Is Liberal Catholicism Dead?

[skyryder]

Skyryder:

Again you are saying that Church councils or that popes have taught certain things and are not providing the sources, but instead you like to quote from and cite modern liberal sources for your arguments and support. I suggest actually reading and studying the early church fathers and Scripture independent of the many liberal documents you have put forth that are infected

Read these articles:
catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9801eaw.asp
catholic.com/library/papal_infallibility.asp
catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9702eaw.asp
catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9904fea2.asp
catholic.com/thisrock/1997/9706eaw.asp
catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9810fea3.asp

Thanks for the information. I did read each link.

Several problems with the above articles: First they are written by Catholic Aplogists who are not objective. I would be more persuaded by articles from a Department of Religious Studies from a Secular University than literature from THIS ROCK which is biased. Second none of the articles draws information from Non Catholic Sources who were witnesses to events at the time of the Early Church which can independantly confirm that Rome was right and someone else was wrong. As you know the Literarists ghost wrote Epistles, edited d Gnostic Writings, and added events after the fact to the work of Evangelists. Where we know things have been rewritten we shouln’t use this as evidence. Why not look at all the writings from the Patriarchs of Alexandria, and Athens that are well preserved, haven’t been tinkered with and show quite opposite points of view?. Third Some of the Biblical Basis for the Papacy are misinterpreted scriputure whch everyone agrees are dead wrong. eg Infallibility, Papal Succession, Christ’s givng the keys to Peter etc. Either tradition is subject to verification by Exegsis and Archeology or it isn’t. Appearently your position is that Offical Church Policy trumps reason.

Sorry, but I find no evidence here to refute my beliefs or support your position.

 

[una_fides]

’

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 soooooo much time to keep posting on these forums. Could you perhaps use some of that time to gather up some supporting sources for your allegations??? Perhaps you can prove that Vatican archives somehow support your theories? Have you by chance been given some special privilege to read them? If not, then how can you propose to know what they contain?

From your last remarks, it appears obvious that you seem to be playing God and now deciding who goes to heaven and hell. I’m speculating here that perhaps you wish to do away with the papacy so you can replace the pope with yourself, as you seem to have done already, since in your view one must accept the word of skyryder as truth, without any sources or evidence put forth, and should reject the vicar of Christ because skyryder said so. hmm…

 

[Filius99993]

You have no evidence to back up this ridiculous assertion.

He hardly ever does. But he keeps on posting…

Nice user name by the way (like Shelly’s poem to the deceased Keats, maybe?).

 

[una_fides]

Thanks for the information. I did read each link.

Several problems with the above articles: First they are written by Catholic Aplogists who are not objective. I would be more persuaded by articles from a Department of Religious Studies from a Secular University than literature from THIS ROCK which is biased. … Appearently your position is that Offical Church Policy trumps reason.
Sorry, but I find no evidence here to refute my beliefs or support your position.

Just to reiterate what you just said here, basically you are saying that you do not accept the writings of Catholics because they try to support the Catholic Church, but instead you accept the writings of secularists and modernists who oppose the Catholic Church.

First, realize that everyone has an agenda of some sorts and if one is “secular” that means that he rejects or at least is indifferent to God and religion. Thus, he too would be biased against God and against the Catholic faith; otherwise, he would himself be Catholic and would be defending the faith. You accept as fact these secular writings and throw out altogether the writings of those who devote their time to defend and uphold the Catholic faith. You would do well to read and respect the writings of those who defend positions with which you disagree.

The facts and evidence to support the Catholic faith are there and are clear to those who are willing to accept the fullness of Christ’s truth. Those who obstinately oppose Catholicism have been blinded by disbelief.

Regardless of where we may now stand, let us humble ourselves and realize that God’s ways and thoughts are much greater than ours.

1Co 1:19 For it is written: I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the learning of the learned I will set aside.
1Co 1:20 Where is the wise one? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made the wisdom of the world foolish?
1Co 1:21 For since in the wisdom of God the world did not come to know God through wisdom, it was the will of God through the foolishness of the proclamation to save those who have faith.
1Co 1:22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom,
1Co 1:23 but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,
1Co 1:24 but to those who are called, Jews and Greeks alike, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
1Co 1:25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.
1Co 1:26 Consider your own calling, brothers. Not many of you were wise by human standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth.
1Co 1:27 Rather, God chose the foolish of the world to shame the wise, and God chose the weak of the world to shame the strong,
1Co 1:28 and God chose the lowly and despised of the world, those who count for nothing, to reduce to nothing those who are something,
1Co 1:29 so that no human being might boast before God.

We would all do well to humble ourselves and consider that the God of the Catholic Church exists. One day we all will meet him and have to give an account for our words and deeds. In the mean time, we would do best to remain humble and take him on his word.

 

[PerryJ]

Skyryder,

I find your selection of Mr. Bonhaeffer most interesting. This man was obviously a very complex man that excelled yet struggled. He did many very noteworthy acts and died a horrifc death at the hands of the Germans. I find it interesting though that he wanted to exemplify Ghandi and his philopsohy of non-violent resitance he chose not to do it. He attempted to kill Hitler. This brings in a very complex notion for a theologian that chose that the end justifies the means. Few great philosphers or theologians have come to this determination. At this time you may wish to divert the discorse to a Catholic that did something similar; however, please refrain as this would not prove your point or provide any insight. You have chosen as a saint a man that left his own belief system to attempt to commit murder. This is an important point. A war resistor that attempted to kill Hitler maybe one that was not taught the ways of Christ. This man fully understood this issue yet chose to take another path. Is this the man you wish to be a saint? Is this the standard you wish to apply? If so then you will have to show this same standard to Catholics. Some of the issues you have brought forth are not as noteworthy as leaving ones belief system to commit murder.

 

[jay29]

I hope hippie masses are gone with the wind.

 

[skyryder]

Skyryder,

I find your selection of Mr. Bonhaeffer most interesting. This man was obviously a very complex man that excelled yet struggled. He did many very noteworthy acts and died a horrifc death at the hands of the Germans. I find it interesting though that he wanted to exemplify Ghandi and his philopsohy of non-violent resitance he chose not to do it. He attempted to kill Hitler. This brings in a very complex notion for a theologian that chose that the end justifies the means. Few great philosphers or theologians have come to this determination. At this time you may wish to divert the discorse to a Catholic that did something similar; however, please refrain as this would not prove your point or provide any insight. You have chosen as a saint a man that left his own belief system to attempt to commit murder. This is an important point. A war resistor that attempted to kill Hitler maybe one that was not taught the ways of Christ. This man fully understood this issue yet chose to take another path. Is this the man you wish to be a saint? Is this the standard you wish to apply? If so then you will have to show this same standard to Catholics. Some of the issues you have brought forth are not as noteworthy as leaving ones belief system to commit murder.

Yes, Bonhaeffer is a saint. Recall that in the Bible God told Deborah to do a similar thing to Sesera who killed Jews in Judges chapter 5. Any objections?

 

[skyryder]

I hope hippie masses are gone with the wind.

Ditto for Latin pal, The object of worship is to praise God, not bore him to tears.

 

[Steeltemplar]

If liberal Catholicism is dead, then it is people like Skyryder who are driving the nails into its coffin with impressive rapidity.

I can’t think that anyone reading this thread would come away with any idea but that liberal Christianity is at best pathetic, but often simply absurd. What I see from Skyryder is a philosophy of doing whatever you want to do, not what God wants you to do. In essence, it is to make human beings their own deities with a pretense of finding justification in Holy Scripture and the nebulous concept that they are supposedly guided by the Holy Spirit.

However, when uncountable numbers of people all disagree on various points of faith, even though they all read the same scriptures and all claim to be in touch with the Spirit, that strikes me as being problematic. If the Bible really were so self-explanatory, if everyone is actually receiving the guidance of the Spirit without human failings distorting it, then there would not be such a great number of divisions.

Basically, people like Skyryder want us to abandon some 2000 years of consistent Tradition, the writings of the most learned theologians in history, and a faith which has remained intact despite many turbulent changes in world culture. And why does he want this? Just because he says so.

That’s right. He has no support at all except his personal interpretation.

Well, my interpretations of scripture are different. How can someone say that their own personal interpretation is any better than mine? How can anyone prove that it is not I who has the Spirit’s message?

God knew about this problem. That is why He established the Holy Church as a visible authority for a united Church. Logically, this simply makes a great deal more sense than Protestantism’s reliance on every separate individual and their differing views.

Protestants and some liberal Catholics (who basically practice as Protestants) claim that Catholicism is led by men, often pointing to the Pope. But this is not only fallacy, but hypocrisy.

Not only is Protestantism led by men, but it is led by untold numbers of individual people. If you want to talk about a man-made faith tradition, sola scriptura has provided the clearest example imaginable.

Now, I am not saying that Protestants cannot be true Christians. There are many who are. And I respect them as my brothers and sisters in Christ. But I must condemn sola scriptura, which I believe is harmful to my Christian brothers and sisters who follow it.

In the end, Catholicism asks the faithful, including the Pope, to accept an authority that is outside of ourselves and greater than ourselves. This is the way of humility. And indeed this helps to illustrate how it is of God.

Humility has nothing to do with how you dress. Wearing jeans does not make you humble. That is superficial. Nor does wearing beautiful clothing make you prideful.

Humility has nothing to do with authority. Being democratic does not make you humble. Nor does being in a position of authority make you prideful. Humility can be observed in all stations and should be so.

Rather humility is, in the truest sense, an understanding of ourselves as we are and God as He is. From this understanding comes obedience and the knowledge of how very weak we human beings truly are. We need the Holy Church, just as it has been since the beginning. That is why God gave it to us. And for that I am thankful.

 

[Steeltemplar]

Ditto for Latin pal, The object of worship is to praise God, not bore him to tears.

Have you even been to a traditional Mass? If you have and it bored you, I would wonder if you paid proper attention to it.

 

[Arnobius]

Ditto for Latin pal, The object of worship is to praise God, not bore him to tears.

And what basis do you have for saying it bores God?

I think more accurately you mean it bores you. That’s your choice of course, but your personal preferences are hardly the basis for what pleases or does not please God.

And this also seems to be the basis of all your posts. it is not whether or not a thing is true, but whether it is pleasing to you.

The problem is, it makes the Church superfluous… it is only right when it agrees with you.

 

[catharina]

It’s clear that skyryder will say almost anything if it brings even a smidgeon of attention to him. Best guess: he lives an extremely lonely life and usually bores other people to tears.

Many folks might simply say “Tsk, tsk. Poor fellow.”
His need to be insulting toward God is unusual though.

The attention that comes his way must make even those insults seem worthwhile to him.

 

[skyryder]

Have you even been to a traditional Mass? If you have and it bored you, I would wonder if you paid proper attention to it.

The purpose of worship is to inspire people and for God to have a meaningful relationship with his people. The Latin Mass does neither. Yes I have been to latin masses. The rite is meaningless.
The music is dull,.People are cold and joyless. It doesn’t resemble in any way the dynamic Love Feasts of the Early House Churches. Somehow I can’t feel any rational God would mind shopping around for other forms of worship.

Look up emergent churches in your area and attend one. If the traditionalists are out of control in your parish, skip going to church, meditate on the beach connect with God, read the bible , go surfing or maybe pray with friends around a clam bake! . Find God where you can experience the Kingdom. This is what Jesus did in Galilee

In its earliest manifestations, the Jesus Movement (called Christianity today) was less concerned about following rules or performing ritual and more concerned with experiencing Love of God and practising Love of Neighbor. The liberating message of Jesus was that God is already present and that his Kingdom could be brought now to the homes we live in or places we work.
The kingdom ends suffering and refreshes those who labor. Jesus went about Galilee proclaiming the Good News of God: ‘This is the time of fulfillment. The reign of God is at hand! Change your hearts and minds, and believe in the Good News .’” (Mark 1:14-15) This is a message of healing and hope. God’s Kingdom (Reign) is here. Prisoners have their shakles broken. Slaves are freed. Redemption changes bad circumstances into something good. We don’t have to wait for it or find it after we die. The Gospel of Thomas puts it this way, “His disciples said to him, “When will the kingdom come?” [Jesus replies] “It will not come by watching for it. It will not be said, ‘Look, here!’ or ‘Look, there!’ Rather, the Father’s kingdom is spread out upon the earth now, and people don’t see it.” (Gospel of Thomas)

 

[Steeltemplar]

The purpose of worship is to inspire people and for God to have a meaningful relationship with his people. The Latin Mass does neither. Yes I have been to latin masses. The rite is meaningless.
The music is dull,.People are cold and joyless. It doesn’t resemble in any way the dynamic Love Feasts of the Early House Churches. Somehow I can’t feel any rational God would mind shopping around for other forms of worship.

Look up emergent churches in your area and attend one. If the traditionalists are out of control in your parish, skip going to church, meditate on the beach connect with God, read the bible , go surfing or maybe pray with friends around a clam bake! . Find God where you can experience the Kingdom. This is what Jesus did in Galilee

In its earliest manifestations, the Jesus Movement (called Christianity today) was less concerned about following rules or performing ritual and more concerned with experiencing Love of God and practising Love of Neighbor. The liberating message of Jesus was that God is already present and that his Kingdom could be brought now to the homes we live in or places we work.
The kingdom ends suffering and refreshes those who labor. Jesus went about Galilee proclaiming the Good News of God: ‘This is the time of fulfillment. The reign of God is at hand! Change your hearts and minds, and believe in the Good News .’” (Mark 1:14-15) This is a message of healing and hope. God’s Kingdom (Reign) is here. Prisoners have their shakles broken. Slaves are freed. Redemption changes bad circumstances into something good. We don’t have to wait for it or find it after we die. The Gospel of Thomas puts it this way, “His disciples said to him, “When will the kingdom come?” [Jesus replies] “It will not come by watching for it. It will not be said, ‘Look, here!’ or ‘Look, there!’ Rather, the Father’s kingdom is spread out upon the earth now, and people don’t see it.” (Gospel of Thomas)

Seriously, you keep digging the hole deeper. The more absurd ideas you post, the more ridiculous your whole argument becomes.

Basically, you defeat yourself and your party-time-do-whatever-you-want ideology.

As for me, I enjoy a faith that means something, a faith in which I change to conform to God’s will instead of trying to change God to suit myself. I have no need for a superficial ideology which does not understand the power of solemnity and reverence.

In short, I want to remain with the Catholic Church as it always has been and will be. I converted to Catholicism because of its truth and have only grown in love for it.

 

[PerryJ]

Skyryder,

Your choice for saint hood is a great example of why liberal Catholicism does not exist. The person you speak of shows duplicity of thought and action. His actions contradict his beliefs.

The Bible states that thou shalt not commit murder. Jesus tells Saint Peter to put down the sword and heals the guard that is arresting him. We both could put down example after example in the Bible that shows both actions. The key here is this person changed his value system to meet his needs. This is what individuals do when they abandon the faith and name themselves conservative, modernist or liberal. They change the religion to fit their needs, just as your person changed his value system.

Martyrdom is about holding to one’s faith and dieing for it. Being Catholic means following the teachings of Christ and being obedient to his will no matter the personal impact. If one applies one of the terms liberal, conservative or modernist to themselves they are placing themselves and their personal beliefs at the center of the universe. Christ is the center of the universe and his teachings are absolute and irrefutable. There is no such thing as a liberal Catholic and the person you select shows this example very clearly. Ones moral values can not change because of circumstance. One is either Catholic or one is not.

 

[skyryder]

Seriously, you keep digging the hole deeper. The more absurd ideas you post, the more ridiculous your whole argument becomes.

Basically, you defeat yourself and your party-time-do-whatever-you-want ideology.

As for me, I enjoy a faith that means something, a faith in which I change to conform to God’s will instead of trying to change God to suit myself. I have no need for a superficial ideology which does not understand the power of solemnity and reverence.

In short, I want to remain with the Catholic Church as it always has been and will be. I converted to Catholicism because of its truth and have only grown in love for it.

Again God does not set they style or form of worship. We do!
We are Co Creators with God. Our worship needs to reflect the type of person God is. First he is loving and forgiving. Second He is tremendously creative and dynamic. Third He has a great sense of humor and is alive. Fourth he wants to talk intimately with every one of his creatures in a language they understand. The Latin Mass is none of these things. It is a straight jacket form of Imperial Choreography meant to glorify a State Church which no longer exists. Lets get rid of costumes, secret gestures, statutes, candles and theatrical props. Lets dump the Lectionary and Latin Prayer Book. Honor God in a sincere manner without the Carney! . Let’s have worship using modern music, dance, video, and services which are dynamic, creative, ever changing, loving and meaningful to today’s generation.

 

[skyryder]

Skyryder,

Your choice for saint hood is a great example of why liberal Catholicism does not exist. The person you speak of shows duplicity of thought and action. His actions contradict his beliefs.

The Bible states that thou shalt not commit murder. Jesus tells Saint Peter to put down the sword and heals the guard that is arresting him. We both could put down example after example in the Bible that shows both actions. The key here is this person changed his value system to meet his needs. This is what individuals do when they abandon the faith and name themselves conservative, modernist or liberal. They change the religion to fit their needs, just as your person changed his value system.

Martyrdom is about holding to one’s faith and dieing for it. Being Catholic means following the teachings of Christ and being obedient to his will no matter the personal impact. If one applies one of the terms liberal, conservative or modernist to themselves they are placing themselves and their personal beliefs at the center of the universe. Christ is the center of the universe and his teachings are absolute and irrefutable. There is no such thing as a liberal Catholic and the person you select shows this example very clearly. Ones moral values can not change because of circumstance. One is either Catholic or one is not.

St Louix XIV per my recollections was a warrior who fought in the Crusades and killed many muslims. Sometimes evil has to be fought with the sword when all else fails.

 

[skyryder]

It’s clear that skyryder will say almost anything if it brings even a smidgeon of attention to him. Best guess: he lives an extremely lonely life and usually bores other people to tears.

Many folks might simply say “Tsk, tsk. Poor fellow.”
His need to be insulting toward God is unusual though.

The attention that comes his way must make even those insults seem worthwhile to him.

 

[una_fides]

What does it mean for one to say he or she is “Catholic”?

"In the Catholic Church, there are many other things which most justly keep me in her bosom. The consent of peoples and nations keeps me in the Church; so does her authority, inaugurated by miracles, nourished by hope, enlarged by love, established by age. The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of the Apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after His resurrection, gave it in charge to feed His sheep (Jn 21:15–19), down to the present episcopate.
"And so, lastly, does the very name of Catholic, which, not without reason, amid so many heresies, the Church has thus retained; so that, though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, no heretic will venture to point to his own chapel or house.
“Such then in number and importance are the precious ties belonging to the Christian name which keep a believer in the Catholic Church, as it is right they should … With you, where there is none of these things to attract or keep me… No one shall move me from the faith which binds my mind with ties so many and so strong to the Christian religion… For my part, I should not believe the gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church.”
—St. Augustine (354–430): Against the Epistle of Manichaeus called Fundamental, chapter 4: Proofs of the Catholic Faith.

 

[skyryder]

It’s clear that skyryder will say almost anything if it brings even a smidgeon of attention to him. Best guess: he lives an extremely lonely life and usually bores other people to tears.

Many folks might simply say “Tsk, tsk. Poor fellow.”
His need to be insulting toward God is unusual though.

The attention that comes his way must make even those insults seem worthwhile to him.

Catharina

Thanks for your concern about my social life. I work in my blogs between weekend parties, wild fits of romantic passion and nights of erotic pleasure!

Seriously the purpose of this thread is to explore differences betwen Liberals and Conservatives. So far we have discovered Progressives and Traditionalists can’t agree on anything and have deep differences. Exchanges have been a bit spiteful.

A question for you: I am fascinated with the creative ways Our Protestant Brothers and Sisters have with Spreading the Good News. Check out Call2All, GodTV, YaaWay, or Campus Crusade for Christ on the web. This is cutting edge stuff. The Catholics are falling flat on their face. What do you think should be done in
the area of Evangelization? What is holding Catholics back?