Is Liberal Catholicism Dead?

[skyryder]

Skyryder,

Judging from your last comments, I take it your answer is no that you have not read Vatican II or the early church fathers. It’s a shame you take the opinions of protestants as “experts” and reject the teachings of the Catholic Church as fabricated tradition. The problem is that you refuse to look at all the evidence in favor of the authority of the Church and instead side with the views of Protestants who oppose Catholic teaching and theology.

Again I would ask you to do the same. Alot of your documents from early church fathers are inaccurate, forged or spend most of their time attacking one heresy or another. Ebusius is a throughly dishonest historian. His history of the early church is mostly fiction. Where are his sources? Who did he interview? How did he check out information. These are not documented.
Even Ebusius states lying is okay if it advances the agenda of his Imperial Sponsors. The early church as described by Rome is fundamentally at odds with facts uncovered by archeology. Why did early church fathers so wildly persecute other christain groups, burn books, kill opponets etc?. This was a purge of rival gangland factions vying for political control. Much of what the Vatican holds out as evidence was written or re written around the time of Constantine to justify a State Church. Yes I have looked through some of the supposed writings of early church fathers and much of it is theological and not historical. Claims by Catholic Historians need to be backed up by something other than their own writings…they need second party confirmation. It doesn’t exist. This is akin to saying The bible is true because the bible says it is true. NOT!

If the Vatican is indeed THE EXPERT. Why not completely open its archieves to scholars? What are they hiding? If Catholicism is indeed true, how is it that they differ so from the other co equal patriarchs established by the Council of Nicea? To me Nil Obstat is the seal saying let the errors continue. Why not clean them up? Truth fears no question. If truth dooms the Papacy; so be it.

Yes I have read books by Anercan Clergy that were present at Vatican II. It is amazing that their ideas of what was approved and Ratzingers’ ideas are so polarized. Part of the problem lies in the generalized concepts and undefined terms used by the Council. For example, Tradittionalists state the council never approved turning around the altars, yet this was universally done. So how did this happen? Bad Latin? I think the Spirit of Vatican II is more accurate than the writings. Read the book Politics in the Purple Kingdom which descibes the underhanded dealings of inner circles in the Holy See in the late 1950s thru 1980s Pope Pius XII was a rigid stiffling conservative. In many ways Vatican II was a mass revolt against the abuses of that era. I remember visiting the Vatican in the early 70s. Pope Pius tomb had no flowers. Pope John XXIII was buried daily by pilgrams with one boquet after another.

I guess you need to decide if you follow Christ or follow Tradition.
The two appear to be incompatible.

 

[gavanhe]

I believe we need to strive to retain the culture that Jesus instituted by his commission to the apostles. This necessarily involves the struggle with todays secular culture and liberal leaning catholics (modernists) with those who believe that the traditions and beliefs of the early church cannot be altered in their essence without losing that vital essence.
By societies very nature - democracy -, liberal catholicism and various other schismatic sects will always exist and therefore provides a need for others to counter with rational argumentation.

Gerry

 

[Filius99993]

I guess you need to decide if you follow Christ or follow Tradition.
The two appear to be incompatible.

Truth be heard- If Vatican is fallible, what makes your ideas infallible? They’ve got at least Jesus Christ’s foundation… you have… what? What makes God approve of your ideas moreso than Vatican’s? Do you have a direct contact with him? Also, the very existence of some of the the early apologists (Ignatius of Antioch, etc.) disprove your conspiracy theories. We might as well say, “They say Christ Jesus existed, but could he REALLY have? Isn’t it possible that the writers of the four gospels made it all up on their own accord?” And of course, the one saying such would be false. As you are right now.

 

[Al_Masetti]

en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

Yes, yes, yes … probable misattribution

This is probably the most quoted statement attributed to Burke, and an extraordinary number of variants of it exist, but all without any definite original source. These very extensively used “quotations” may be based on a paraphrase of some of Burke’s ideas, but he is not known to have ever declared them in such a manner in any of his writings. It may have been adapted from these lines of Burke’s in his Thoughts on the Cause of Present Discontents (1770) … followed by fifty variations on that first sentiment.

In any event, check out the link to Mr. Burke,

Lots of relevant quotes worth memorizing and passing along.

Edmund Burke ( 1729 –1797 ) was an Irish political philosopher, Whig politician, and statesman; he is regarded by many as the father of modern conservatism. Take a quick look at some of what he wrote by clicking on the link.

No liberal, he.

 

[Al_Masetti]

I wouldn’t let the liberals steal the word progressive. The Catholic Curch is progressive. A world based on unconditional love and compassion is progressive. How is supporting the murder of millions of babies progressive? Barbaric yes. Progressive no.

On page 100 of his book, “None Dare Call It Treason”, author John A. Stormer describes how the word “progressive” was hijacked by the Socialists to conceal their plans and intentions.

"Dewey believed that because man’s environment is constantly changing, man also changes constantly. Therefore, Dewey concluded, teaching children any of the absolutes of morals, government, or ethics was a waste of time.

"On this amoral philosophy, he developed his teaching formula, commonly labelled, ‘Progressive Education’.

"Dewey published, ‘My Pedagogic Creed’, in 1897. …’

We have been stuck with the word “progressive” as a code word for Socialist ever since.

amazon.com/None-Dare-Call-Treason-Stormer/dp/0899667252

Stormer also wrote a revised and updated edition:

amazon.com/None-Dare-Call-Treason-Years/dp/0914053108/ref=pd_sim_b_img_1

 

[Al_Masetti]

I wouldn’t let the liberals steal the word progressive. The Catholic Curch is progressive. A world based on unconditional love and compassion is progressive. How is supporting the murder of millions of babies progressive? Barbaric yes. Progressive no.

On page 100 of his book, “None Dare Call It Treason”, author John A. Stormer describes how the word “progressive” was hijacked by the Socialists to conceal their plans and intentions.

"Dewey believed that because man’s environment is constantly changing, man also changes constantly. Therefore, Dewey concluded, teaching children any of the absolutes of morals, government, or ethics was a waste of time.

"On this amoral philosophy, he developed his teaching formula, commonly labelled, ‘Progressive Education’.

"Dewey published, ‘My Pedagogic Creed’, in 1897. …’

We have been stuck with the word “progressive” as a code word for Socialist ever since.

 

[Al_Masetti]

I wouldn’t let the liberals steal the word progressive. The Catholic Curch is progressive. A world based on unconditional love and compassion is progressive. How is supporting the murder of millions of babies progressive? Barbaric yes. Progressive no.

On page 100 of his book, “None Dare Call It Treason”, author John A. Stormer describes how the word “progressive” was hijacked by the Socialists to conceal their plans and intentions.

"Dewey believed that because man’s environment is constantly changing, man also changes constantly. Therefore, Dewey concluded, teaching children any of the absolutes of morals, government, or ethics was a waste of time.

"On this amoral philosophy, he developed his teaching formula, commonly labelled, ‘Progressive Education’.

"Dewey published, ‘My Pedagogic Creed’, in 1897. …’

We have been stuck with the word “progressive” as a code word for Socialist ever since.

 

[estesbob]

Skyryder,

Judging from your last comments, I take it your answer is no that you have not read Vatican II or the early church fathers. It’s a shame you take the opinions of protestants as “experts” and reject the teachings of the Catholic Church as fabricated tradition. The problem is that you refuse to look at all the evidence in favor of the authority of the Church and instead side with the views of Protestants who oppose Catholic teaching and theology.

He relies solely on books written by dissident Catholics and protestants . He ignores scripture and the writings of the Church. He dismisses 2,000 of traditoin but embraces as gospel 10 years of dissident writings. But then this is the guy who claims there is no biological difference between males and females which pretty much destroys what little crdibility he had in the first place.

 

[PerryJ]

I struggle with the terms “liberal”, “modernist” etc. Either one is Catholic and follows the teachings of the Church or you don’t. These terms imply that it is okay to be a Catholic and support politicians that vote for abortion. It implies that one can debate woman’s ordination etc. It is not okay to take these actions and in some instances these actions can be acts of grave matter. Truly there is no such thing as a “liberal” Catholic. Again, I struggle with why people think they can ignore, attack, scandalize Church doctrine and yet call themselves Catholic. The teachngs of Christ is not up for a vote. Christ’s teachings and the Church teachings are one and the same. One can not refute one without refuting the other. If one challenges the Church on doctrine does not one challenge Christ? I would conclude by saying “liberal” Catholicism is not dead it never existed.

 

[catharina]

I guess you need to decide if you follow Christ or follow Tradition.
The two appear to be incompatible.

Your ignorance is astonishing.
Your teachers must be one-foot-out-the-door Catholics, at best.

The Church, now and always, protects Scripture and Tradition so that we might know best how to follow Christ. LIving one’s faith is not a do-it-yourself project, thank God.

 

[skyryder]

I struggle with the terms “liberal”, “modernist” etc. Either one is Catholic and follows the teachings of the Church or you don’t. These terms imply that it is okay to be a Catholic and support politicians that vote for abortion. It implies that one can debate woman’s ordination etc. It is not okay to take these actions and in some instances these actions can be acts of grave matter. Truly there is no such thing as a “liberal” Catholic. Again, I struggle with why people think they can ignore, attack, scandalize Church doctrine and yet call themselves Catholic. The teachngs of Christ is not up for a vote. Christ’s teachings and the Church teachings are one and the same. One can not refute one without refuting the other. If one challenges the Church on doctrine does not one challenge Christ? I would conclude by saying “liberal” Catholicism is not dead it never existed.

I* offer the following thoughts on a rewrite of the above blog to make them more in line with the relgion I advocate and understand. We should drop the name calling and self righteous monologue,. :Ok*?

I struggle with the term Traditionalist or Conservative Catholic either one follows principles of Christianity or one doesn’t. The
term Catholic Conservative tells me it is ok to support an optional war declaired by a president under false pretenses to steal oil fields, ban civil liberties, and kill/maim hundreds of thousands in the name of Jesus. If this isn’t blasphamy what is? Truly there is no such thing as a conservative catholic. Why do poeple think they can invent teachings which are non biblical eg. Indulgences, Papal Infallibility, Assumption of Mary etc and call themselves Followers of Christ? I struggle with how conservatives can ignore Pedophillia, Financial Mismanagement, Obstruction of Justice, which scandalize the church and attack its good name worldwide.
Either one is Catholic and follows the teachings of Christ or you don’t. These terms imply that it is okay to be a Catholic and embrace Holy Inquisition & Torture . It implys that one can mindless follow Humane Vitae and ignore centuries of teaching to the contray in which a more balanced approach to abortion and sexuality was practised. It implies one can ignore all the errors of the papacy eg. Legalization of Slavery, Colonial Exploitation of Millions, or taking Millons in gold from Nazi Regimes in exchange for signing Concordats of Political Support and that said actions are of no moral consequence. Truly most of the errors of the Catholic Church come from an embracing of Monarchial Episcopate that is answerable to no one and banning the Original Democratic Stucture of the Early Church. The teachngs of Christ show us THE WAY. This is a sharing of wealth and a vision of equality,love and kindness which has nothing to do with the Darwinian Capitalist Economy of the Conservatives but rather embraces Enlightened Socialism as advocated by Liberals. One can not refute following THE WAY without refuting Christ If one does not challenge false doctrine or teaching which make no sense what so ever (eg. ban on women’s ordination), one does not follow the revolution which Christ envisions. I would conclude by saying ConservativeTraditional Catholicism is not dead it never existed…

 

[Steeltemplar]

I would like to note the following:

Skyryder has not backed up any of his claims with legitimate sources. He has not produced even one shred of viable evidence. That is not surprising, as his posts have been full of complete falsehoods.

Indeed, he has not even been able to show any document from the Second Vatican Council which backs up his understanding of it. Instead, he dodges challenges made by people like Arnobius and myself.

And, no, I am not interested in modernist trash “scholarship” or Protestant anti-Catholic writings. Only credible sources interest me.

 

[una_fides]

I would conclude by saying ConservativeTraditional Catholicism is not dead it never existed…

Funny, pretty sure the Catholic Church has been hierarchal and led by a male priesthood for 2000 years. And for 2000 years it has been clinging steadfastly to the Tradition she had received both oral and written. The Church has been obsessed with Tradition for her entire life because she wishes to continue in the truth and not go astray and embrace what any individual person with no authority might conclude to be his or her truth.

One of the biggest reasons I am a traditional Catholic is that that the Church has been given the authority by Christ to decide on matters and I understand the result of individuals trying to figure everything out on their own. There are thousands of different protestant denominations in the world all teaching and believing different “truths” from the Bible. If the Holy Spirit leads all people to the fullness of truth based on their own private interpretations of things, then we obviously have a problem. Every denomination has individuals who are sincere and are trying to follow God in the best way they know how. If that is the case, then why all the confusion?

God did not give each person the authority to figure everything out on his own just as he did not give us the authority to disobey his divine law. God gave us a free will so that we will then turn it back over to him and be obedient. The sin of the father of lies, the devil, was pride and rebellion. The sin of Adam and Eve was the same (regardless of whether you believe they really existed; their story is in Scripture, and the sin they committed is clear.) When we think we know more than those whom God has appointed to be in authority, we then try to make ourselves as gods, even though we may think or believe that we are doing the right thing. Thus, when approaching the personal God, who wishes all to know the truth about him, and when approaching his revelation to us, we must do so with the greatest amount of humility. For without first humbling ourselves, we will not be able to hear the voice of God and go in the direction towards the fullness of his truth.

If we claim to be Catholic, then we must hold to what the Catholic Church teaches. If one disbelieves in the Trinity, apostolic authority, the pope, indulgences, purgatory, and everything else essentially Catholic, then why would that person insist that he or she is still Catholic? If one wishes to oppose the Catholic Church and her teachings, then one should come out and say so, instead of coming in disguise as some form of “catholic” who opposes everything Catholic about the Church.

 

[PerryJ]

Mr. Skyrydder,

I agree that I should have included the word “conservative” in the list of terms that should not be included with Catholicism. One is Catholic or not. There are not variations. This includes conservative. I am sure that I can not change your opinion on the Catholic Church. I respond so that others are not lead astray by your misinformation. There are many secular books written that would show most of your statements as being incorrect.

The inquistion although troubbling was limited to less than 5,000 deaths. The majority of these occurred from the hands of the Spanish Monarchy and was actually forbidden by the Pope. These deaths were the result of fear from the Spanish Monarchy that Islam was taking over the world. Which at that time appeared to be inevitable.

The Catholic Church does not support pre-emptive wars as sated in the the “just war doctrine”. As such the Church does not support this war. As a follower of our Church’s belief I also do not support the war. This is were labeling people can have negative consequences. Because I left a word out it was assumed that I was conservative and supported the war. I support the teachings of the Church.

As a follower of my Church I accept responsibility for the terrible abuses my Preist have committed and have donated funds to make resititution. Note that studies have found Protestant pastor abuse at almost twice the level that Catholic Priest were guilty of, this however, does not make it right and I have assisted in the best method I can. Does it fully restore these people? No, it does not; but, I share the responsibilities of people in my Church that fail.

Did not the Jewish surviors of the Holocaust just meet to thank the Pope for saving so many Jewish people from the Holocaust. They did this because they are not turned by propoganda; but, they actually survived the concrentration camps and felt obliged to thank the Catholic Pope’s for their intervention. Note Catholicism has its deepest roots from our Jewish Brothers and the Old Testament. We can not abandone the people that were the first step in bring Christ into the world.

I do not have time to discuss all of your points; but, want to thank you for your post. It is wonderful that you bring out so many misunderstood points. As these points are clarified and refuted with history and facts it shows the light of our Church. Keep posting it truly is an asset when this misinformtaion is posted. It gives us the opportunity to post the truth.

 

[estesbob]

I would like to note the following:

Skyryder has not backed up any of his claims with legitimate sources. He has not produced even one shred of viable evidence. That is not surprising, as his posts have been full of complete falsehoods.

Indeed, he has not even been able to show any document from the Second Vatican Council which backs up his understanding of it. Instead, he dodges challenges made by people like Arnobius and myself.

And, no, I am not interested in modernist trash “scholarship” or Protestant anti-Catholic writings. Only credible sources interest me.

Which he has been doing for over 400 posts. He keeps throwing out the most outrageous claims he can come up , never defends them, yet people here keep taking the bait.

 

[PerryJ]

To Skyrydder, I am posting this information for your review. I believe a testament from Jewish survivors and the Chief Rabbi of the day states it all.

HOLOCAUST-SURVIVING JEWS THANK POPE

Today, Pope Benedict XVI is welcoming a group of Jewish Holocaust survivors. Arranged by the Pave the Way Foundation, the group will personally thank the pope for the Catholic Church’s intervention in saving their lives in Italy during World War II.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue addressed this event today:

“Despite attempts by embittered ex-priests and seminarians, and others, to discredit Pope Pius XII’s heroic efforts in rescuing Jews during the Holocaust (as many as 860,000 were saved), the evidence is mounting that Pius was a ‘Righteous Gentile.’ What is happening in the Vatican today is another reminder of just how great a man he was.

“October 9 marks the 50th anniversary of Pius’ death. To mark this important event, the Vatican announced yesterday that a convention will be held November 6-8 to honor his work; a photo exhibit will be on display in the colonnade of St. Peter’s Square from October 21-January 6. Millions of Catholics hope that eventually Pius will be beatified and then canonized. The Catholic League certainly supports this process.

“Those who disagree with this assessment have a lot of explaining to do. For example, the true test of the Catholic Church’s role in rescuing Jews was in Italy, and nowhere in Europe were more Jews saved—fully 85 percent—than in Italy. Also, the chief rabbi in Rome during the German occupation, Emilio Zolli, once said that ‘no hero in all of history was more militant, more fought against, none more heroic, than Pius XII.’ Indeed, Zolli was so moved by Pius’ work that he became a Catholic after the war, taking the pope’s name as his baptismal name.

“Finally, today’s meeting of Jewish Holocaust survivors thanking the pope for what the Church did to save their lives says it all. No amount of revisionism can change that.”

 

[skyryder]

To Skyrydder, I am posting this information for your review. I believe a testament from Jewish survivors and the Chief Rabbi of the day states it all.

HOLOCAUST-SURVIVING JEWS THANK POPE

Today, Pope Benedict XVI is welcoming a group of Jewish Holocaust survivors. Arranged by the Pave the Way Foundation, the group will personally thank the pope for the Catholic Church’s intervention in saving their lives in Italy during World War II.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue addressed this event today:

“Despite attempts by embittered ex-priests and seminarians, and others, to discredit Pope Pius XII’s heroic efforts in rescuing Jews during the Holocaust (as many as 860,000 were saved), the evidence is mounting that Pius was a ‘Righteous Gentile.’ What is happening in the Vatican today is another reminder of just how great a man he was.

“October 9 marks the 50th anniversary of Pius’ death. To mark this important event, the Vatican announced yesterday that a convention will be held November 6-8 to honor his work; a photo exhibit will be on display in the colonnade of St. Peter’s Square from October 21-January 6. Millions of Catholics hope that eventually Pius will be beatified and then canonized. The Catholic League certainly supports this process.

“Those who disagree with this assessment have a lot of explaining to do. For example, the true test of the Catholic Church’s role in rescuing Jews was in Italy, and nowhere in Europe were more Jews saved—fully 85 percent—than in Italy. Also, the chief rabbi in Rome during the German occupation, Emilio Zolli, once said that ‘no hero in all of history was more militant, more fought against, none more heroic, than Pius XII.’ Indeed, Zolli was so moved by Pius’ work that he became a Catholic after the war, taking the pope’s name as his baptismal name.

“Finally, today’s meeting of Jewish Holocaust survivors thanking the pope for what the Church did to save their lives says it all. No amount of revisionism can change that.”

’

We agree to disagree:

It s my conclusion having looked at evidence that Pope Pius XII really played both sides of WWII for all he could get out of the deal. He signed a deal with Mousolini and Hitler that brought millions in gold into the Vatican Bank. This has been verified in documents found in the Federal Reserve and in US Child Abuse Cases. Pius encouraged Hitler to attack Russia to destroy communism even though it would kill millions. He did not excoummunicate Hitler who was a Catholic even though he knew about the Concentration Camps, nor did he speak out against them until he knew the Germans would lose the war and the British and Americans would win. Pius encouraged ethnic cleansing in the Balkans as recently found documents in Yugoslavia proved, even though again he knew many muslims would die. The reason why the Vatican has refused to open its WWII archieves when all other major players have US, Russia, Britain, Germany, Japan, etc. is that they spied for both sides.
Their actions would be condemned world wide and cause a scandal if fully disclosed. Yes there were some instances in France and Italy where the Catholics hide Jews and for this Israel thanked the Vatican however where was the Catholic Church during all the deportations of Jews in Germany? Look at photos on the internet: Bishops blessing Fascist Troops, Bishops attending formal dinner parties with War Criminals, Bishops and Cardinals wearing the .Swastika and screaming Seig Heil! You can’t have it both ways…otherwise it is hypocrisy. A saint he ain;t. Instead of trying to cannonize a man of such low moral character as Pius XXII we should be cannonizing Dietrich Bonhoeffer as the first protestant martyr in the Catholic Church !
Dietrich B. had the courage to stand up for Christ. Pius didn’t.
While I am sure Bonhaeffer is in heaven, I can’t say the same
about the hero of Ulta Conservatives and the Catholic Right

 

[Adonis33]

’

We agree to disagree:

It s my conclusion having looked at evidence that Pope Pius XII really played both sides of WWII for all he could get out of the deal. He signed a deal with Mousolini and Hitler that brought millions in gold into the Vatican Bank. This has been verified in documents found in the Federal Reserve and in US Child Abuse Cases. Pius encouraged Hitler to attack Russia to destroy communism even though it would kill millions. He did not excoummunicate Hitler who was a Catholic even though he knew about the Concentration Camps, nor did he speak out against them until he knew the Germans would lose the war and the British and Americans would win. Pius encouraged ethnic cleansing in the Balkans as recently found documents in Yugoslavia proved, even though again he knew many muslims would die. The reason why the Vatican has refused to open its WWII archieves when all other major players have US, Russia, Britain, Germany, Japan, etc. is that they spied for both sides.
Their actions would be condemned world wide and cause a scandal if fully disclosed. Yes there were some instances in France and Italy where the Catholics hide Jews and for this Israel thanked the Vatican however where was the Catholic Church during all the deportations of Jews in Germany? Look at photos on the internet: Bishops blessing Fascist Troops, Bishops attending formal dinner parties with War Criminals, Bishops and Cardinals wearing the .Swastika and screaming Seig Heil! You can’t have it both ways…otherwise it is hypocrisy. A saint he ain;t. Instead of trying to cannonize a man of such low moral character as Pius XXII we should be cannonizing Dietrich Bonhoeffer as the first protestant martyr in the Catholic Church !
Dietrich B. had the courage to stand up for Christ. Pius didn’t.
While I am sure Bonhaeffer is in heaven, I can’t say the same
about the hero of Ulta Conservatives and the Catholic Right

You have no evidence to back up this ridiculous assertion.

 

[estesbob]

You have no evidence to back up this ridiculous assertion.

446 posts into this thread and he still baits and he still get responses. He will continue to post this nonsense as long as people reply.

 

[skyryder]

446 posts into this thread and he still baits and he still get responses. He will continue to post this nonsense as long as people reply.

You must admit the Liberals and Conservatives love to fight!
Too bad we can’t find anything to agree on. I think this is a micocosm of the problems which plague both Anerican and European Catholicism

From the tone of the debate I think the Church will eventually split into Reformed and Orthodox Catholics.

Where I think the Holy Spriit wants to lead the Church however is 1) Abolishing the papacy 2) Abolishing tradition and the latin rite3) Unification with the Protestants. I think a reformed Catholic Faith as advocated in previous blog could do this. I think an Orthodox or Conservative Catholic Faith won’t,