No More "Liberal" or "Conservative", please!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cominghome89
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cominghome89

Guest
Please move this if it is posted improperly, but since a lot of these labels often have to do with liturgical ideas, this was the best I could find.

Our Moral Theology professor at the seminary, who is at a parish notoriously labeled as extremely “conservative,” brought up the problem of the use of these words, and he’s absolutely right. For those of us who are very informed about Church teaching and belief, trust me, I know that we understand the connotations “liberal” or “conservative” have when speaking about certain Catholics, clergy, or just positions in general. But the results of using these words can be very damaging.

The truth is, these words have such a politicized meaning, which constantly changes with the state of politics. And, these meanings have nothing to do with the Church, and can greatly confuse the Catholics who do not have a firm grasp on Church teaching. Please, if somebody believes something that is contrary to the defined dogma of the Church, simply state that the Church teaches otherwise. Do not label the person a liberal. Likewise, if somebody has a preference for a tradition that has fallen out of common practice, do not label them an “ultra-conservative”.

This serves two very important purposes, I think. First, it’s so important that we avoid these terms for the sake of Church unity. If you have a problem with someone’s belief that you consider to be against Church teaching, outdated, whatever it is, address it quietly and truthfully. This division in the Church between liberal and conservative, traditional and progressive, is tearing out unity apart, especially among the clergy. Address people, tell them your issue, but please do not throw these words around. Also, I think avoiding these terms will help us to actually find out what the Church teaches. Is a person a “liberal” because their view is truly heretical? Or is their view on a teaching that the Church has never defined, and you just disagree? Big difference! In the same way, does the person prefer the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, or does he claim that it is the only valid form? Again, biggg difference.

I would like to hear people’s take on this, because I am often labeled “conservative” when I am no such thing. I love Latin, I am 100 percent faithful to the teaching of the Church, and I have a deep appreciation for liturgy. But I am also aware that there are brother seminarians and clergy who do not share my tastes, and often that is just fine! Point: do your homework, find out what is essential for orthodox belief and worship, and stop throwing around these misleading labels! Thank you for listening 🙂

In caritate Christi et Mariae,
Frank
 
There is, what sociologists and psychologists refer to as, the labeling theory, but that is more closely linked to deviance.

That said, even without labels there is still the separation of unity. It’s one thing to have the odd herectical view, but what I’m finding, at least in my own family, is my orthodox views are so different from those of my parents’ that we might as well be two different religions. My mom is closer to protestant beliefs than she is to the orthodox Catholic teachings. As far as she’s concerned, Rome is wrong, Human Vitae caused all the riff-raft and why all the Catholics are leaving the Church, there’s nothing wrong with ABC, people who have large families are “stupid”, Canon Law is no longer in effect, our Sunday obligation is to keep the day holy, not to attend Mass, cohabitation is perfectly fine in a committed relationship because it’s a step towards marriage, the Catechism is out-dated and not required to be followed, etc. My mom even told off our Bishop!:eek:
 
Love_Divine said:
There is, what sociologists and psychologists refer to as, the labeling theory, but that is more closely linked to deviance.

That said, even without labels there is still the separation of unity. It’s one thing to have the odd herectical view, but what I’m finding, at least in my own family, is my orthodox views are so different from those of my parents’ that we might as well be two different religions. My mom is closer to protestant beliefs than she is to the orthodox Catholic teachings. As far as she’s concerned, Rome is wrong, Human Vitae caused all the riff-raft and why all the Catholics are leaving the Church, there’s nothing wrong with ABC, people who have large families are “stupid”, Canon Law is no longer in effect, our Sunday obligation is to keep the day holy, not to attend Mass, cohabitation is perfectly fine in a committed relationship because it’s a step towards marriage, the Catechism is out-dated and not required to be followed, etc. My mom even told off our Bishop!:eek:
Click to expand...
Insofar as labeling effects are concerned, they are a double-edged sword. On the plus side, they enable people to functionally relate to each other in a somewhat efficient way; but on the negative side, they deny people’s individuality by summarizing them only according to the labels. I think the negative consequences outweigh the positive, and agree with the OP. A similar issue is found in Judaism, in which so-called Orthodox Jews (who themselves are subdivided into further categories) don’t like to think of themselves in terms of labels such as orthodox or ultra-orthodox, and prefer to regard all Jews as more observant and less observant.
 
TheMc said:
I see no problem with these labels, as they are quite accurate.
Click to expand...
I agree! If these label are bad for a person’s view then we can gove even harsher orthodox/heretical. St. Ignatious of Antioch used the work Catholic to seperate the true Christians from the Gnostic Christians.

Unity in the Church is a must, but not at the expence of the Truth!
 
Liberalism in the political scene is closely linked to the breakdown of traditional Catholic values in the Catholic scene. I don’t see any issues with those labels.
 
Alexander_Smith said:
Liberalism in the political scene is closely linked to the breakdown of traditional Catholic values in the Catholic scene. I don’t see any issues with those labels.
Click to expand...
Exactly. 99999/10000 times, liberals are the ones fighing for birth control, abortion, etc…
 
We can’t live our lives with “wishful thinking.”

Yes, we all wish that the labels weren’t there, and that everyone could get along and that unity would become the norm.

But this is fantasy, wishful thinking, and we can’t live in fantasy.

Everyone else uses the labels, and we really don’t have the option of “opting out” and living in a world that doesn’t exist except in someone’s mind. As much as we sometimes detest it and as foolish and illogical as it often is, we still have to live in Reality.

As long as others use labels like liberal and conservative, we’re kinda stuck.

The best we can do is use the labels as accurately as possible, and IMO, we need to make sure to separate “theological liberalism” and “political liberalism.” I think that often the two go hand-in-hand, but not always. We just need to work very hard to understand each other, and if we do use a label, it should not result in a closed door that essentially shuts off communication between “us” and “them.” The labels “liberal” and “conservative” label should not be called out as a derrogatory “names” along the lines of “Poopy Pants” or “Cry-Baby.”
 
Let’s just all follow the Pope
and the teachings of the Catholic Church, please!
 
Words have meaning.

There is an insidious attempt to separate words from meaning - the worst example of this being the word ‘choice’ —a nice warm fuzzy of a word— to indicate ‘abortion.’

The two are not synonymous, but there are some people who wish to blur the distinction.

This is bad.

Since everyone knows what conservative and liberal means, I see nothing wrong with using the terms.

It’s intellectually dishonest to try to separate words from their meaning by saying ‘Don’t politicize things!’ If you attempt to compartmentalize your faith from the rest of your life, your head will spin.
 
I recommend everybody to apply this conservative - liberal categories to Jesus’ time.

Pharisees claimed that they and only they represent the tradition. Jesus at least on the last two weeks before His crucifixion harshly rejected them

In other hand if liberal means welfare, accepting the illegal immigrants, rejecting the greed, being tolerant Jesus was liberal.

Politically in the US sometimes in the 1990’s the Greed changed from the ‘strategy for getting into power’ to the ‘strategy to keep the power’, and thus changed the liberal slogans to conservative slogans. For some reason, which puzzles me, the majority of the people are unable to understand this.

We are Christians, not conservatives and nor liberals. Our way is Christ, not the political slogans.
 
It’s funny, because depending on the person, calling someone a liberal or a conservative can be a pejorative, an insult.

I find that many people wear the label of conservative within the Church with pride, but there are very few unabashed liberals who call themselves such.

Interesting.
 
I guess when we are speaking of religion, if we don’t want to offend anyone by using the terms Conservative or Liberal, we can drop those offensive words and just say it like it really is…Catholic and Catholic-Lite.
 
Cominghome89 said:
Please move this if it is posted improperly, but since a lot of these labels often have to do with liturgical ideas, this was the best I could find.

Our Moral Theology professor at the seminary, who is at a parish notoriously labeled as extremely “conservative,” brought up the problem of the use of these words, and he’s absolutely right. For those of us who are very informed about Church teaching and belief, trust me, I know that we understand the connotations “liberal” or “conservative” have when speaking about certain Catholics, clergy, or just positions in general. But the results of using these words can be very damaging.

The truth is, these words have such a politicized meaning, which constantly changes with the state of politics. And, these meanings have nothing to do with the Church, and can greatly confuse the Catholics who do not have a firm grasp on Church teaching. Please, if somebody believes something that is contrary to the defined dogma of the Church, simply state that the Church teaches otherwise. Do not label the person a liberal. Likewise, if somebody has a preference for a tradition that has fallen out of common practice, do not label them an “ultra-conservative”.

This serves two very important purposes, I think. First, it’s so important that we avoid these terms for the sake of Church unity. If you have a problem with someone’s belief that you consider to be against Church teaching, outdated, whatever it is, address it quietly and truthfully. This division in the Church between liberal and conservative, traditional and progressive, is tearing out unity apart, especially among the clergy. Address people, tell them your issue, but please do not throw these words around. Also, I think avoiding these terms will help us to actually find out what the Church teaches. Is a person a “liberal” because their view is truly heretical? Or is their view on a teaching that the Church has never defined, and you just disagree? Big difference! In the same way, does the person prefer the Extraordinary Form of the Mass, or does he claim that it is the only valid form? Again, biggg difference.

I would like to hear people’s take on this, because I am often labeled “conservative” when I am no such thing. I love Latin, I am 100 percent faithful to the teaching of the Church, and I have a deep appreciation for liturgy. But I am also aware that there are brother seminarians and clergy who do not share my tastes, and often that is just fine! Point: do your homework, find out what is essential for orthodox belief and worship, and stop throwing around these misleading labels! Thank you for listening 🙂

In caritate Christi et Mariae,
Frank
Click to expand...
Frank, I understand your frustration at the disunity of the Church. Its been going on for a long time. There are no easy answers. Much of what is taking place today has a lot to do with the seclurism we find in society. A great deal of it started when the councils of Vatican II were being discussed and there was a tug of war between the old hard line Italian Chruch leaders and the so called progressives or liberals, if you will forgive the descriptions. Better yet, the novus ordo and the traditionalists. St. Pius the X noted with alarm that progressive thinking was taking hold of the contemporary mind particularly in Western civilization, including Catholic Priests and Laity.The Pope defined progressivism as modernism and in 1907 declared it a heresy in the Encyclical called "Pascendi Domenici Gregis". You see a great deal of this so called liberalism originating from so called Catholic colleges and Universities today as reported and tracked by "Campus Notes" the Newman Report and others that describe Programs and speakers and lecture series that are in direct conflict with Catholic teachings. A perfect example of course,;) is the invitation of a commencement speaker by Notre Dame of a sitting Presidant for an honorary doctorate who happens to be pro choice. Pope Benedict the XVI is working to bring unity and correct some of the problems caused by Vat II misconceptions of Post Conciliar Documents especially with the recent Document Eclasia Dei Commission which strengthens Summorum Pontificum and Motu Propio. Dont
be surprised if you see coming soon a blend of the Novus Ordo Mass with the Traditional
Mass. There is a concerted effort to unify the liberal and traditional Catholics however in
my view the Bishops are going to have to come down hard on a number of so called Catholic
colleges.
Pax
Tom T:crossrc:
 
laszlo said:
In other hand if liberal means welfare, accepting the illegal immigrants, rejecting the greed, being tolerant Jesus was liberal.
Click to expand...
Good point. As I just said in another thread, the Church is conservative when it comes to theology but much less so in social matters.

Hard-nosed conservatism can be just as damaging as left-wing liberalism.
 
laszlo said:
I recommend everybody to apply this conservative - liberal categories to Jesus’ time.

Pharisees claimed that they and only they represent the tradition. Jesus at least on the last two weeks before His crucifixion harshly rejected them

**In other hand if liberal means welfare, accepting the illegal immigrants, rejecting the greed, being tolerant Jesus was liberal. **
Politically in the US sometimes in the 1990’s the Greed changed from the ‘strategy for getting into power’ to the ‘strategy to keep the power’, and thus changed the liberal slogans to conservative slogans. For some reason, which puzzles me, the majority of the people are unable to understand this.

We are Christians, not conservatives and nor liberals. Our way is Christ, not the political slogans.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? Your only twisted sacred scripture to defend your political beliefs! Christ did not reject the pharisees because of their office, he rejected them because of their hyporcrisy. Why would illegal immigration be ok? The Church says that every country has the right to keep in check who comes in and out, and to protect their cultural identity. As I stated in another post, why should I have an instiion take a share of my earned money to give to others who abuse the wellfare system? I would gladly out of my good will give money to an organization that I trust that helps out the poor, I don’t need the government to do that.
 
archangel04 said:
What are you talking about? Your only twisted sacred scripture to defend your political beliefs! Christ did not reject the pharisees because of their office, he rejected them because of their hyporcrisy. Why would illegal immigration be ok? The Church says that every country has the right to keep in check who comes in and out, and to protect their cultural identity. As I stated in another post, why should I have an instiion take a share of my earned money to give to others who abuse the wellfare system? I would gladly out of my good will give money to an organization that I trust that helps out the poor, I don’t need the government to do that.
Click to expand...
As a matter of fact the pharisee defended the tradition, TRUE TRADITION, and missed what was most important: the Second Divine Person, present.

As for the illegal immigration, neither fraternizing with sinners, prostitutes, publicans was OKI; but Jesus did it, as you are scandalized by the acceptance of the illegal immigration. He also explicitly required you to see Him, in the illegal immigrant, in the pain of "Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire … I was a stranger, and you took me not in: " For the question why should you share your hard earned money in the welfare system, the answer is: because Jesus explicitly ordered so in the pain of the everlasting fire: “For I was hungry, and you gave me not to eat: I was thirsty, and you gave me not to drink” The government takes half of your monet, it should not waste it in everlasting wars, but to follow the Christian ideas, because the majority are Christians.
 
laszlo said:
As a matter of fact the pharisee defended the tradition, TRUE TRADITION, and missed what was most important: the Second Divine Person, present.

As for the illegal immigration, neither fraternizing with sinners, prostitutes, publicans was OKI; but Jesus did it, as you are scandalized by the acceptance of the illegal immigration. He also explicitly required you to see Him, in the illegal immigrant, in the pain of "Depart from me, you cursed, into everlasting fire … I was a stranger, and you took me not in: " For the question why should you share your hard earned money in the welfare system, the answer is: because Jesus explicitly ordered so in the pain of the everlasting fire: “For I was hungry, and you gave me not to eat: I was thirsty, and you gave me not to drink” The government takes half of your monet, it should not waste it in everlasting wars, but to follow the Christian ideas, because the majority are Christians.
Click to expand...
Lol wow you really distorted those teachings! I will be honest I am no bible scholar and probably would not be able to handle a biblical argument with, but I am sure others can do that. I am against illegal immigration, but I never once said I do not respect my fellow man as a human being and as a child of God. Little history, both my parents came here illegally, and later became citizens. Welfare is a program that takes away money and gives it to people that in my opinion don’t deserve it. I’ve personally seen many times where families that truly needed help where not given help by the government. That’s why I said earlier, it is more charitable and Christian to give out of your own heart instead of having a system take it away from you, but apparently you missed that. “Christ also said give up everything you have and follow me”, have you done this already? If not then why not? By the way thanks for saying that the Lord will one day tell me to depart from him and be in hell just because I was against certain government practices or ideologies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top