Liberal catholics

[Adeodatus]

I didn’t know there was a pre-VII Church and a post-VII Church - aren’t all of our beliefs the same? What must be accepted? Who is more dangerous to the Church - somebody who publicly denies Church teaching and still claims the name Catholic, or somebody who adheres to Tradition and the Magisterium, including those who attend Mass with the SSPX?

Well, you can have a mass for practicing homosexuals or a clown mass, or stick the Tabernacle in a side room to make room on stage for the altar girls and female EMHCs, or preach open heresy and dissent and get away with it for years, if not for all time. But (before HH gave us Summorum Pontificum) try to have a Latin Mass for people who actually believe in the Real Presence and all that the Catholic Church teaches and you would be ruthlessly crushed.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out what has been going on.

 

[Angel_Bradford]

Well, you can have a mass for practicing homosexuals or a clown mass, or stick the Tabernacle in a side room to make room on stage for the altar girls and female EMHCs, or preach open heresy and dissent and get away with it for years, if not for all time. But (before HH gave us Summorum Pontificum) try to have a Latin Mass for people who actually believe in the Real Presence and all that the Catholic Church teaches and you would be ruthlessly crushed.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out what has been going on.

Paddy22, that’s the mentality I was talking about!

 

[Warrenton]

Rather than use the terms liberal or conservative, I prefer to think in terms of “good” or “bad” catholics. Bad cats stay in for a very simple reason: because they hate the indictment of the church on their behavior. Scripture contains numerous restatements of the maxim that the Godly man is a rebuke to the evil man. So the evil man considers, “What to do?” He seizes on an idea: destroy the church, which if he is already a cat, he can best do by subverting it. This happened to Israel, or forefathers in faith. Judah didn’t formally renounce its Jewishness, it apostosized and corrupted to the downfall of itself and Jerusalem. Bad cats think if they can destroy the church from within, then they can destroy the judgment on their conduct.

 

[Adeodatus]

Rather than use the terms liberal or conservative, I prefer to think in terms of “good” or “bad” catholics. Bad cats stay in for a very simple reason: because they hate the indictment of the church on their behavior. Scripture contains numerous restatements of the maxim that the Godly man is a rebuke to the evil man. So the evil man considers, “What to do?” He seizes on an idea: destroy the church, which if he is already a cat, he can best do by subverting it. This happened to Israel, or forefathers in faith. Judah didn’t formally renounce its Jewishness, it apostosized and corrupted to the downfall of itself and Jerusalem. Bad cats think if they can destroy the church from within, then they can destroy the judgment on their conduct.

We should also not discount the fact that the 20th Century was characterized by the struggle against a dark, revolutionary ideology that dominated whole superpowers and encompassed international revolutionary strategy committess and intelligence agencies. This ideology and its very real apparatus (Communism; the Comintern, the KGB, etc.) explicitly sought (and still seeks) the utter destruction of the Christian religion and the Catholic Church in particular.

Think of how easy it would be for a hostile intelligence agency to place agents in the Church. Think of how useful that would be to powers that sought to destroy or discredit her. And what is the Church’s defense against infiltration? The “Honor System”? Quite a joke, actually.

Consider the Prayers After Mass… the ones that were done away with by the ‘Reformers’: the Hail Mary, the prayer to St. Michael, the prayer to the Sacred Heart, etc… Now perhaps they were simply done away with by people who did not see their beauty or value. I don’t know the actual reason and I do not claim to know, nor to know what was in the mind or heart of any one of the revolutionists who have nearly wiped the Catholic Church from the face of the Earth. Perhaps their intentions were good and their hearts were clean.

*Saint Michael the Archangel,
defend us in battle.
Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil.
May God rebuke him, we humbly pray;
and do Thou, O Prince of the Heavenly Host -
by the Divine Power of God -
cast into hell, satan and all the evil spirits,
who roam throughout the world seeking the ruin of souls.

Amen. *

 

[kozlosap]

Well, you can have a mass for practicing homosexuals or a clown mass, or stick the Tabernacle in a side room to make room on stage for the altar girls and female EMHCs, or preach open heresy and dissent and get away with it for years, if not for all time. But (before HH gave us Summorum Pontificum) try to have a Latin Mass for people who actually believe in the Real Presence and all that the Catholic Church teaches and you would be ruthlessly crushed.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out what has been going on.

I smell a good old fashioned conspiracy theory here!

 

[Holly3278]

The problem I have with the ideas you expressed is that it the “cafeteria pick and choose” mentality is not relagated only to liberals as I have experienced this same thing with Catholics who refuse to accept the post-Vatican II church.

Unfortunately this is true as well. Forgive me for leaving that out.

 

[Angel_Bradford]

Unfortunately this is true as well. Forgive me for leaving that out.

Thank you!

 

[phoenixrrt62]

One honest question that’s always been bugging me, though. Why do liberal catholics want to be catholic in the first place? is it because they don’t want enter the despair of atheism but want to divest themselves of all the personal morality? Is it nostalgia? Is it a vague sense that Catholicism is part of their identity? You’re italian/irish/polish/spanish so you HAVE to call yourself a “catholic” just like jews will call themselves jews even when they’ve abandoned God altogether?

I once had a supervisor who wanted to get his son baptized, but couldn’t find a priest that wouldn’t make him promise to raise the child Catholic (+1 for our priests). I could really tell that getting him baptized was important, but why is that so but not giving the child a Catholic upbringing? I just don’t understand. I wanted to scream at him that that was the point of baptism.

Of course this being the trad board, many will say things about communist infiltration into the hierarchy, and while I’m sure that happened, I don’t think this whole thing is all a direct result of that.

I’d venture to say religion (I mean in a general sense) is more of a social identity for a lot of people…think of this. Most people pretty much follow the religion of their parents…for good or ill. I think most peeps just go with the flow, enjoy the social trappings of said religion, but don’t really take it too serious.

Then you have people like me who DO take it serious, study it diligently, looking to religion for all the answers, instead of just going with the flow…and when religion comes up short…becomes a wanderer in the dark.

Just sayin’…

 

[chypmonk]

While labels can be derogatory and insulting, at times they are very useful, I think it is silly to insist that NO labels can be used. To call a group “liberal” Catholics helps to orientate about whom you speak. I am a “Feeneyite” I find the term derogatory and insulting (but no other Catholics that disagree with me don’t seem to care). Although I don’t like the term, because I don’t agree with a number of Fr. Feeney’s personal positions, prejudices, or opinions, but it is short hand to know my general position, so I use it.

To insist a “traditional” Catholic needs to say “I am a Catholic who prefers to go to the Mass that was common in the Church before 1960’s”-- doesn’t seem practical. Same for “liberal” Catholics they should be understood as ones who have a subjective understanding of doctrine–IN GENERAL. These are general terms to help with orientation of others positions.

If the label doesn’t fit, then that is why discuss stuff-- we can clarify it. If the term is too insulting that it is counterproductive to discussion, then that could be a reason to be against the term. But general categories are helpful. Are Dominicans and Franciscans the same group because they are both Catholics? Should we do away with these labels? Is it helpful to know if a brother is a Dominican or Franciscan? I think yes.

 

[LemonAndLime]

Welcome to God’s Church, my friend.

Thank you

Actually, what you have said about American politics is incorrect. There are very few actual Right Wing people in the USA… I’m deeply sorry to say that, but it is true.

“Right” and “Left” come from the French National Assembly, on the eve of the Revolution and before the Tennis Court Oath. Those who sat on the Right supported the Monarchy, the Aristocracy and the Church. Those who sat on the Left were for the destruction of those institutions (or their removal from French civil life).

A Rightist is someone who supports a monarchy or benevolent dictatorship, supports a meritocratic form of rule (rule by the best, not by the mob) and who believes that the Church should be enthroned in the civil life of the state and people. As I said, to our shame such people are rare in the USA. It is especially sad since Rightism is the native political orientation of the Catholic Christian, who first of all recognizes the eternal kingship of Jesus Christ.

Both major parties in the USA are Left Wing parties. The Republicans are the (classical) Liberal party. The Democrats are a mixture of Liberals and Marxists*.

• Most Marxists in the USA are not Dialectical Materialists; they are instead “Western” Marxists such as Freudo-Marxists. The biggest influences over here have been the Frankfurt School, Gramsci and Lukacs.

Ah okay. I got confused by British politics. Over here, its the conservatives (right wing…ish) politicians who have more American values - for traditional families, marriage, etc etc. Whereas Labour is meant to be for the common man (leftist).

I find it very strange that you Americans are leftist, when you dislike communism so much.

 

[jonpd]

Thank you

Ah okay. I got confused by British politics. Over here, its the conservatives (right wing…ish) politicians who have more American values - for traditional families, marriage, etc etc. Whereas Labour is meant to be for the common man (leftist).

I find it very strange that you Americans are leftist, when you dislike communism so much.

While these terms may have originated in the French revolution, I think they mean something different here in the US. In the US right vs. left has generally been about the power of the Federal Government. The Right believes in a minimal Federal role with most government functions relegated to the states or local communities, and an emphasis on individual rights, whereas the left tends to favor the Federal Government as being the great equalizer that levels out the differences between states and insures equal protection for all citizens. Going along with this is the tendency for the Right to favor traditional values and faith (generally tending toward the Protestant Christian values) to regulate society in the place of a strong Government presence, the left favors the opposite.

There actually aren’t that many real leftists in the country either, as demonstrated by the results of the last election, when the government tried to take us in a more European style leftist direction only to be rebuffed, what would have been a vote of no confidence and fall of the government in a parliamentary system.

And what this has to do with liberal Catholics - I believe that Catholics tend to fall somewhat in both camps as I noted in a previous post. While I tend to view myself as a conservative both politically as well as a Catholic, I do see the need for social justice and the importance of not becoming like the Pharisees in the Gospels. There are always movements to try to bring renewal to the Church and not just the Catholic church - for example John and Charles Wesley in the Church of England. However we always have to be on guard that efforts to renew the Church do not throw out our basic values and traditions, which is what happened in the “spirit of V2” and which we now seem to be at least on the way to recovering.

 

[GIR]

I think that for Catholics we tend to have some aspects that are associated with the politically liberal side of things, such as a strong belief in social justice, fair wages, immigration, etc. yet are conservative on issues such as the sanctity of life, marriage and family values. I disagree that as Americans we are dominated by the right wing (in spite of what happened Tuesday) we are a center-right leaning country, due to a stronger belief in individual achievement and personal freedom.

I think when people talk about liberal Catholics they mean those that take a looser view of the authority of the Church and emphasize more the right of an individual to make their own decisions about Church teachings, rather than the political side of things which can be “liberal” even for traditional Catholics.

What I mean by liberal are the Nancy Pelosi’s, Mary Daily’s, and Joh Bydon’s of the world. But abortion isn’t the only issue I’m focusing on. I’m thinking of the people who say “I’m catholic but…”

Also, let’s not forget that the Catholic church has more to say about political policies than whether or not abortion and homosexual unions are right or wrong, it’s just that the life and family issues are the most prevalent right now, so we can’t sit down and decide which policy better follows the principles of subsidiarity, for example.

 

[Timothysis]

There is rampant sodomy

I’m just curious; of all the sins to mention, why is this the one you picked???

 

[Adeodatus]

I’m just curious; of all the sins to mention, why is this the one you picked???

It is a sin crying out to Heaven for vengeance. It is the tool that the Left is using to destroy the institution of marriage. It is constantly being shoved down people’s throats on television. It is the template of the anti-Life interpretation of the sex act: that it is essentially for recreation and only accidentally for procreation.

Abortion is the other one I harp on; willful murder and sodomy are the first two sins in the Torah that are said to cry out to Heaven for vengeance.