praise God!) or complacent self-deception. That’s not to say the Church is necessarily wrong–only that we by our various subjective dispositions are dissenters. It’s ingrained. We should never cease to question things and promote positive change.

Not all Catholics are super-orthodox, or even orthodox at all. Many are simple sinners that legitimately disagree in some areas and are striving to better align their consciences, as well as their actions, with God’s will.

Orthodoxy isn’t easy. Give people the benefit of the doubt, that they’re trying, really trying, for something worth trying for. Sympathize with what may be a weak faith or simply a strong and opinionated personality.

Very good and well thought out post. You really reached to the heart of the discussion.

 

[leftistdestroye]

To be technically accurate, estesbob did not quote a Pope. Estesbob quoted a Cardinal, in an officially unreleased communication with the Bishops of the USCCB.

FWIW, I did quote two popes. The distinction matters (to me at least), because of what we Catholics believe about the rightful successor to Peter.

OK, but regardless, she thought that it was written by the poster LOL.

 

[SoCalRC]

OK, but regardless, she thought that it was written by the poster LOL.

I’ve re-read the post and can find no evidence to support that interpretation. The only obvious confusion that I find is in regards to heirarchal authority of the source, and that was not Spiritmeadow’s.

The interpretation of the document is also suspect. After all, read in full it gives an example of significant compromise on an infallibly held teaching and contends that the application can be licit. This would appear to be the opposite of the characterization assigned to it. But since the document has never been officially released and the author has asserted that it is misleading without the proper context and supporting writing, intense theological debate on the matter is probably not prudent.

 

[SoCalRC]

Relativism is not a Catholic doctrine. The Church teaches that there are things that are

GOOD
marriage
procreation
obedience
humility

and things that are

EVIL
homosexuality
abortion
dissent
pride

Why someone would be on a Catholic website arguing for abortion, homosexuality, etc. is beyond me. The Church has SPOKEN on those issues. The Church is guided by the Holy Spirit in teaching on faith and morals. That means that the Church’s teachings on homosexuality, abortion, etc. are not up for debate - they are the word of GOD!

For better or worse, the Catholic faith is generally nuanced. Consider your list regarding ‘evil’. We do not consider homosexuals to be evil, we consider certain homosexual acts to be evil. From the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith:

Nonetheless, according to the teaching of the Church, men and women with homosexual tendencies “must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided”. They are called, like other Christians, to live the virtue of chastity. The homosexual inclination is however “objectively disordered” and homosexual practices are “sins gravely contrary to chastity”.

This can bring up moral conflicts on which there is not universal agreement.

Although there is no doubt about abortion being a grave moral disorder (EVANGELIUM VITAE), there is plenty of legitimate debate even among Catholics who accept that teaching. In fact, the majority of Catholics on this forum that describe themselves as intensely pro-life openly support compromise on the question of abortion, at least in terms of secular voting. They generally hold this compromise on what the Church has deemed “non negotiable” by an application of a principle called “proportionate reasons”. While several members of the ordinary have spoken about this principle, the Church has not spoken about such an application.

I actually cannot find a case where the Church generically labels dissent as evil. There are cases where it is identified as problematic, for example, here:

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19900524_theologian-vocation_en.html

But even then, room is made for “personal difficulties”, provided they are handled appropriately.

Pride is also hard to exactly quantify. Several of St. Paul’s epistles appear to loudly profess his accomplishments. What seemingly distinguishes them from, say, the prideful boasting of the Pharisee with regards to the Publican is that the Lord’s rightful role in all things good are acknowledged.

But pride still remains open to perception. For example, I would not be comfortable starting a topic whose subject line might easily be translated to ‘Why do all you false Catholics bother pretending you belong to the Church?’ But other Catholics seem to be much more comfortable with the underlying premise. So even if we agree on the merits of ‘humble’ over ‘pride’, our understanding of where each line is drawn differs.

 

[leftistdestroye]

SoCalRC;3677343]

I’ve re-read the post and can find no evidence to support that interpretation.

Well, I did, and it seems clear that the other poster did as well. THough, I am not speaking for him. Either way, it is all irrelavent anyway. SpiritMeadow and I do not like each other. She is eluding to me in her posts, though not posted to me. I did the same thing. Anyway, it’s out of my mind now anyway, it’s old. But thanks

The interpretation of the document is also suspect. After all, read in full it gives an example of significant compromise on an infallibly held teaching and contends that the application can be licit. This would appear to be the opposite of the characterization assigned to it. But since the document has never been officially released and the author has asserted that it is misleading without the proper context and supporting writing, intense theological debate on the matter is probably not prudent.

I have stayed out of that whole debate. I have not followed it.

 

[invocation]

Could you please provide some sources for that assertion. The principle of subsidiarity defines the organization of society fairly well…at least to my limited experience in understanding the writings on that principle.

whatever might have been said about subsidiarity, and whatever that term might mean (which i don’t think is incredibly clear and certainly doesn’t rise to the level of a political theory), there has not been a catholic society in quite some time, and so the relation of Catholics to the state and what sort of state they ought to be promoting is not, in fact, very clear. We find ourselves in a political form that, by definition, does not ask questions of the common good nor does it promote the Good, but relegates these matters to the private sphere. this is fairly unacceptable if you are Catholic. nonetheless in liberal society, if you try to push questions of the highest good and insist that society ought to be ordered in such a way that the good is promoted and the citizens of the state are capable of forming good habits, you are accused of either being fascist (to the right) or socialist/communist (to the left).

thus it seems fairly obvious to me that Catholics are constantly going to find themselves in a conversation with one another and with their larger society in which they are constantly trying to envision radically different alternatives because the actual political and social order is dehumanizing.

Well, it’s clear that the social teaching of the Church hasn’t been passed on well.

i’m certainly not going to argue with that.

No, that’s not exactly right. Please look at the CDF documents here .

i think most people with anything more than a passing interest in liberation theology are familiar with the 1984 instruction from ratzinger. i would point out a couple of things to start. 1. this is not a condemnation of liberation theology; 2.it is actually a weaker statement than the censures that i pointed out (e.g., sobrino, but also l.boff) insofar as no one is named or singled out.

the 1984 instruction actually recognizes the legitimacy of the concerns raised by the liberationists and speaks favorably of the south american bishops conferences of medellin and puebla, which pushed basic liberationist themes. if you are guttierez you are doing back flips (which, imagining the cute, short, somewhat stocky guttierez doing a back flip, makes me giggle a little).

basically the instruction is the equivalent of someone reminding scholastics in 1250 that aristotle is dangerous and pagan. most scholastics were well aware of the dangers. likewise, most liberationists had no problems with the warnings about marx contained in the '84 instruction. the fact was, they were not marxists (guttierez, ellacuria(himself a philosopher and certainly not a marxist), sobrino are good examples), just as most scholastics were not unrepentant-aristotleans.

the instruction does not rise anywhere near the level of a condemnation of liberation theology.

Well, I can understand what you are saying, but, frankly, the attitude of valuing your own opinion over that of the Church seems to me to be EXTREMELY protestant.

if indeed someone valued their own opinion over that of the church, one would imagine that those persons would probably have already left. if they stay, they probably value something other than their own opinion, even where they might think the church is not taking the most fruitful course available to it.

The Church teaches the Truth (capital “T”). The Church is inspired, in doctrine, by the Holy Spirit. Christ has promised that the Church will not fail. It seems to me that efforts to undermine the Church, given the above, are ill-advised, at best. Again, a highly protestant idea. One endorsed by such champions of reason as Marcion and Nestorius.

you have a very odd idea of the champions of reason. the champions of reason are augustine, anselm, bonaventure, etc, whose thoughts are speculative and daring at times, and who attempt to rationally explain what it is that they love when they love God. the attempt to rationally grasp the Truth is not blameworthy. reason does not belong to those who wander aimlessly in the dark and argue against the union of God and creature as did marcion and nestorius. it is precisely in Reason/the Word/the Logos that humanity and God are brought together. reason is not the enemy. for how else will one recognize the Truth?

 

[markomalley]

I don’t anymore, mostly because of comments like this one.

I called myself a Catholic because a Catholic priest baptized me.

I stopped calling myself a Catholic because people like you don’t think I pass the purity test. And maybe I don’t.

Not a purity test, but an integrity test.

The teachings of the Church state one thing or another. As Catholics, we are obliged to align our beliefs and attitudes to the contents of those teachings. Again, not on every issue…but where the Church has definitively spoken, we are obliged to follow those teachings.

If you, in good conscience, cannot bring yourself to follow those teachings, then you should do exactly what you have stated. Better to do that than to live a lie.

However, if it is a matter of a feeling of inability to live up to those teachings, Christ has given us the sacrament of reconciliation. If it’s a matter of not fully understanding, Christ has given us teachers and, as a consequence of the Holy Spirit’s action, the ability to have spiritual understanding (wisdom).

But, after humbling yourself before God and after prayerful efforts to understand and accept the Church’s teachings, you are convinced that the teachings of the Church are wrong, then you should and must do as you are doing.

But I would encourage you to consider your position carefully…is it one taken out of honest conviction that the Church is wrong…or is it a matter of egocentric pride that you couldn’t be wrong.

(And if you, or somebody else, calls the above words hateful or judgmental, that’s your right. But consider that I don’t know who you are. So I can’t stand in judgment. However, there is one who is perfectly capable of doing so)

What was once one church has become thousands upon thousands of cults, sects and denominations of people who call themselves Christian. Each division was caused by disagreements between people who believed in Christ. It is human nature to cause divisions and rifts between people, I suppose. I cannot imagine that the divisions and disagreements will stop any time soon.

And each and every one of those divisions was, in some way, caused by a lack of charity and an excess of pride.

If the collection plate feels light next week, it’s probably because another dissenter has stopped calling himself a Catholic.

And I am supposed to care about that? Money is supposed to be the driving factor? God help us if it does. (Of course that may explain a lot of the positions that are taken…or more properly NOT taken…by AMCHURCH)

Oh, and one other thing. Whether you consider yourself to be Catholic or not, if you were baptized a Catholic, you are Catholic. You do have it in your power to change that, though. But simply badmouthing the Church is not the way to do that. Click on the link to see what you should do: if you TRULY are convinced that you are correct.

Regardless, may God bless you in your future, whatever that future holds.

 

[markomalley]

The simple reason is that we humans aren’t naturally predisposed to belief in any one Church’s dogma.

A Catholic may be wholeheartedly devoted to his/her faith but still find the Church’s prohibitation of contraceptives a bit troubling at times in terms of practicality–even if he/she understands why the Church takes this position.

Likewise, a Catholic who is close to individuals experiencing SSA (like myself) may fully comprehend the rationale behind the Church’s position on homosexuality, but at the end of the day still feel a legitimate dissent.

A Catholic may be 100% pro-life but still feel some sympathy toward those in difficult positions (maternal endangerment, rape or incest, etc.) and even agree with certain aspects of the pro-choice movement–or may simply believe economic and societal change are the first steps toward eradicating abortion.

The fact is, if you find yourself wholly and totally in agreement with all Church teachings, I am forced to suspect either super-human faith (praise God!) or complacent self-deception. That’s not to say the Church is necessarily wrong–only that we by our various subjective dispositions are dissenters. It’s ingrained. We should never cease to question things and promote positive change.

Not all Catholics are super-orthodox, or even orthodox at all. Many are simple sinners that legitimately disagree in some areas and are striving to better align their consciences, as well as their actions, with God’s will.

Orthodoxy isn’t easy. Give people the benefit of the doubt, that they’re trying, really trying, for something worth trying for. Sympathize with what may be a weak faith or simply a strong and opinionated personality.

Nobody is perfect. Not even a Padre Pio or a Mother Theresa.

How we respond is a matter of humility.

 

[fix]

Not all Catholics are super-orthodox, or even orthodox at all. Many are simple sinners that legitimately disagree in some areas and are striving to better align their consciences, as well as their actions, with God’s will.

What is legitimate disagreement?

 

[Dale_M]

I stopped calling myself a Catholic because people like you don’t think I pass the purity test. And maybe I don’t.

I have seen more than one thread about how CAF is weakening their faith. Threads such as this one are part of the problem.

What we discuss here in CAF rarely concerns the heart of Christianity - what Jesus taught. I think it is entirely possible to be a “good Catholic” and yet not be very Christian.

When members talk about how good it would be if the Church would shrink to only “true Catholics,” I have to shake my head. They just don’t get it.

 

[Joe_5859]

As far as I know there have only been two issues that have been pronounced infallibly, The Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary. Have a look at this list of Dogmas:

theworkofgod.org/dogmas.htm

On everything else, discussion is open.

So, is Jesus fully human and fully divine? We don’t know, it’s still up for discussion.

Is God a Trinity? We don’t know for sure. Maybe there are four persons in God.

Did Jesus really rise from the dead? Well, that teaching could change, too.

How many books in the Bible are there? How many sacraments are there? Well, maybe we’ll add some more in the future.

We’re not sure of any of these things, but, doggone it, we know that Mary was immaculately conceived and assumed into heaven!

(I’m sorry, this may be a snarky way to make my point, but I couldn’t resist. )

 

[johnlal]

Whether you consider yourself to be Catholic or not, if you were baptized a Catholic, you are Catholic.

OK. To the guy who submitted the original post–(Why do you keep calling yourselves Catholics)-- there’s your answer.You answered your own question.

But simply badmouthing the Church is not the way to do that. Click on the link to see what you should do: if you TRULY are convinced that you are correct.

Thanks, but formally defecting from the Catholic Church seems complicated and tedius. I much prefer this method, where some anonymous guy on the internet lists a handful of the Church’s most controversial issues. Then I’m told to agree or stop calling myself a Catholic. That cuts out all of the red tape with the clergy, the Bishop, the hearings, and all that paperwork.

 

[estesbob]

So, is Jesus fully human and fully divine? We don’t know, it’s still up for discussion.

Is God a Trinity? We don’t know for sure. Maybe there are four persons in God.

Did Jesus really rise from the dead? Well, that teaching could change, too.

How many books in the Bible are there? How many sacraments are there? Well, maybe we’ll add some more in the future.

We’re not sure of any of these things, but, doggone it, we know that Mary was immaculately conceived and assumed into heaven!

(I’m sorry, this may be a snarky way to make my point, but I couldn’t resist. )

Of course most Catholics accept those teachings without question. It’s those other “hard” teachings they want to quibble with:

Abortion
Contraception
Homosexuality
Female Ordination

They just cannot seem to grasp that the Church can no more change its teachings on these issues than it can declare the Resurrection never took place.

As to whether they should leave the Church? Of course not-they should stay and seek to understand the truth of what the Church is teaching. They should also be ready to accept the admonitions of those who and tell them the futility of their dissent and how their dissent on core doctrines can lead other Catholic astray.