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

  • Thread starter Thread starter CrossBro
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CrossBro

Guest
The use of words.

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.
 
I understand your frustration. Remember that there are tares planted among the wheat and only in the end will God make a final judgement. Remember the Church is not a museum of saints but a hospital of sinners. We are all on a journey and some of us are obviously more down the road than others. Yes, it would be nice to see more of a stance by the bishops against pro-choice Catholics. I think you highlight the need for the faithful to pray for our Bishops. I think when you get in conversations with others and they bring up “pro-choice” Catholic groups, you need to correct them as you did and point out the the title Catholic is misused and abuse by a number of people. Remember that most people get the news from mainstream media which is not a friend of the Church, that one needs to be careful when concerning news about or over the Church, we use solid and faithful Catholic sources. In the end, those Catholics that are not faithful to their faith in a number of areas will answer to God for it which in reality no one should want to be in. I don’t think it helps to go around and calling other Catholics “fake”. We really don’t know and wouldn’t want to judge that. There are and always will be Catholics that are more faithful and devoted than others and it will always be that way until the end of time.
 
I understand your feelings of frustration (which I share to a certain extent), but I don’t think introducing the term “fake Catholic” is going to be of benefit to the overall conversation.

I know many such “liberal Catholics” who firmly and sincerely believe that they are the faithful Catholics whereas they think “conservative Catholics” have more in common with fundamentalists than with actual Catholics. To them, book titles such as Charles Curran’s “Faithful Dissent” are not an oxymoron but a legitimate way of “being Church” (as they would say).

And they feel just as you do that there is nowhere else to go and nowhere else they want to be. Being Catholic is the core part of their identity.

For whatever reason, some such people view certain teachings (homosexuality, women’s ordination, abortion, etc.) as tangential to what it really means to be Catholic. They would put the “essentials” as being the Creed. And they find it curious that “conservatives” give so much time and attention to these issues that – in their estimation – are not really all that bound up with what it means to be Catholic.

I find the whole thing quite sad. I know people who roll their eyes and get put on the defensive at the mere mention of “Gregorian chant,” “Marian devotion,” “Eucharistic adoration,” or “pro-life.” Then I know people who do the same at the thought of “social justice,” or “preferential option for the poor.”

I heard a talk recently where the speaker mentioned how, in the U.S., we often find ourselves feeling more of a sense of comraderie with those of the same political party (regardless of religion) than we do with those who share our Catholic faith (regardless of political party). Again, I find that profoundly sad.
 
There’s only one type of Catholic - orthodox (Faithful)

All others are heterodox

Heterodox Catholics can be conservative or liberal (in the real non-American sense, as an English word spoken by the rest of the English speaking world).

Orthodox Catholics can be conservative or liberal (in the real non-American sense, as an English word spoken by the rest of the English speaking world).
 
Get those who twist doctrine around out of the church. Send em’ over to ‘Bishop’ Schori. (They’ll be her problem then.)
 
JackieO123 said:
Get those who twist doctrine around out of the church. Send em’ over to ‘Bishop’ Schori. (They’ll be her problem then.)
Click to expand...
Exactly how do you imagine such a strategy being enacted? Will the bishops all pass out a Catechism test and all who fail will be formally excommunicated and sent a flyer for the local episcopalian Church? And all the excommunicated will say, “Oh well, no big diff,” and just carry on?

Sorry, I think the better approach is to reach out to people with truth and charity rather than kicking them to the curb. 🤷
 
triumphguy said:
There’s only one type of Catholic - orthodox (Faithful)

All others are heterodox

Heterodox Catholics can be conservative or liberal (in the real non-American sense, as an English word spoken by the rest of the English speaking world).

Orthodox Catholics can be conservative or liberal (in the real non-American sense, as an English word spoken by the rest of the English speaking world).
Click to expand...
That sums it up nicely.
 
I very much share the frustration, and although I don’t agree with making the laity sign anything, I think it would be a great idea for all Priests and Religious to sign a document of Orthodoxy.
 
I understand the OPs frustration, but these are words that only serve to divide and to cause people to close their ears to truth and the message of Christ.

Truth without charity is cold and sterile, it is a clanging cymbal in the ear, and it is off-putting to those that are not yet given the grace of faith. I write this not to admonish, but to confess that I have been in error over this in my zeal for the Lord. 🙂

In life, we meet people who share the same faith and people that don’t know our faith. In our parishes, we meet people that are devout and those that are “just passing through”, the curious, and those “just filling a seat”, so to speak.

How can we approach and reach out to these if we label them before we even encounter them? (rhetorical, I have struggled with this question lately)

We must love one another. We must love God. We must build each other up in our faith, and bring the truth to those who are enslaved by this world.

And we must live our faith (be doers of the Word and not just listeners). These things are only possible through God’s grace and our effort to live as we are instructed by God.

I am no perfect saint in this either, I don’t mean to come across “preachy”. I understand the frustration expressed here.

It grieves me to hear people advocate that the Church begin to embrace ideas that are clearly heterodox, and very strange teachings indeed. It’s even worse when a tenet is so clearly taught in the Church, and yet some people stubbornly reject it and speak out against the long held doctrines of truth. These truths are not “optional”. We’ve been warned about these issues from the very beginning.

We must have the courage to encounter those among us that are heterodox with love, and with an understanding of what our doctrine and dogma really are, and sometimes be ready for our own correction if we are in error in our own understanding. We all fall short at times. We are all children trying our best to grow up and mature in our faith.

Most of all, we must pray for those who are stumbling in their walk, or are walking in the wrong direction. We must help them, and guide them until they can walk in the fullness of faith.

And we must take care not to walk off the path ourselves.
 
I heard a talk recently where the speaker mentioned how, in the U.S., we often find ourselves feeling more of a sense of comraderie with those of the same political party (regardless of religion) than we do with those who share our Catholic faith (regardless of political party). Again, I find that profoundly sad
Click to expand...
I agree it is frustrating that there is such ignorance and dissent within the Church. But I would argue that this only emphasizes the need for evangeliaztion within the Church as the more charitable approach to address the issue. However, when such dissenters cause scandal, quick and effective action must be taken to clarify their errors. This doesnt have to mean shoving anyone out the doors of the Church, or immediately tearing up their Catholic Card at the Vatican. it simply means that we as laity, the clergy , everyone must clarify how the dissent is NOT Catholic teaching, and counsel the dissenters when there is an opportunity.

Nevertheless, as the above quote points out, politics has become the actual religion for some of us. We find more of a sense of communion in the similar beliefs of our fellow Democrats or Republicans than in a fellow Catholic. That is VERY sad. But the point is that it happens on both ends of the political and religious spectrum. A faithful Catholic must be be Catholic FIRST and Democrat or Republican second. Too many of us on the left and the right have made our political philosophy our god and never get to have a living breathing faith in Jesus Christ.

Those of us whose faith is in Jesus Christ and not our political parties must strive even harder to ensure we remember we are the Body of Christ whether we are liberal or conservative , that we are not Greek nor Jew, man nor woman nor Democrat nor Republican, that we are the Children of God! But those who truly place their trust in Jesus Christ and His Church, have to set the example and reach out to each other and the rest because there are too many nominal Catholics whose real religion is their political philosophy , and do not really know Jesus Christ - both on the left and the right!
 
I think the better way to frame this uses orthodox versus heterodox (or heretical). People who conform to the Church’s teaching and meet their obligations to the Church are orthodox Catholics. People who dissent or have their own “take” on things are not orthodox.

One can argue all day about what is real and not real Catholic, but orthodox versus unorthodox have clear and objective definitions. If your opinion on something conflicts with dogma, then you definitely are not espousing orthodox Catholicism.
 
**Michael

I understand the OPs frustration, but these are words that only serve to divide and to cause people to close their ears to truth and the message of Christ. **

I don’t agree. Saint Paul had the same frustration with those putative Christians who were holding false doctrines against other Christians. He did not mince words.

"I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brethren. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apollos,” or “I belong to Peter,” or “I belong to Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” (1 Cor 1:10-13).

So the division Paul preached against is very much the same division that fake Catholics have caused within the Church. The notions that abortion should be legal or that same -sex marriage should be legal that are held by many Catholics only shows the fakery of their stance. There is no way to achieve Christian unity so long as these fakes continue to persist in rebellion against what they know to be authentic Catholic teaching, and then go on to multiply their numbers exponentially. What will happen to our Catholic (Universal) identity if such fakery is excused as tolerable and even insignificant?

One of the definitions of fake is false. Let the word stand and let those to whom it applies look to their Catechism.
 
Extreme conservative and extreme liberal are about as scary as each other IMO
 
CrossBro said:
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 ?
Click to expand...
I was graced with the ability to see my sin. I go to confession weekly and I could spend hours there. Instead, I pick the big ones, try not to sin again, and end up the next week with the same list. At some point there has to be a balance between scrupulosity and trust in God. What you’re talking about is someone who places all of their trust in God without checking their action–someone who many not be able to see their sin, who has no idea the damage that it does, who uses logic to defy Church teaching (and probably to justify their actions).

Your solution is simple: Leave.

But that’s not a solution. It’s like a scale. There has to be a balance of trust in God and scrupulosity. In other words, you need to be able to look and see your own sinfulness and confess it, as well as have trust that Christ has what you don’t have.

But for people like me, who see everything as something wrong–who feel like “If I confess every single one of my sins I can never leave the confessional,” where is the line between justifying your own sinfulness/being disobedient to the Church and “letting the little stuff go.”

I think you’re trying to make something pink, black and white. “If you don’t agree, leave.” Where they are saying, “Look. Look at the majority of Catholics who don’t agree. Is this indicative of unrealistic expectations or just a sign of the times?”

Life may be simpler with a smaller more faithful Church, but then we have failed the world as Catholics. We were called to be servants of God, to bring others closer to God. I think you’ve lost sight of the fact that we are supposed to be servants of Charity, and nothing else matters. We can’t judge them on where they are out without the eyes of love guiding our steps.

It’s much better to keep to your own list in confession than to dwell on the sins others aren’t confessing.
 
**Akimbo

It’s much better to keep to your own list in confession than to dwell on the sins others aren’t confessing. **

Actually, it’s much better to have a standing and united Catholic Church than one that is flat on the ground and akimbo. 😉

Welcome to the club! 🙂
 
**Et

Seems pretty rude and unnecessary to call people fake. **

Would you prefer “Cafeteria Catholic”? :rolleyes:
 
Charlemagne_II said:
**Michael

I understand the OPs frustration, but these are words that only serve to divide and to cause people to close their ears to truth and the message of Christ. **

I don’t agree. Saint Paul had the same frustration with those putative Christians who were holding false doctrines against other Christians. He did not mince words.

"I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brethren. What I mean is that each one of you says, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apollos,” or “I belong to Peter,” or “I belong to Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” (1 Cor 1:10-13).

So the division Paul preached against is very much the same division that fake Catholics have caused within the Church. The notions that abortion should be legal or that same -sex marriage should be legal that are held by many Catholics only shows the fakery of their stance. There is no way to achieve Christian unity so long as these fakes continue to persist in rebellion against what they know to be authentic Catholic teaching, and then go on to multiply their numbers exponentially. What will happen to our Catholic (Universal) identity if such fakery is excused as tolerable and even insignificant?

One of the definitions of fake is false. Let the word stand and let those to whom it applies look to their Catechism.
Click to expand...
Well, that’s the first time that I’ve heard that this section of scripture addressed “fake” Catholics. I always thought that this had a bit more to do with factionalism and schism.

Thanks for the new perspective. 🙂

What happened to Arianism, the Donatists, and all the other heresies of the Church?

The Church survived. Two thousand years and counting.

And some that were heterodox became orthodox and were saved from their error. That’s a good outcome. Some that could not let go of their error, sadly, died in their error. That’s a bad outcome.

We must love our brothers and sisters suffering in error, and lead them into the light. Calling them names doesn’t show them love.

All of us have faults. All of us are trying to do as we best can with God’s grace. None are perfect.

Our Church is a hospital for those sick with sin, and that includes those you label “fake”, my brother.

So come, let us reason together at how we may bring more people to the light and love of Christ in wholeness and all truth.
 
**MIchael

We must love our brothers and sisters suffering in error, and lead them into the light. Calling them names doesn’t show them love. **

Matthew 23:33

“You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?”

I reckon you remember who said this? :rolleyes:

And surely he loved them even when calling them names.
 
Charlemagne_II said:
**MIchael

We must love our brothers and sisters suffering in error, and lead them into the light. Calling them names doesn’t show them love. **

Matthew 23:33

“You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?”

I reckon you remember who said this? :rolleyes:

And surely he loved them even when calling them names.
Click to expand...
Love the Lord with all your heart, and love your neighbor.

Peace be with you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top