Is Liberal Catholicism Dead?

[skyryder]

I don’t understand why someone would call him/herself a “liberal Catholic” I do not know why you continue posting on a Catholic answers forum, you would do well to not try to promulgate your anti-religious agenda. My prayers are with you.

God must love Liberals because he has given us so many misguided and lost Conservatives to convert. It is interesting that
your infinite, loving and all powerful God is so small and vindictive.

 

[AmyS]

It is interesting that your infinite, loving and all powerful God is so small and vindictive.

Satan is small and vindictive (not God), and can be enticing and beautiful, so wonder who really is on your side?

 

[catharina]

The offense given by this statement is an offense against God.
Please re-think your insulting and stupid attempts at cleverness.

 

[Robert_Bay]

GENERAL WARNING

This thread needs to discus the topic of the original post and not discuss individual posters. Participants are strongly reminded that charity is essential to our discussions here.

If you wish to review the subject, please see Charity for specifics, or CAF rules for an overview, both of which are located in the Rules of the Road sub-forum.

 

[mangy_dog]

I disagree, what you are promoting is a static, unchanging Church. Ask yourself what a static Church brings? Stagnation and internal decay. “Liberalism” is not bad, it is a way of internal renewal in the Church. If following every rule to every i and t is what makes up faith, it ends up being pretty empty.

Faith is tied into spirituality, much of it on a personal level. Faith is not a one-size fits all construct.

This is why all levels need renewal with fresh ideas to keep relevance to the people in the pews. The Church is so very very human at all levels and that goes beyond rule and law books. While it gets attacked as “heterodox” at times, what is happening is renewal from fresh ideas that reflect the present time and place the institution and the humans who make it up, who are the true spiritual soul.

And I disagree with you.

The Catholic church is not stagnant and in decay as you say, for it is the Body of Christ. Continually life-giving and always offering salvation to all the parts of the living body of Christ.

Rules and laws and traditions of the catholic church are an easy yoke and a bearable burden. Only the ones distracted with modernism find it difficult and unbearable and are seeking new ways in which the faith can conform to the “me” for me, me, me.

The true, rotting stagnation is in the vicious circle of modernism disguising as change and progress of ideas while isolating and insulating the soul from its principal of life.

Unfortunately liberal catholicism is not dead. It is thrusting its talons ever so deep into our shoulders and threatening to take a bite out of our necks.

Fortunately neither this or any other luciferian plot will prevail against the Church that Christ Himself instituted.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

 

[Joe_5859]

Hey, does anybody else here wish they had an ignor button on this site?

They do. Just click on the user’s name and go to the “View Profile” screen. On that screen, there should be a link “Click to add so-and-so to your ignore list.” Once you do that, that person’s posts will no longer appear to you when perusing the forums.

 

[AmyS]

They do. Just click on the user’s name and go to the “View Profile” screen. On that screen, there should be a link “Click to add so-and-so to your ignore list.” Once you do that, that person’s posts will no longer appear to you when perusing the forums.

Awesome, thanks!

 

[skyryder]

Unfortunately liberal catholicism is not dead. It is thrusting its talons ever so deep into our shoulders and threatening to take a bite out of our necks.

Fortunately neither this or any other luciferian plot will prevail against the Church that Christ Himself instituted.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

Bro,

Liberalism is not a luciferian plot, neither is conservatism.

We need to bring reality into this discussion. NO ONE has ever seen God. NO ONE can absolutely prove God exists or doesn’t.
NO ONE in this generation has ever seen Jesus Christ. NO ONE can absolutely prove the events of the Gospel (eg the resurection) happened or didn’t. NO ONE can prove Catholicism is the true faith. NO ONE can prove God likes the traditional mass or prefers other forms of worship. NO ONE can prove the lineage of the Popes is factual (Most Historians discount it) NO ONE can prove with certainty that any of the Popes Rules, Regs, Dogmas or Doctrines are true. NO ONE can prove heaven or hell exists.

Everything comes down to faith and personal beliefs.

God is effiable. (ie beyond Human Understanding) What your blog states is your view of God is better than my view of God…Right? To state that conservatives are right and liberals are wrong because you know God would violate the definition of what God is. There are no modern prophets.

The finite cannot know the infinite.

I think the remark about the devils talons taking a bite out of one shoulders and biting one’s neck might be your own pride or a misbehaving pet parrot. You can state your opinions but do not villify mine.

 

[fix]

Bro,

Liberalism is not a luciferian plot, neither is conservatism.

We need to bring reality into this discussion. NO ONE has ever seen God. NO ONE can absolutely prove God exists or doesn’t.
NO ONE in this generation has ever seen Jesus Christ. NO ONE can absolutely prove the events of the Gospel (eg the resurection) happened or didn’t. NO ONE can prove Catholicism is the true faith. NO ONE can prove God likes the traditional mass or prefers other forms of worship. NO ONE can prove the lineage of the Popes is factual (Most Historians discount it) NO ONE can prove with certainty that any of the Popes Rules, Regs, Dogmas or Doctrines are true. NO ONE can prove heaven or hell exists.

Everything comes down to faith and personal beliefs.

God is effiable. (ie beyond Human Understanding) What your blog states is your view of God is better than my view of God…Right? To state that conservatives are right and liberals are wrong because you know God would violate the definition of what God is. There are no modern prophets.

The finite cannot know the infinite.

I think the remark about the devils talons taking a bite out of one shoulders and biting one’s neck might be your own pride or a misbehaving pet parrot. You can state your opinions but do not villify mine.

I think you are confused. The “proof” you refer to seems to be a materialistic proof, right? You think proof of God must come in some materialistic way to be a valid proof?

 

[ToddM]

Unfortunately liberal catholicism is not dead. It is thrusting its talons ever so deep into our shoulders and threatening to take a bite out of our necks.

Fortunately neither this or any other luciferian plot will prevail against the Church that Christ Himself instituted.

Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.

Bro,

Liberalism is not a luciferian plot, neither is conservatism.

We need to bring reality into this discussion. NO ONE has ever seen God. NO ONE can absolutely prove God exists or doesn’t.
NO ONE in this generation has ever seen Jesus Christ. NO ONE can absolutely prove the events of the Gospel (eg the resurection) happened or didn’t. NO ONE can prove Catholicism is the true faith. NO ONE can prove God likes the traditional mass or prefers other forms of worship. NO ONE can prove the lineage of the Popes is factual (Most Historians discount it) NO ONE can prove with certainty that any of the Popes Rules, Regs, Dogmas or Doctrines are true. NO ONE can prove heaven or hell exists.

Everything comes down to faith and personal beliefs.

God is effiable. (ie beyond Human Understanding) What your blog states is your view of God is better than my view of God…Right? To state that conservatives are right and liberals are wrong because you know God would violate the definition of what God is. There are no modern prophets.

The finite cannot know the infinite.

I think the remark about the devils talons taking a bite out of one shoulders and biting one’s neck might be your own pride or a misbehaving pet parrot. You can state your opinions but do not villify mine.

Bro, I understand feeling offended, but this is a case of ‘irreconcilable differences’ so to speak. Headlock and deadlock.

Prayer, Holy Spirit. This is a merry go round and I for one have eaten too much pop corn. Don’t think I’m alone in this.

 

[Ender]

Skyryder, you do not consider yourself Catholic - do you?

This is an interesting question that goes to the topic of the thread. Skyryder has called himself a liberal but there is no way to tell from his posts whether he considers himself a Catholic. This is not true of all liberals but there is surely a great disconnect between what many liberals believe and what the Church teaches so it would seem that as the Church becomes more persistent in opposing error, liberal Catholicism wanes. It cannot do otherwise as (in the main) it directly opposes many serious Church teachings: women’s ordination, homosexuality, contraception, …

If we see liberal Catholicism (heterodoxy) receding it is probably because of a resurgence of orthodoxy.

Ender

 

[JudieK]

We need to bring reality into this discussion. NO ONE has ever seen God. NO ONE can absolutely prove God exists or doesn’t.
NO ONE in this generation has ever seen Jesus Christ. NO ONE can absolutely prove the events of the Gospel (eg the resurection) happened or didn’t. NO ONE can prove Catholicism is the true faith. NO ONE can prove God likes the traditional mass or prefers other forms of worship. NO ONE can prove the lineage of the Popes is factual (Most Historians discount it) NO ONE can prove with certainty that any of the Popes Rules, Regs, Dogmas or Doctrines are true. NO ONE can prove heaven or hell exists.

Everything comes down to faith and personal beliefs.

God is effiable. (ie beyond Human Understanding) What your blog states is your view of God is better than my view of God…Right? To state that conservatives are right and liberals are wrong because you know God would violate the definition of what God is. There are no modern prophets.

The finite cannot know the infinite.

I think the remark about the devils talons taking a bite out of one shoulders and biting one’s neck might be your own pride or a misbehaving pet parrot. You can state your opinions but do not villify mine.

Sky- I don’t think anyone is villifying your opinions or saying you don’t have the right to believe what you want! That has been made clear. The question, though, is, can you hold your opinions and still be considered “Catholic.” If you don’t consider yourself “Catholic,” then carry on with your beliefs, uncontested! But to be “Catholic” means to submit to the authority of the Pope, the Church, the Bishop, etc. Catholic beliefs aren’t up in the air and open for revision whenever we feel like it. We can discuss how best to live out the doctrines in this particular day and age, but we can’t change what the Church teaches as dogma. Fortunately for you and for everyone, no one is holding a gun to your head and telling you that you MUST be a Catholic! The title of this thread indicates that it is about “Catholicism,” (albeit liberal), which implies that we all have a general acceptance of the most basic defining beliefs of catholicism, and we are quibbling over certain details. Your beliefs seem to be out of the spectrum of even basic catholicism. Catholics have the right to believe what we do. Everyone is free to seek out truth where he or she thinks they will find it, and we believe it to be best found in the Catholic Church. If we didn’t, why would we stay?

 

[ToddM]

Sky- I don’t think anyone is villifying your opinions or saying you don’t have the right to believe what you want! That has been made clear. The question, though, is, can you hold your opinions and still be considered “Catholic.” If you don’t consider yourself “Catholic,” then carry on with your beliefs, uncontested! But to be “Catholic” means to submit to the authority of the Pope, the Church, the Bishop, etc. Catholic beliefs aren’t up in the air and open for revision whenever we feel like it. We can discuss how best to live out the doctrines in this particular day and age, but we can’t change what the Church teaches as dogma. Fortunately for you and for everyone, no one is holding a gun to your head and telling you that you MUST be a Catholic! The title of this thread indicates that it is about “Catholicism,” (albeit liberal), which implies that we all have a general acceptance of the most basic defining beliefs of catholicism, and we are quibbling over certain details. Your beliefs seem to be out of the spectrum of even basic catholicism. Catholics have the right to believe what we do. Everyone is free to seek out truth where he or she thinks they will find it, and we believe it to be best found in the Catholic Church. If we didn’t, why would we stay?

How 'bout a re frame/new thread f/sky about 'why I believe the Catholic church is not The Church f/sky?

 

[JudieK]

Or perhaps people come onto a Catholic Answers blog and attack catholicism because they like being the center of attention?

 

[ToddM]

Or perhaps people come onto a Catholic Answers blog and attack catholicism because they like being the center of attention?

Thats ‘crazy talk’. Seriously though, while the majority of human interaction could be seen having this motive, it is still just an attempt to fill the Christ shaped black hole.

Why this particular venue though? Any attention is better than none, anyone with kids likely knows this.

If someone has their choice, why make this one?

 

[edwest2]

Liberal Catholocism is dying but, in fact, it never existed in the first place. There will always be those with various levels of living out their faith.

Some are hindered due to physical illness. They are still able to pray and love others.

Others are too distracted by the “if it feels good, do it” lifestyles of those around them. What did Christ say to the religious leaders of the time? He referred to this “murderous and adulterous generation.” Lots of adultery, divorce and fornication going on right now. Too many Catholics are imitating the secular world. And they are too afraid or too ashamed to come back. I encourage you - forgiveness and healing are waiting for you.

And there are those who have forgotten. There is just so much secular, pro-sex/fornication, pro-divorce/What’s the big deal?, pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage noise coming out of the TV, radio and movies that some people think: “Church? Do people still go there?” Yes, they do.

Reverence. Mass is the extent of your Catholic life. Got communion? Time to go. This is the Mass, brothers and sisters. The solemn commemoration of Christ’s sacrifice for you.

Pope John Paul II and now, Pope Benedict, are turning the great Church back to its foundational principles and to reverence and living in a culture that respects the human person from conception to natural death.

Some call this “orthodoxy” but I would call it, in the words of Christ: “If you love me keep my commandments.”

God bless,
Ed

 

[ToddM]

Liberal Catholocism is dying but, in fact, it never existed in the first place. There will always be those with various levels of living out their faith.

Some are hindered due to physical illness. They are still able to pray and love others.

Others are too distracted by the “if it feels good, do it” lifestyles of those around them. What did Christ say to the religious leaders of the time? He referred to this “murderous and adulterous generation.” Lots of adultery, divorce and fornication going on right now. Too many Catholics are imitating the secular world. And they are too afraid or too ashamed to come back. I encourage you - forgiveness and healing are waiting for you.

And there are those who have forgotten. There is just so much secular, pro-sex/fornication, pro-divorce/What’s the big deal?, pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage noise coming out of the TV, radio and movies that some people think: “Church? Do people still go there?” Yes, they do.

Reverence. Mass is the extent of your Catholic life. Got communion? Time to go. This is the Mass, brothers and sisters. The solemn commemoration of Christ’s sacrifice for you.

Pope John Paul II and now, Pope Benedict, are turning the great Church back to its foundational principles and to reverence and living in a culture that respects the human person from conception to natural death.

Some call this “orthodoxy” but I would call it, in the words of Christ: “If you love me keep my commandments.”

God bless,
Ed

“First thou pullest the Holy Pin. Then thou must count to three. Three shall be the number of the counting and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither shalt thou count two, excepting that thou then proceedeth to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the number of the counting, be reached, then lobbest thou the Holy Hand Grenade in the direction of thine foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it.”

Frag out!

 

[una_fides]

READ THE GOSPELS…If Christ had some problem with communion in the hand I am sure he would have flipped bread on his disciples tongues at the Last Supper. THE GOSPELS EXPLICITLY STATE THAT THE CONSECRATED BREAD WAS PASSED AROUND AND BROKEN & EATEN BY THE TWELVE USING THEIR HANDS. GET REAL! Good ridance to the communion rail.

I am assuming this is the last supper passage to which you were referring:
Luke 22:17-19, “And having taken the chalice, he gave thanks, and said: Take, and divide it among you: For I say to you, that I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, till the kingdom of God come. And taking bread, he gave thanks, and brake; and gave to them, saying: This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me.”

This passage does not in any way bolster the position of those who propose Communion in the hand. First, the passage says to divide the chalice among themselves. This also took place before the consecration. Second, even if you could somehow prove that the apostles administered themselves Communion in the hand (which you cannot), that would still not support those who propose the laity to receive Communion in such a way. There is a clear difference between consecrated priests (such as the apostles who were the first) and the laity. Traditionally, only a consecrated priest was permitted to touch Communion, as he was the one who administered the Sacrament.

We have no record either way at the last supper that Christ handed his apostles (the first priests) Communion on the hand or if they received on the tongue. Lastly, we do have a record that it was the 12 apostles present at the last supper and there is no indication whatsoever in any Scripture passage that I am aware of that anyone else was present.
Mark 14:20 Who saith to them: One of the twelve, who dippeth with me his hand in the dish.
Luke 22:14 And when the hour was come, he sat down: and the twelve apostles with him.

Since you referenced Scripture, here are a few Scripture verses on apostolic authority that you may find interesting:
Acts 20:28 Take heed to yourselves and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood.
Jesus speaking to those on whom he had placed his apostolic authority: Luke 10:16 He that heareth you heareth me: and he that despiseth you despiseth me: and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.
Christ speaking of himself and his apostles: 1John 4:6 We are of God. He that knoweth God heareth us. He that is not of God heareth us not. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.
1Timothy 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Let us both agree to humbly approach God and his truth so that we will not just see our truth that we want to see but that we might see the truth as he has revealed and intended.

 

[ToddM]

I am assuming this is the last supper passage to which you were referring:
Luke 22:17-19, “And having taken the chalice, he gave thanks, and said: Take, and divide it among you: For I say to you, that I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, till the kingdom of God come. And taking bread, he gave thanks, and brake; and gave to them, saying: This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me.”

This passage does not in any way bolster the position of those who propose Communion in the hand. First, the passage says to divide the chalice among themselves. This also took place before the consecration. Second, even if you could somehow prove that the apostles administered themselves Communion in the hand (which you cannot), that would still not support those who propose the laity to receive Communion in such a way. There is a clear difference between consecrated priests (such as the apostles who were the first) and the laity. Traditionally, only a consecrated priest was permitted to touch Communion, as he was the one who administered the Sacrament.

We have no record either way at the last supper that Christ handed his apostles (the first priests) Communion on the hand or if they received on the tongue. Lastly, we do have a record that it was the 12 apostles present at the last supper and there is no indication whatsoever in any Scripture passage that I am aware of that anyone else was present.
Mark 14:20 Who saith to them: One of the twelve, who dippeth with me his hand in the dish.
Luke 22:14 And when the hour was come, he sat down: and the twelve apostles with him.

Since you referenced Scripture, here are a few Scripture verses on apostolic authority that you may find interesting:
Acts 20:28 Take heed to yourselves and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood.
Jesus speaking to those on whom he had placed his apostolic authority: Luke 10:16 He that heareth you heareth me: and he that despiseth you despiseth me: and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.
Christ speaking of himself and his apostles: 1John 4:6 We are of God. He that knoweth God heareth us. He that is not of God heareth us not. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.
1Timothy 3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

Let us both agree to humbly approach God and his truth so that we will not just see our truth that we want to see but that we might see the truth as he has revealed and intended.

God willing and good ‘luck’ on this last paragraph especially. This particular nail has been driven completely through this particular board numerous times.

 

[JudieK]

“First thou pullest the Holy Pin. Then thou must count to three. Three shall be the number of the counting and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither shalt thou count two, excepting that thou then proceedeth to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the number of the counting, be reached, then lobbest thou the Holy Hand Grenade in the direction of thine foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it.”

This is beyond a doubt the funniest part of the movie!!! I almost died laughing the first time I saw it!!!

As a side note, not in anyway related to this thread, we just watched Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (the best of the three, I think! Haven’t seen the latest yet… ) and it was amusing to see how these guys interpretted the words of Christ re: the cup- “whoever drinks from this cup shall have eternal life.” When I first saw this movie in the 80’s, I wasn’t even a Christian, so I probably took this at face value- “wow! a magical cup that gives eternal life to the drinker!” But now, I thought- “how silly! Every chalice used at every Catholic mass around the world is “the cup”- and they all grant eternal life!” But not the way the movie portrays it, of course- as earthly immortality…but eternal life in Heaven with Christ. Anyway- it was cool to watch this movie with a Catholic understanding of communion!