Liberal Catholics Vs. Conservatives

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dicerning
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dicerning

Guest
Just looking for thoughts on this subject.

Is it me or is there a vast difference between this two types of Catholics on the Matter of the Magisterium.

An example would be. My parish has a very nice Woman in charge of CCD (she goes bonkers when I use the term CCD…she insists I use the term Faith Fomation director)…anyway this woman along with many others who I would consider extremely liberal in their Catholicity never seem to mention the Magisterium when debate comes up.

In fact this paritcular woman (who is 42 years old) Had no idea who the pope before John Paul I was. Often in converstations with her I mention various teachings of our beloved Pope she gets a blank stare on her face as if I was from a different religion than her.

I distinctly remember one time during a catechist training session I spoke up about a Concern regarding Eucharistic Reverence and what JP II mentioned in his encylical. SHe looked at me and said, “thats Nice but we are doing things the New way, the Vatican does things the Old way” :eek:

This woman has gone through our diocesan training in Ministry Formation and Catechist training. She had no idea what an encylcal was when I mentioned Ecclesia de Eucharista.

Is it me or do Liberals seem to be distanced from ROme?
 
I’m lucky to be in a parish where there is a more orthodox perspective on “Faith Formation”. As my username suggests, I am a new Catholic and came to the faith because of the consistency of teaching throughout the history of the Church.

I prefer not to use Liberal or Conservative. That often denotes a political reference, even though, unfortunately, they often do align.

I heard, I think it was Jimmy Akin, on Catholic Answers Live, when he was accused by a caller of being too conservative, say that he’s neither conservative or liberal he’s ORTHODOX. That’s the real issue.

If you are a member of the Catholic Church, you are saying, “I believe what the CHURCH teaches”. That’s why I’m here.

Have you spoken to your pastor about this issue?

God Bless and let’s pray for the confused.
 
no comment except to say I have observed that often those most in love with the phrase “faith formation” are unfamiliar with the real thing.
 
I’d say it’s nearly impossible to be both a liberal (according to the modern definition) and a Catholic, for the simple reason that liberals reject so many of the Church’s teachings. Being very active and having some form of authority in a parish that’s deviating from the Church’s traditional teachings, hardly makes one a Catholic.
 
Dicerning said:
Just looking for thoughts on this subject.

Is it me or is there a vast difference between this two types of Catholics on the Matter of the Magisterium.

An example would be. My parish has a very nice Woman in charge of CCD (she goes bonkers when I use the term CCD…she insists I use the term Faith Fomation director)…anyway this woman along with many others who I would consider extremely liberal in their Catholicity never seem to mention the Magisterium when debate comes up.

In fact this paritcular woman (who is 42 years old) Had no idea who the pope before John Paul I was. Often in converstations with her I mention various teachings of our beloved Pope she gets a blank stare on her face as if I was from a different religion than her.

I distinctly remember one time during a catechist training session I spoke up about a Concern regarding Eucharistic Reverence and what JP II mentioned in his encylical. SHe looked at me and said, “thats Nice but we are doing things the New way, the Vatican does things the Old way” :eek:

This woman has gone through our diocesan training in Ministry Formation and Catechist training. She had no idea what an encylcal was when I mentioned Ecclesia de Eucharista.

Is it me or do Liberals seem to be distanced from ROme?
Click to expand...
I agree with the previous poster who said that these labels are often not helpful.

I think we need to be carfeul about painting with too broad a brush. Yes, there may be some “liberals” such as the person you mention who seem more “distant from Rome” and unfamiliar with basic Catholic teaching.

But there are many that people would describe as “liberal” who grew up during Vatican II. They are more familiar with Latin and the Baltimore Catechism than I am. They know what the papal documents say. For one reason or another, they disagree that certain things need to be believed (women’s ordination, homosexual “marriage”, etc.).

We need to be careful about being too polarizing by placing all Catholics in one of two camps. It can be useful for discussion, but it doesn’t work well in reality. I’ve known Catholics who would probably be considered “liberal”, but who are more than willing to follow what their bishop says and who get irritated at the “conservatives” who want to be their own bishop by determining for themselves what is authentic magisterial teaching.
 
NewCatholic1207 said:
I prefer not to use Liberal or Conservative. That often denotes a political reference, even though, unfortunately, they often do align.

I.
Click to expand...
I do realize what you mean however. I find it uncharitable and not quite accurate to use the words orthodox Catholics vs. unorthodox Catholics.

I am pretty sure people get the idea of what I mean by using the words liberal and conservative.
 
I wouldn’t say “Conservative” or “liberal” (even though orthodox would be considered politically and theologically conservative).

I would say orthodox Catholics and heretical Catholics.
 
Matariel said:
I wouldn’t say “Conservative” or “liberal” (even though orthodox would be considered politically and theologically conservative).

I would say orthodox Catholics and heretical Catholics.
Click to expand...
I agree. To me, an Orthodox Catholic is a Catholic who believes what the Church teaches and submits himself or herself to that. There really is not any ambiguity about what the church teaches.

The Catechism is pretty clear teaching.
 
Dicerning said:
I do realize what you mean however. I find it uncharitable and not quite accurate to use the words orthodox Catholics vs. unorthodox Catholics.
Click to expand...
I do not know why you would consider it uncharitable. These are the terms I prefer. Orthodox means that you are in accord with the Catholic Church and unorthodox means you are not. Heretical means not only that one is out of step with the Catholic Church, but that one is obstinately denying a matter of faith and morals. One can be unorthodox out of ignorance and not heretical. Liberal and conservative, theologically have more to do with openness to change. A liberal can still be orthodox, as long as they remain obedient to what the Church teaches.
 
pnewton said:
I do not know why you would consider it uncharitable. These are the terms I prefer. Orthodox means that you are in accord with the Catholic Church and unorthodox means you are not. Heretical means not only that one is out of step with the Catholic Church, but that one is obstinately denying a matter of faith and morals. One can be unorthodox out of ignorance and not heretical. Liberal and conservative, theologically have more to do with openness to change. A liberal can still be orthodox, as long as they remain obedient to what the Church teaches.
Click to expand...
I agree. Of course, using the term “orthodox” can also get confusing as people may think you’re referring to one of the Eastern Orthodox churches. 😉

And we all know that God is both extremely liberal and staunchly conservative. He is extremely liberal with his grace and mercy, and yet staunchly conservative in preserving His teaching from generation to generation. 🙂
 
pnewton said:
One can be unorthodox out of ignorance and not heretical.

Liberal and conservative, theologically have more to do with openness to change.

A liberal can still be orthodox, as long as they remain obedient to what the Church teaches.
Click to expand...
How about the labels:

Oblivious Hippy Catholic (OHC)

vs.

Obediant Conscious Catholic (OCC)

…just a goofy thought.

:shamrock2:
 
Ther terms I like to use are orthodox Catholic and dissenting Catholic.
 
What about those of the Eastern "ORTHODOX", Greek "ORTHODOX", Russian "ORTHODOX" and other Eastern Christians who use that title as part of their religion? After the Great East and West split of the Catholic Church in 1054. The Eastern `Christians called themselves “ORTHODOX” because they believed in only following the first 7 Ecumenical Councils of the Catholic Church. Everything after that was marred. Not holding to true Christian beliefs. In their opinion they believed the Catholic Church had wandered away. Even some Protestant Christians might think of themselves as “ORTHODOX”, because they feel the Catholic Church has also strayed away from Jesus and true Christian belief.

The terms ***“LIBERAL” ***and ***“CONSERVATIVE” ***are misleading. Lets take the Second Vatican Council as a focal point. Pope John XXIII called the Council together wasn’t he a “TRADITIONAL”, “ORTHODOX”, CONSERVATIVE" person? But yet he wanted to reform and change the Church. Would he be a “LIBERAL”, “UNORTHODOX”, “PROGRESSIVE”? And the same holds true the Council Fathers, what would they be called? Now fast forward to today. The Council is part of Church doctrine. Those who want to change it, say they are " TRADITIONAL", “ORTHODOX”, “CONSERVATIVE” Catholics. But if they are trying to change it aren’t they now “LIBERALS”, “PROGRESSIVE”, “REFORMERS”? Whose who want to keep the Second Vatican Council in tact, what are they called? Would they not be “CONSERVATIVES”, “TRADITIONALISTS”?

When Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI allowed the Latin Mass to be said again. Didn’t they became “LIBERAL” because they “LIBERALIZED” the use of that form?

Now in my case I’m a little bit of everything. I find myself being “TRADITIONAL” or “ORTHODOX”, “CONSERVATIVE”, “MODERATE”, “LIBERAL” or “REFORM”

Maybe we should borrow the Jewish branches of Judaism: Orthodox, Conservative or Reform as definitions.

LABELS, LABELS, LABELS
 
Wow, Patrick!

After that post I will definitely refrain from using those labels.

Maybe I will just describe myself as a Catholic who is obedient to the teachings of the Holy Father and the Magisterium… even if it is a bit of a mouthful. Even then I suspect someone would nod their head knowingly and label me as someone living in the past.
 
Ok Ok

I will use the term Orthodox and Dissenting…

OK anyone else think the Dissenting types distance themselves from ROme?
 
Dicerning said:
Ok Ok

I will use the term Orthodox and Dissenting…

OK anyone else think the Dissenting types distance themselves from ROme?
Click to expand...
I think some do, but some don’t. There are more than a few dissenters who spend their life in service of the Church, whether in working for Catholic parishes, dioceses or universities.

Looking at things from their perspective, I think they see themselves less as dissenters than they do as trying to move the Church in the direction they genuinely and sincerely believe it needs to go.
 
I have met some “dissenting” Catholics who teach catechism, run church ministries, and even priests who would fall into this category. I agree with previous posters that not ALL of “dissenting” Catholics are far from Rome but they ARE out there and causing no small amount of harm. It seems that if you have significant differences in opinion with the Magisterium you just stay on board now instead of leaving and finding a sect that appeals to you. Some of these folks are Catholic in name only and are contributing to the “protestantization” of Catholicism. I have no problem with them, if they keep their views to themselves and don’t teach children and if they want to have heretical views, thats their right, but they need to leave if they are in serious conflict with Rome.

Pax Vobiscum
 
Eileen_T said:
Wow, Patrick!

After that post I will definitely refrain from using those labels.

Maybe I will just describe myself as a Catholic who is obedient to the teachings of the Holy Father and the Magisterium… even if it is a bit of a mouthful. Even then I suspect someone would nod their head knowingly and label me as someone living in the past.
Click to expand...
Hi Eileen T,

See how confusing things got. They are getting out of control. Before I joined this Forum I just considered myself a Roman Catholic in obedience to the Church and its teaching that includes Vatican II. Nothing more, nothing less. Then I learned on this Forum how much people are into labels. You’re not this but that mentality. I like your definition and description. Maybe we place too much emphasis on terms and name calling. WE ARE CATHOLICS,PERIOD. DARN IT! PEOPLE PLEASE GET OVER IT. We have bigger fish to fry.
 
IrishDude45 said:
I have met some “dissenting” Catholics who teach catechism, run church ministries, and even priests who would fall into this category. I agree with previous posters that not ALL of “dissenting” Catholics are far from Rome but they ARE out there and causing no small amount of harm. It seems that if you have significant differences in opinion with the Magisterium you just stay on board now instead of leaving and finding a sect that appeals to you. Some of these folks are Catholic in name only and are contributing to the “protestantization” of Catholicism. I have no problem with them, if they keep their views to themselves and don’t teach children and if they want to have heretical views, thats their right, but they need to leave if they are in serious conflict with Rome.

Pax Vobiscum
Click to expand...
This is further complicated by the fact that some people we might categorize as “liberal” have a different understanding of “Rome” and Church authority than we do. In their mind, they are not in conflict with Church teaching at all.
 
IrishDude45 said:
I have met some “dissenting” Catholics who teach catechism, run church ministries, and even priests who would fall into this category. I agree with previous posters that not ALL of “dissenting” Catholics are far from Rome but they ARE out there and causing no small amount of harm. It seems that if you have significant differences in opinion with the Magisterium you just stay on board now instead of leaving and finding a sect that appeals to you. Some of these folks are Catholic in name only and are contributing to the “protestantization” of Catholicism. I have no problem with them, if they keep their views to themselves and don’t teach children and if they want to have heretical views, thats their right, but they need to leave if they are in serious conflict with Rome.

Pax Vobiscum
Click to expand...
Hello IrishDude45,

You mentioned “DISSENTERS” At point does a dissenter become disobedient to the Church and the Pope? Who is a dissenter? The ones who support and preserve the changes of Vatican II? The people who want even more change from Vatican II? What about the TLM supporters that have broken away from the Church? Were they not told to follow the Church teachings, that also included V2 AND the Ordinary Form? Before they were accepted back into the Church. But they won’t for the most part. So can a “CONSERVATIVE” or “TRADITIONALIST” be a dissenter as well? Does it only apply to “LIBERALS”, “REFORMERS”, “PROGRESSIVES” as being bad for the Church. So, if the Church changes something and we don’t like it we become dissenters. No matter what it is.Anybody can be a dissenter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top