Liberalism in the Catholic Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Shiphrae
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
stringbeanduck said:
Hey OTJM, that quote about marijuana was not the only thing I said to explain celibacy and why priests should not marry. See here, I don’t like to write long posts so I shortened all what happened during those 2 Sundays. Had I known this misunderstanding was gonna happen in the forum I would have said everything. I did, in fact, give much better reasons than the marijuana example. I was being a bit sarcastic with that example.

This teacher of mine brings up ‘the priests being married’ issue. He says, “Guys, today we are going to talk about the call to priesthood.” And for a good while he does fine until he says, “They can’t be married.” So a girl asks, “Why, what’s so important about that.” Another kid says, “Yeah that could help the shortage of priests.” The teacher says, “It might change it in the future.” He is all for priests marrying. I say, “Well I believe it should stay the same.” So all the kids who were paying attention chime in and start questioning me why I believe it should stay the way it is. And look here, I’m not the smartest person on celibacy so I say what I know. Time has run out and I haven’t had my last say yet. So I say, “Lets bring this back up next week by then I’ll have more to say.” So the teacher says alright we will debate about it next week. This guy wants me alone to debate him and the other 11 kids who are all for priest getting married.

After being challenged on my beliefs of celibacy and priests, I wrote a three page speech, with my parents’ approval, that gives many references to celibacy and quotes from the Bible that gives many indications for celibacy. I explain that a priest can’t have two masters (dedication to the church vs. dedication to a wife and family). Please don’t make me have to retype my whole speech so you can read it. And YES I did write about how the church still, right now, allows married men ministers from other denominations (for instance: married Lutheran ministers who want to convert to Catholic priesthood) who want to become a Catholic priest. They do that since the church is against divorce.

So I come next with my speech ready and he comes ready to debate me. Team 1 was the teacher and 11 kids. Team 2 was 1 kid, that kid being me. So I say, “Look this is not gonna happen full ‘debate’ style. I said how about I read my speech and you can have a rebuttal. He says, “Sure.”

After I read aloud my speech he and 11 other kids start shouting questions at me. I will not repeat their rebuttal. But it was like 12 lions going after a lamb. I came there to learn and I was challenged instead including by my teacher. One of the only things I learned that Sunday school year was to defend what I believe without backing down. This event happened earlier this year around February I believe. Since then I have made my Confirmation and fortified my views with unwavering resolve. I am now in 9th grade. Maybe 8th graders are not slow and stupid but there sure is a lot who aren’t well religiously educated. Why? Probably since the teacher was not fitted for the job. Btw, I also gave my speech for my parish priest to read and he was proud of me for writing it.
Click to expand...
God bless you! You have my utmost admiration.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad
 
stringbeanduck said:
Hey OTJM, that quote about marijuana was not the only thing I said to explain celibacy and why priests should not marry. See here, I don’t like to write long posts so I shortened all what happened during those 2 Sundays. Had I known this misunderstanding was gonna happen in the forum I would have said everything. I did, in fact, give much better reasons than the marijuana example. I was being a bit sarcastic with that example.

This teacher of mine brings up ‘the priests being married’ issue. He says, “Guys, today we are going to talk about the call to priesthood.” And for a good while he does fine until he says, “They can’t be married.” So a girl asks, “Why, what’s so important about that.” Another kid says, “Yeah that could help the shortage of priests.” The teacher says, “It might change it in the future.” He is all for priests marrying. I say, “Well I believe it should stay the same.” So all the kids who were paying attention chime in and start questioning me why I believe it should stay the way it is. And look here, I’m not the smartest person on celibacy so I say what I know. Time has run out and I haven’t had my last say yet. So I say, “Lets bring this back up next week by then I’ll have more to say.” So the teacher says alright we will debate about it next week. This guy wants me alone to debate him and the other 11 kids who are all for priest getting married.

After being challenged on my beliefs of celibacy and priests, I wrote a three page speech, with my parents’ approval, that gives many references to celibacy and quotes from the Bible that gives many indications for celibacy. I explain that a priest can’t have two masters (dedication to the church vs. dedication to a wife and family). Please don’t make me have to retype my whole speech so you can read it. And YES I did write about how the church still, right now, allows married men ministers from other denominations (for instance: married Lutheran ministers who want to convert to Catholic priesthood) who want to become a Catholic priest. They do that since the church is against divorce.

So I come next with my speech ready and he comes ready to debate me. Team 1 was the teacher and 11 kids. Team 2 was 1 kid, that kid being me. So I say, “Look this is not gonna happen full ‘debate’ style. I said how about I read my speech and you can have a rebuttal. He says, “Sure.”

After I read aloud my speech he and 11 other kids start shouting questions at me. I will not repeat their rebuttal. But it was like 12 lions going after a lamb. I came there to learn and I was challenged instead including by my teacher. One of the only things I learned that Sunday school year was to defend what I believe without backing down. This event happened earlier this year around February I believe. Since then I have made my Confirmation and fortified my views with unwavering resolve. I am now in 9th grade. Maybe 8th graders are not slow and stupid but there sure is a lot who aren’t well religiously educated. Why? Probably since the teacher was not fitted for the job. Btw, I also gave my speech for my parish priest to read and he was proud of me for writing it.
Click to expand...
I think that you did a super job of speaking in defense of the Church. Few adults could have done better, Congratulations again!

God bless you.
 
Thanks guys. You all are kind. At our church they combine all the 9th-12th grade kids together. These high school CCD teachers are very nice and I’ve learned a lot from them.
 
stringbeanduck said:
Probably since the teacher was not fitted for the job. Btw, I also gave my speech for my parish priest to read and he was proud of me for writing it.
Click to expand...
HI Bean. I really am proud of you. Also I can’t even imagine you as the lamb. LOL keep up the good work.
 
stringbeanduck, all I can say is that I wish we had millions like you! Keep up the good work, and God bless your family for forming a person such as you.
 
Shiphrae, we got away from your OP, as usual. 😃 Let me say unequivocally, you are not alone! I know from sites I visit and friends I have, that I can truthfully say that. It’s in Scripture, and is a sign of the times - they will leave sound teaching and look for what tickles the ears, an easy way to act and think. See Pius X’s encyclical on Modernism about not conforming to the world; many have done that. Don’t get discouraged; just keep watching EWTN, read holy books, and stay close to Mother Mary and the Saints. They will in turn keep us close to Jesus. (Of course, the Sacraments)
 
Thank you sphilomena! That is beautiful, sound advice.

Thank you to all who have given encouragement and good advice.
 
**Sorry about the above post. It was supposed to be from Shiphrae. I was using someone else’s computer. **

So **thank you **again from Shiphrae
 
I have been thinking about what you all have said in answer to this subject and I have come to the following realization.
There are 3 different attitudes:
  1. The people who agree that there is a problem and that we must guard against it.
  2. The people who think that we must be loving and non-judgmental. Our love alone will hopefully influence others in the right direction. In other words stay positive.
  3. The people who see conservative Catholicism as only outside factors such as the way we dress, the form of liturgy and other such exterior practices.
I have come to the conclusion that the first is the right way. If we do nothing to fight the liberalism, eventually it will become a whole new religion. Catholicism will be split. People who see the real problem should write to their bishops to ask where he stands on different isssues. We have a duty to fight for our faith.

I believe that the other 2 views also have some good.

Love in Jesus Christ 🙂
 
Shiphrae said:
I have been thinking about what you all have said in answer to this subject and I have come to the following realization.
There are 3 different attitudes:
  1. The people who agree that there is a problem and that we must guard against it.
  2. The people who think that we must be loving and non-judgmental. Our love alone will hopefully influence others in the right direction. In other words stay positive.
  3. The people who see conservative Catholicism as only outside factors such as the way we dress, the form of liturgy and other such exterior practices.
I have come to the conclusion that the first is the right way. If we do nothing to fight the liberalism, eventually it will become a whole new religion. Catholicism will be split. People who see the real problem should write to their bishops to ask where he stands on different isssues. We have a duty to fight for our faith.

I believe that the other 2 views also have some good.

Love in Jesus Christ 🙂
Click to expand...
I would very much agree with you. St. Athanasius felt the same way when dealing with the Arians. He is a very good example.
 
stringbeanduck said:
Hey OTJM, that quote about marijuana was not the only thing I said to explain celibacy and why priests should not marry. See here, I don’t like to write long posts so I shortened all what happened during those 2 Sundays. Had I known this misunderstanding was gonna happen in the forum I would have said everything. I did, in fact, give much better reasons than the marijuana example. I was being a bit sarcastic with that example.

This teacher of mine brings up ‘the priests being married’ issue. He says, “Guys, today we are going to talk about the call to priesthood.” And for a good while he does fine until he says, “They can’t be married.” So a girl asks, “Why, what’s so important about that.” Another kid says, “Yeah that could help the shortage of priests.” The teacher says, “It might change it in the future.” He is all for priests marrying. I say, “Well I believe it should stay the same.” So all the kids who were paying attention chime in and start questioning me why I believe it should stay the way it is. And look here, I’m not the smartest person on celibacy so I say what I know. Time has run out and I haven’t had my last say yet. So I say, “Lets bring this back up next week by then I’ll have more to say.” So the teacher says alright we will debate about it next week. This guy wants me alone to debate him and the other 11 kids who are all for priest getting married.

After being challenged on my beliefs of celibacy and priests, I wrote a three page speech, with my parents’ approval, that gives many references to celibacy and quotes from the Bible that gives many indications for celibacy. I explain that a priest can’t have two masters (dedication to the church vs. dedication to a wife and family). Please don’t make me have to retype my whole speech so you can read it. And YES I did write about how the church still, right now, allows married men ministers from other denominations (for instance: married Lutheran ministers who want to convert to Catholic priesthood) who want to become a Catholic priest. They do that since the church is against divorce.

So I come next with my speech ready and he comes ready to debate me. Team 1 was the teacher and 11 kids. Team 2 was 1 kid, that kid being me. So I say, “Look this is not gonna happen full ‘debate’ style. I said how about I read my speech and you can have a rebuttal. He says, “Sure.”

After I read aloud my speech he and 11 other kids start shouting questions at me. I will not repeat their rebuttal. But it was like 12 lions going after a lamb. I came there to learn and I was challenged instead including by my teacher. One of the only things I learned that Sunday school year was to defend what I believe without backing down. This event happened earlier this year around February I believe. Since then I have made my Confirmation and fortified my views with unwavering resolve. I am now in 9th grade. Maybe 8th graders are not slow and stupid but there sure is a lot who aren’t well religiously educated. Why? Probably since the teacher was not fitted for the job. Btw, I also gave my speech for my parish priest to read and he was proud of me for writing it.
Click to expand...
Hi stringbeanduck,

Just read this and also wanted to say God bless you for being willing to defend the faith to your teacher and fellow classmates (which I think is sometimes harder than defending it to non-Catholics). God bless and sounds like you gave some really good reasons in defense of celibacy.
 
To Stringbeanduck:
Btw, I also gave my speech for my parish priest to read and he was proud of me for writing it.
Click to expand...
After reading your speech and hopefully hearing about why it was written, I hope the pastor had a short and to the point talk with that CCD teacher.
Something to the effect that “You WILL teach church doctrine or you WILL NOT TEACH AT ALL!!”

On the OP:
There is much, both large and small, that can be done. I am not a great rabblerouser or speachifier but I can, and do, show my great reverence at mass. (sorry for the “me” sound of that)

As traditional Catholics we should:
  1. Sit near the front. Less distraction for us and more people see how we act.
  2. Spend as much time on our knees as the liturgy allows. In our case, my wife and I hit the kneeler as soon as possible after the sign of peace. We are kneeling and beating our breasts during the “Lamb of God”.
  3. Spend some time praying after church lets out. Again - on your knees.
  4. Genuflect often and completely each time. Bow your head and make a reverent sign of the cross.
  5. Recieve on the tongue
  6. If the Tabernacle is to the side of the Altar, sit on that side of the Church.
It’s amazing the effect that some of this can have.
A couple of weeks ago we attended a weekday mass at the parish I grew up in. It was a mass for the grade school and there were some mom’s there with little ones. As we were leaving, my wife and I left our pew and genuflected. (my wife has a bad hip and uses a cane, but she still insists on getting completely down and up.) As we stood back up and turned around I saw a little girl of maybe 2 years old genuflecting behind me, looking up at me and smiling. Her mom came out and, without even a bow, turned and went down the aisle followed by her wee one. This is one way we can make a true difference - by quiet testimony.

James
 
JRKH said:
To Stringbeanduck:

After reading your speech and hopefully hearing about why it was written, I hope the pastor had a short and to the point talk with that CCD teacher.
Something to the effect that “You WILL teach church doctrine or you WILL NOT TEACH AT ALL!!”
Click to expand...
All well and good, except the issue of married priests is not an issue of doctrine, and the teacher, by opening the question, was not questioning doctrine, they were questioning discipline.

And given the fact that the Church for 2000 years has had a married clergy in the Eastern ritesf, and had a married clergy for a significant part of the history of the Latin rite, and in fact has married clergy - priests (I realize that permanent deacons who are married are part of the clergy; I am not referring to them) - then the issue of more married priests is not an illegitimate question. I do believe that it is beyond silliness to presume that if we had more married clergy that the priest shortage would be addressed, for a number of reasons.

There are legitimate arguements both for and against having more married priests in the Latin rite. To presume that it is “liberalism” to even discuss the issue is an abuse of the term “liberalism”.

For anyone to “defend the faith” by presuming that the issue of clerical celibacy is a doctrine, I would suggest that they learn the difference between doctrine and discipline. For anyone to presume that a discipline cannot be questioned, I would suggest that they are ignorant of the factual issues concerning celibacy of the clergy, which the Church itself waives now in certain circumstances.

And to presume that a traditional Catholic, or a Traditional Catholic (assuming there may be a difference between the two) must reject the issue of more married clergy is to lead one to ask how traditional or Traditional is being defined, as the tradition of the Church for 2000 years has been to have a married clergy, albeit in the Eastern rites, and even within the Latin rite the tradition has been to have a married clergy for a significant part of its history, including to a limited extent today. If traditional or Traditional is being defined as following the tradition of the Church, then it certainly should be within the parameters to be able to discuss it; and if traditional or Traditional is being defined as only that part of the Church one wishes were the tradition, then what we are really saying is tha those who call themselves traditional or Traditional Catholics are really pick-and-choose- Catholics who want the Church to be in their own chosen image and likeness.

It is my opinion that we are to follow the Magisterium of the Church. Most certainly, disciplinary issues are subject to legitimate questioning; the issue behind the MP should satisfy that as an objective example. Following the Magisterium does not mean that we never question disciplinary actions or choices. and within that it is certainly legitimate that one may feel that the discipline at a given time in history is a better choice than a different discipline on the same matter at another time. But let’s keep clear what we are doing; it is too easy to style ourselves as “right” and everyone else as “wrong” and “liberal” because there is a disagreement on which way the discipline should be on a given matter. Too often it has nothing whatsoever to do with real issues of conservative and liberal.
 
I get so sick and tired of listening to people talk ad nauseum about how if we in the western church had married priests it would solve all of our problems, especially the sex scandal. No one talks about the rate of divorce among eastern-rite and orthodox priests. No one even wants to consider the problem of homosexuality in many of our seminaries because it is too hot of a topic to handle.

I don’t think one can label it ‘liberalism’. I think one can adequately say that it is a disdain for the Truth and for the teachings of the Church. It is akin to apostasy. We are reaping the effects of a movement which started long before Vatican II.
 
*This is one way we can make a true difference - by quiet testimony.

James*

That’s good! I appreciate what you are saying. But I think that we still have to go to the top. The dissention, I believe, is coming from the top. As Mother Angelica found out many bishops were part of this liberalism movement. She went right to the source of it. And if we all would follow her example, the bishops would be forced to listen and finally address the issues.

In the church that I was attending even leaders of church groups were obviously against some of the Pope’s encyclicals.

We need to remember that
working for social justice is not the main thing about being a catholic. Jesus told us to love God first. If we love God, we will listen to His Word. He gave us the Church when Jesus said, “Peter you are rock and on this rock, etc.” We must make following the Pope’s laws an important issue as a catholic.

Please excuse the sermon but this issue really bothers me. I know that prayer is the most important way to fight the problem. But I still believe that we have to work with the Holy Spirit to make a difference.

God be with you all,
Shiphrae
 
otjm said:
All well and good, except the issue of married priests is not an issue of doctrine, and the teacher, by opening the question, was not questioning doctrine, they were questioning discipline.

There are legitimate arguements both for and against having more married priests in the Latin rite. To presume that it is “liberalism” to even discuss the issue is an abuse of the term “liberalism”.
Click to expand...
Is it your belief that this Sunday School teacher’s behavior was appropriate in bringing in the question and allowing the debate in an 8th grade religion class??? For me the issue isn’t whether Priests shoud be allowed to marry or not, but rather whether this teacher had the right to turn his class into a debating society. Particularly when the debate was so obviously one sided and he could or would not take an impartial position.
For anyone to “defend the faith” by presuming that the issue of clerical celibacy is a doctrine, I would suggest that they learn the difference between doctrine and discipline. For anyone to presume that a discipline cannot be questioned, I would suggest that they are ignorant of the factual issues concerning celibacy of the clergy, which the Church itself waives now in certain circumstances.
Click to expand...
My apolgies for confusing doctrine with discipline.
Again my concern is less with whether the issues can be debated than with the appropriateness of the teachers actions in a Sunday School Class. That teacher needed to be conveying the churches teachings and kept his opinions to himself.

James
 
*Again my concern is less with whether the issues can be debated than with the appropriateness of the teachers actions in a Sunday School Class. That teacher needed to be conveying the churches teachings and kept his opinions to himself.

James*

Thank you!! This is exactly what I was going to post. You took the words right out of my mouth.
 
In my opinion, if we have a problem with some activities in the church, we should first discuss it with the person(s) involved. Perhaps there is a perfectly valid reason for the activity. If not, then we should privately tell the person that they are doing wrong. Scripture says, “If thy brother sin, rebuke him privately.”
In any case we should not discuss things we believe to be wrong in the church in public. I believe, this is like taking a newspaper ad to talk about private family matters. The church is a family. Only those affected by wrongs done and errors of Her members, have any need (or right) to know about them.
 
<>

IN Orthodoxy, married men may become priests, but there is likewise a shortage, so marriage is not a solution.

Furthermore, despite long-standing practice, few priests’ sons follow in their fathers’ footsteps.

Ever wonder why?
 
bpbasilphx said:
<>

IN Orthodoxy, married men may become priests, but there is likewise a shortage, so marriage is not a solution.

Furthermore, despite long-standing practice, few priests’ sons follow in their fathers’ footsteps.

Ever wonder why?
Click to expand...
It seems as though more evangelical preachers’ sons and daughters follow in their father’s footsteps than married priests.
Could it be because the latter are not permitted inheritance?:hmmm:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top