Such as?
So conseravives actually beleive all of the nonsense the Church teaches, correct? Perhaps you could give us a list of what the Church teaches that we should ignore. it really owuld be helpful.
Bro If you’re serious about finding out about Judea and Samaria (the Roman region of Palestine) in the 1st century there are two books that are indispensable:
With all due respect once you told us that there was no biological difference bewteen men an women I pretty much dismissed you as a person one could have an intelligent converstion with.
Glad you have come around. My views on the differences between men and women comes from the field of endocrinology.
Do you actually think all the great minds through out time who were Catholic and got it all wrong and now these few books finally get it all correct?
Really?
Actually, that myth has already been discredited. I recommend the book Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compasionate Conservatism Who Gives, Who Doesn’t, and Why It Matters. Liberals are more likely to rely on the government to do the charitable work for them. Conservatives are more likely to do it themselves.
Is Liberal Catholicism dead? Gosh, most Catholics I know are liberal. They attend mass with some regularity, often send their children to parochial schools, have a high respect for Catholic work among the poor, in the medical field, etc. In some parishes they are the key participants in parish activities.
But when it comes to strict theology, most within my circle don't fret that much about traditional doctrine. If we talk about such matters, which is rare, they quietly express their doubts re transubstantiation, the Mariology represented by Fatima and Lourdes, papal infallibility, priestly celibacy, etc. Their attachment to the faith supercedes dogmas and has more to do with a desire to faithfully follow Jesus and live as godly lives as possible. They embrace a 'live and let live' view toward other faiths. A few have been so alienated by this or that priest or by the sex scandal or something else that they have distanced themselves from the church, occasionally even becoming mainline Protestants.
What does shock me is how many have embraced evangelicalism which in many ways reflects the same psychology as orthodox Catholicism. This psychology requires that they have the 'one truth faith' while most Catholics in my circle recognize that none of us has a monopoly on truth and that all of us live in a world so magnificant and mysterious that we all need some humility. God is so far beyond any one religion, so far beyond our limited human understanding, and while we embrace the faith that we have inherited that or suits our situation best we all should accept the fact that we too often think in very limited terms. One theologian, I'm not positive which one, stated it well when he said that he could only believe in a God that he could not understand. Sounds wise to me.
I wonder sometimes if there is any arrogance which God despises more than that which suggests that "we" have the only full and legitimate insight into the Divine. We're all seekers, and I for one am grateful to all those wise men and women of every faith who have enriched my appreciation for the Divine. Let's rejoice in humanity's search for that Divine and not be dismissive of the efforts of others as they seek for ultimate truth. Close-minded Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Jews, etc., all miss so much by contending that they alone are blessed with the one truth faith. And their arrogance has been at the root of so much silly prejudice and even sectarian killing over the centuries.Would it be that the only differences between Liberal Catholics and Orthodox Catholics were the things I bolded above. of course the major differences have nothing to do with dogma but much to do with a demand that the Church fully embrace the secular humanist culture we live-that is embrace abortion,homosexuality,contraception, cohabitaion, female ordination, etc.
In court decisions involving multiple justices the outcome is decided by vote; this is obviously true of our electoral system. Are you claiming that moral questions should be settled by voting on them?
Give me a scientific test that proves morality exists. Suggest anything that proves that any behavior at all is either moral or immoral.
OK, then you should be willing to do the same: prove your claims. Prove that moral truths can be known apart from the Church.
The belief that right and wrong may be decided by the individual for himself is the basis of liberal Catholicism. It is the dividing line that separates the two camps: orthodoxy and heterodoxy. However you dress it up, this is the issue. It is also why the OP’s question as to whether liberal Catholicism is dead is like asking whether all the unicorns are dead. Liberal Catholicism (as I defined it above) does not exist - it may be liberal but it isn’t Catholicism.
What proof do you have he was tortured?
The notion that those who have doubts about certain traditional Catholic doctrines means, as you seem to suggest, that we embrace all the wild ideas of the far-out secularists is, of course, silly. Most Catholics I know are moderate and reasonable people who may, for example, strongly oppose abortion except under extreme conditions (e. g., rape). They probably don't judge others who use artificial birth control, especially those who already have as many children as they can responsibly support in this age. They likely are ready to accept gays without approving of gay marriage, promiscuity, etc.
There is a broad middle ground that avoids harsh judgments and pious denunciations, and millions of fine, observant Catholics and other Americans dwell there.But, doctrines are truth. Why is it legitimate to reject part of Christ?
It takes humility to submit to Truth. In fact, it is said the measure of humility is obedience. That means accepting Christ speaks through His Church.
I love it when we are told it is great to search for truth. But, we better never find it because when we do we will be termed close minded, arrogant, homophobic, judgmental, fundamentalist, etc…
Could you give us a list of doctrines/teachings its OK to ignore. it really would be helpful.
The same John Dominic Crossan who doesn’t believe Jesus rose from the dead but was eaten by wild animals?
I think we need to have a general rule that you need to read the author before misquoting them.
The same John Dominic Crossan who doesn’t believe Jesus rose from the dead but was eaten by wild animals?
The same John Dominic Crossan who left the priesthood over his personal beliefs about ‘Historical Jesus’?
I would pollute my home with a book of his.
I guess what the differences between Liberals and Conservatives is that Liberals follow the truth where ever it leads. Conservatives ignore the truth and try to cling to the past, even if errors are so blatant they howl. Suggest reading both Catholic and Non Catholic Histories of the early church for balance and accuracy.