My viewpoint on Conservative versus Liberal Catholic: The faithful v the fake

[Starrsmother]

Typically, for us Catholics in our debates surrounding Church teaching, especially concerning teaching on moral issues such as abortion or sexual orientation, camps seem to be divided into two groups: those who embrace and agree with the teachings of the Church and those who do not. Bear in mind here that when I speak of those who do not accept the teachings I am not speaking of those who honestly struggle with the Church teaching, I am speaking of those who have the attitude that the Church “needs to grow up”.

We all know that the common terms used for these two camps are “conservative Catholic” and “liberal Catholic”.

I was recently debating abortion online with a non-Catholic who was trying to get me to accept choice over life. This non-Catholic presented me with a list of “pro-choice catholic” websites.

My response to his list was

"The penalty of excommunication for abortion extends to the mother, all medical personnel, anyone who offers the mother moral or financial support to abort, as well as those who publicly campaign for legalized abortion. Incidentally, no formal notification of such excommunication is necessary, as it takes effect as soon as the action is performed."
p. 77 The Catholic Answer Book vol 1, Rev. Peter M.J. Stravinskas PH.D S.T.D.

And a reference to 1983 CIC 1398.

I have a different pair of terms for these two camps: “faithful Catholic” and “fake Catholic”. This is so out of control now that I feel it is coming to the point where the faithful Catholics need to stand up and demand that the Church take a more direct and individual level of dealing with people . Yes, I am for the Church making people sign a declaration of faith that is kept on file in Rome , the diocese, and the parish. This declaration would be the individual affirmation not to “false preach” against the Church.

The fake Catholics can go the way of Martin Luther. Martin Luther thought the Church should grow up too. Unfortunately, us faithful Catholics have NO WHERE ELSE TO GO ! So guess who it is that needs to leave ?

This may seem mean spirited, but like I stated, I am not against those that honestly struggle and make attempts to reconcile their beliefs, I am against those that knowingly sow the seeds of discontent and false preach.

Briefly stated, you and I agree 100%. A person either is a Catholic, a non-Catholic or a heretic. If non Catholic–whether muslim, Hindu, Baptist or whatever–that’s their perfect right to believe as they will. BUT if someone proclaims they are Catholic, then they should be expected to believe, promote, and abide by Catholic teaching and law! There just is NO “grey area” here!! They are HERETICS plain and simply put! Pandering to heretics has sadly become the new way of life in the Catholic church in most cases. In an attempt–for whatever reason–to be PC, our Catholic hierarchy–all the way up to the pope–does the church no service when they do this–no matter what their reason for doing so. This “pandering doctrine”–as I call it-- doesn’t “show charity” or “bring sinners home”. It cheapens the Catholic faith, scandalizes those who expect (and rightly so) our leaders to grow a pair and stand up for truth and righteousness and it contributes to generalized confusion among the faithful. Being Catholic should stand for something. This doesn’t mean that as Catholics we shouldn’t reach out to our Christian brothers and sisters of other sects or homosexuals, Hindus, atheists, women who have abortions or all people in this world. Jesus EXPECTS us to reach out to all people–hoping to bring all souls to Him and to salvation. But, it SHOULD also mean that we do so out of love and a deep belief in catechizing these groups to the TRUTH–not because we are trying to reshape church doctrine to fit and be more palatable to the masses in a secular society! There is something truly amiss in our church when people like Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi–only to mention the two biggest shots with the biggest mouths out there who jump into my mind first-- or that crazy bunch of heretical nuns who run around calling themselves “Nuns On A Bus” are permitted to be heretics in full view of the church but with no fear of being taken to task for what they do or say! It makes our church beliefs appear divided and it scandalizes many who think that the church is just old fashioned and struggling within to adapt to the 21st century. It promotes a feeling that even the church itself isn’t certain what is really right or wrong and that what we need is more revolutionaries in the church to change our direction. Mark my word, if it continues unchecked as it has for the last 50 years or so, eventually it will cause even many sincere Catholics to fall away as even they begin to question whether the church actually believes church doctrine anymore, And, by the way, I’d tell that to anyone–priest, bishop, cardinal, or to Pope Francis’ very face if I had the chance–which I never will! When a Catholic in the public eye deliberately and knowingly takes a public position which is in complete opposition to church doctrine–they are, infact, taking the church on–just as assuredly as when, in the middle ages, some monarche raised an army and decided to wage war on the Vatican! They should pay a price for their public denunciation of church doctrine done on TV (for instance) or in the newspaper or in a speech which they do all the time and even as all the while they proclaim themselves to be practicing Catholics. AND, IF THE OFFENSE IS PUBLIC THEY SHOULD BE PUBLICLY EXCOMMUNICATED AS WELL!! We should have the right to expect this from our leadership. Period. We just don’t get what we deserve in this area–but that doesn’t mean we are wrong to feel that we should have this expectation of church integrity! I’ll get off my soap box now–but you hit on one of my BIGGEST pet peeves! LOL!:banghead:

 

[CrossBro]

NO, I quoted actual Canon Law, you’re the one relying on a non-official source here, Bud.

If you’re right, and these politicians have in fact been excommunicated, why do the Bishops permit them to attend Mass?

How is it that you know more than the Bishops? Or are they “Fake Catholics” too?

Beyond the teaching authority of the Bishops, what OTHER parts of Catholicism are you “picking and choosing”?

And why aren’t YOU a “Fake Catholic” for doing so?

I will believe the current Pope who wrote the following in May of this year:

“[people] cannot receive Holy Communion and at the same time act with deeds or words against the commandments, particularly when abortion, euthanasia, and other grave crimes against life and family are encouraged. This responsibility weighs particularly over legislators, heads of governments, and health professionals.”

“These are the guidelines we need for this time in history,” the pope wrote to the bishops.
Source: Lifesitenews

So the Pope himself has stated the gov of my state cannot receive Holy Communion for publically stating he is prochoice.

 

[BillP]

I will believe the current Pope who wrote the following in May of this year:

Which is not the same as excommnication latae sententiae.

Do you honestly not see the difference between being in a state of mortal sin and being excommunicated? Honestly?

This is my objection to you.

You come here pontificating about how people who don’t follow Church teaching 100% are fake Catholics, but it turns out, you aren’t demanding that they follow actual Church teaching but rather some interpretation of Church teaching that YOU happen to agree with. An interpretation that appears to be at odds with what the actual Church teaches.

In effect, you’re accusing people of being fake Catholics for NOT agreeing with you in your error.

And you’re careless with facts, having repeatedly asserted that various politicians are excommunicated when even the merest consideration will show that they’re not.

 

[BillP]

I will believe the current Pope who wrote the following in May of this year:

So the Pope himself has stated the gov of my state cannot receive Holy Communion for publically stating he is prochoice.

No he didn’t. At MOST he make a generalization about some politicians. He din’t mention the governor of your state, and you may well believe that Holy Father’s words apply to the governor, but your statement is incorrect. Once again, careless with facts.

 

[CrossBro]

Which is not the same as excommnication latae sententiae.

Do you honestly not see the difference between being in a state of mortal sin and being excommunicated? Honestly?

This is my objection to you.

You come here pontificating about how people who don’t follow Church teaching 100% are fake Catholics, but it turns out, you aren’t demanding that they follow actual Church teaching but rather some interpretation of Church teaching that YOU happen to agree with. An interpretation that appears to be at odds with what the actual Church teaches.

In effect, you’re accusing people of being fake Catholics for NOT agreeing with you in your error.

And you’re careless with facts, having repeatedly asserted that various politicians are excommunicated when even the merest consideration will show that they’re not.

Other than making ambiguous subjective arguments, you fail to provide any source to refute any of my sources.

If the Pope states one cannot receive Holy Communion the only valid reason he can state that is because that person is in a state of mortal sin.

Mortal sin separates us from God. Dying in a state of mortal sin means you burn in hell when you die. That is indeed excommunication and you can find that easily enough for yourself in the catechism you are so good at subjectively with a broad brush interpreting.

 

[BillP]

Other than making ambiguous subjective arguments, you fail to provide any source to refute any of my sources.

I don’t need to cite sources to prove that you are misusing words, giving them definitions that aren’t consistent with English.

If the Pope states one cannot receive Holy Communion the only valid reason he can state that is because that person is in a state of mortal sin.

Do you HONESTLY not see the difference between the Pope saying “pro choice politicians should receive Communion” and the Pope saying “Gov. Brian Sandoval can’t receive Communion?” Why do you think your Bishop still permits the Governor to attend Mass?

If you can’t see that difference, we’re wasting out time. This isn’t Wonderland and you’re not Humpty Dumpty. Words don’t mean exactly what you want them to mean.

Mortal sin separates us from God. Dying in a state of mortal sin means you burn in hell when you die. That is indeed excommunication and you can find that easily enough for yourself in the catechism you are so good at subjectively with a broad brush interpreting.

To quote the late, great, Ronald Reagan; “There he goes again”. No Mortal sin DOES NOT equal excommunication. That is NOT a Catholic teaching

 

[Contra_Mundum_1]

Pandering to heretics has sadly become the new way of life in the Catholic church in most cases. This “pandering doctrine”–as I call it-- doesn’t “show charity” or “bring sinners home”. It cheapens the Catholic faith, scandalizes those who expect (and rightly so) our leaders to grow a pair and stand up for truth and righteousness and it contributes to generalized confusion among the faithful. Being Catholic should stand for something. This doesn’t mean that as Catholics we shouldn’t reach out to our Christian brothers and sisters of other sects or homosexuals, Hindus, atheists, women who have abortions or all people in this world. Jesus EXPECTS us to reach out to all people–hoping to bring all souls to Him and to salvation. But, it SHOULD also mean that we do so out of love and a deep belief in catechizing these groups to the TRUTH–not because we are trying to reshape church doctrine to fit and be more palatable to the masses in a secular society!

Completely agree. I find this whole attitude of “oh, let’s not judge that person who publicly mocks the faith and promotes false teaching” disturbing and absolutely appalling. Yes, we should definitely judge lies that spread confusion and scandalise the faithful.

And I agree that many want to water down the faith so it comes more palatable to the masses in a secular society, as you put it.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

**Congregation for the Doctorine of Faith:

Declaration on Abortion

National Congress of Catholic Bishops: “No Catholic can responsibly take ‘a pro-choice’ stand when the ‘choice’ in question involves the taking of innocent human life”. **

This does not address the question at hand, which is excommunication. That’s the only thing I was objecting to in your statement about politicians and latae sententiae excommunication.

 

[CrossBro]

I don’t need to cite sources to prove that you are misusing words, giving them definitions that aren’t consistent with English.

Do you HONESTLY not see the difference between the Pope saying “pro choice politicians should receive Communion” and the Pope saying “Gov. Brian Sandoval can’t receive Communion?” Why do you think your Bishop still permits the Governor to attend Mass?

If you can’t see that difference, we’re wasting out time. This isn’t Wonderland and you’re not Humpty Dumpty. Words don’t mean exactly what you want them to mean.

To quote the late, great, Ronald Reagan; “There he goes again”. No Mortal sin DOES NOT equal excommunication. That is NOT a Catholic teaching

All mortal sin effectively excommunicates, millions of people burning in hell agree with me.

 

[BillP]

All mortal sin effectively excommunicates, millions of people burning in hell agree with me.

But the Church doesn’t.

And we’re supposed to be the “Fake Catholics”?

Right.

So tell us. Why hasn’t your Bishop prevented your Governor from attending Mass? And what makes YOU more qualified than your Bishop to determine who has and has not excommunicated himself?

Oh, and in order to not be a “Fake Catholic” should we just follow YOU then, instead of your Bishop or the Pope?

 

[CrossBro]

But the Church doesn’t.

And we’re supposed to be the “Fake Catholics”?

Right.

So tell us. Why hasn’t your Bishop prevented your Governor from attending Mass? And what makes YOU more qualified than your Bishop to determine who has and has not excommunicated himself?

Oh, and in order to not be a “Fake Catholic” should we just follow YOU then, instead of your Bishop or the Pope?

The Church does agree with me that mortal sin excommunicates, read your catechism. It will tell you that mortal sin effectively separates you from God, that is the entire point of confession.

The catechism will also tell you that you may not receive Holy Communion outside the state of grace or you are guilty of the sin of sacrilege.

I do not know why my bishop is allowing the governor to receive communion even against the recent counsel of the Pope, why don’t you write a letter and ask him yourself ?

 

[CrossBro]

Completely agree. I find this whole attitude of “oh, let’s not judge that person who publicly mocks the faith and promotes false teaching” disturbing and absolutely appalling. Yes, we should definitely judge lies that spread confusion and scandalise the faithful.

And I agree that many want to water down the faith so it comes more palatable to the masses in a secular society, as you put it.

Wonderful response, I don’t want anyone to think I am missing the good posts here while dealing with those who disagree with the faith.

 

[Julianna]

On the contrary, sir! It is you who doesn’t have his facts straight. Your “Catholic Vote. Org” group is a very conservative political action committee working out of Chicago whose sole aim is to get conservative Catholics elected to office. Since 1995 the group has changed its name four times. The statistic this group has tried to lay at the feet of the Obama Administration is completely bogus.

Reuters News Service carried an article on this very subject in the Boston Globe Newspaper on April 13, 2011. The story reported that 98 percent of Catholic women have used contraceptive methods banned by the Catholic Church. The story adds, “The new report from the Guttmacher Institute shows that only 2 percent of Catholic women, EVEN THOSE WHO REGULARLY ATTEND CHURCH, rely on natural family planning. The latest data shows practices of Catholic women are in line with women of other religious affiliations and adult American women in general.”

The Boston Globe story goes on to add, “The findings nearly match previous NSFG (National Survey of Family Growth) data from 2002, which showed that 97 percent of Catholic women were using contraceptives , and is consistent with a trend tracked over the last decade.”

As for the reliability of the Guttmacher Institute, it is considered one of the best statistical data gathering organizations in the world, Almost all of the statistical research done for the United Nations is done by the Guttmacher Institute. The United Nations Assembly has cited them in the past for their reliable work. The “Catholic Vote.org” story is an attempt to twist the facts. Get the Boston Globe story and read it for yourself.

You can also go to C.A.R.A. (Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate) at Georgetown University. Their statistical data will verify the Boston Globe statistics.

Moonbug, I have read the same. One only has to look around the pews during Mass and see the 1 to 3 children accompanying parents to Mass. And if one has been going faithfully for decades, they will notice, same said children never increase to 4 or 5 and 9 times out of 10 never over 5. Why is that? I have attended many Catholic weddings, family, friends… and it always comes up at the reception, "when will you be starting a family?’ Every…and I mean every answer was as follows…“well, we are planning on a two year wait before we have children?” Why is that? Out of 8 cousins married in the Church, only 3 of them have 2 children (adults now) and one never had children. Out of my dad (born in 1927, the year is important, pre Vat ii), 5 sisters, only one had 2 kids, the rest had 1. His brother, my uncle, had 1 biological (three of them are step children). My dad had the highest number a whopping 3. And this was wayyyyyyy before birth control. Had to be total abstinence in their case…or logically, they didn’t want to have any more kids.

I noticed this comment was not answered. I taught CCD for a decade…saw the same families, same children, grow in, up and out of CCD. No more than 3 to a family. Medium size parish. All but 2 moms of the 30 kids I had in class worked outside the home. I worked at a Catholic School for 10 yrs…out of the 300 families…only one had 5 children. The average was 2.

Could it be…naww…the economy? But that is for another thread.

 

[BillP]

Wonderful response, I don’t want anyone to think I am missing the good posts here while dealing with those who disagree with the faith.

Nobody is disagreeing with your faith. Just your propensity to ACCURATELY TALK ABOUT WHAT IT TEACHES.

You positively asserted that your Governor had been excommunicated because he was pro-choice. You even went so far as to say he was “toast”, “with no paperwork required” (a pretty flippant way to talk about someone suffering Hell for eternity), which is obviously beyond Church teaching (the Church who refuses to categorically state that ANYONE, even Judas, is in Hell)

I demonstrated that that wasn’t true, that while he was probably in mortal sin, excommunication was reserved for those who procured completed abortions.

You, rather than admit that you misspoke, “doubled down” on your assertion by intentionally misrepresenting the Holy Father’s words to bolster your defective position.

When that was pointed out, you engaged in more misstatements, misdirection and obfuscation trying to weasel out of admitting that you were wrong. Being pro-choice, while mortally sinful, does not result in excommunication. Nor is mortal sin exactly the same thing as excommunication (with or without paperwork). That’s why the Church differentiates between the two things.

And now you’ve been reduced to straw-man arguments about how I disagree with the Faith, because you are unable (or more likely unwilling) to accurately describe its teachings.

I don’t disagree with the FAITH, I disagree with YOU. And rightfully so. You’ve consistently misrepresented, mistated and misinterpreted pretty much every aspect of the Faith that you’re tried to describe.

And you have the nerve to state that Anyone who doesn’t agree with your inaccurate, flawed and misstated positions (including, it appears the Bishop who permits Gov. Sandoval to attend Mass) is a “fake Catholic”.

You’re not doing yourself or your case any favors here.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

All mortal sin effectively excommunicates, millions of people burning in hell agree with me.

The word excommunication has a very specific meaning which you are ignoring. Please either use a different word or use that word the way the Church means it. Look it up if you are unsure.

 

[SMGS127]

The Church does agree with me that mortal sin excommunicates, read your catechism. It will tell you that mortal sin effectively separates you from God, that is the entire point of confession.

The catechism will also tell you that you may not receive Holy Communion outside the state of grace or you are guilty of the sin of sacrilege.

I do not know why my bishop is allowing the governor to receive communion even against the recent counsel of the Pope, why don’t you write a letter and ask him yourself ?

“Read your catechism” is typically not a winning argument.

Mortal sins and excommunication are not the same thing, by any means. Committing murder of a human being post-birth does not excommunicate you from the Church, for example, though it is most definitely a mortal sin.

Excommunication refers only to your relationship with the Church (as opposed to your relationship with God, which is what mortal sin refers to). Abortion provides excommunication, because you are providing false witness on an issue of grave evil that confuses many people. Murder of someone post-birth does not, because your false witness is extremely unlikely to lead a person astray to support or commit murder of someone post-birth.

 

[christofirst]

Wonderful response, I don’t want anyone to think I am missing the good posts here while dealing with those who disagree with the faith.

It seems to me that you have the same zealous passion for right and wrong that some of the first apostles displayed, which is commendable. But consider our Lord’s response when the apostles got carried away in their zeal to right the wrongs. “Shall we call down fire from Heaven to burn them (the “false” Catholics) up?” (pardon my paraphrasing and taking liberties with Scripture.) “Do you want us to go and pull up those weeds (the “false” Catholics)?” “Shall we strike with a sword (those “false” Catholics)?” What was our Lord’s response? “Yes, Yes! Burn them up, throw them out, strike them down! That’ll teach them!”?? Of course not! For every example you give like our Lord cleansing the temple, I can show many more where he counsels patience, reminding us that we are not the Judge. My suggestion - and I know you haven’t asked for it - would be, keep the zeal, but tone down the rhetoric, and trust that the leaders of the Church which Christ founded are still chosen, protected, and guided from above.

 

[Rete]

It seems to me that you have the same zealous passion for right and wrong that some of the first apostles displayed, which is commendable. But consider our Lord’s response when the apostles got carried away in their zeal to right the wrongs. “Shall we call down fire from Heaven to burn them (the “false” Catholics) up?” (pardon my paraphrasing and taking liberties with Scripture.) “Do you want us to go and pull up those weeds (the “false” Catholics)?” “Shall we strike with a sword (those “false” Catholics)?” What was our Lord’s response? “Yes, Yes! Burn them up, throw them out, strike them down! That’ll teach them!”?? Of course not! For every example you give like our Lord cleansing the temple, I can show many more where he counsels patience, reminding us that we are not the Judge. My suggestion - and I know you haven’t asked for it - would be, keep the zeal, but tone down the rhetoric, and trust that the leaders of the Church which Christ founded are still chosen, protected, and guided from above.

I would suggest you instead compare this sentiment to that of St. Paul when dealing with apostates in the Church. He recommends they be thrown out, and when they decide to repent and live accordingly, readmitted to the Church. The same example is given by Christ with the moneychangers in the Temple. He kicked them out because they were behaving scandalously within the Temple. It doesn’t mean they can’t come back, but when they do come back, they can’t do those scandalous things any longer.

What you refer to is mercy and charity for all men. Yes, we should have mercy and never give up on saving those people who violate the faith so terribly as some of these politicians have done. But that doesn’t mean we have to continue allowing them to pollute the Church.

 

[BillP]

I would suggest you instead compare this sentiment to that of St. Paul when dealing with apostates in the Church.

Hmmmm Jesus, or Saint Paul. Whose example should we follow?

Oh wait!

We’re “Christians”,not “Paulians”.

Problem solved.

 

[Rete]

Hmmmm Jesus, or Saint Paul. Whose example should we follow?

Oh wait!

We’re “Christians”,not “Paulians”.

Problem solved.

The point is that the reference to Christ’s mercy for all men is inapplicable to what we should do about Christians who continue scandalous behavior within the Church. Both Christ and St. Paul provide us with the same example: kick them out and let them return when they repent.

The fact that you seem to believe St. Paul and Christ conflict on this matter speaks to the heart of the problem addressed in this thread.