C
carefullytread
Guest
John the Baptist is a rather special case.
Philadelphia Archbishop Chaput welcomes ‘smaller church’ of holier Catholics
- Status
U
Usige
Guest
They proudly shame themselves day after day. Their utter abandonment of Catholic teachings is public knowledge.How is he shaming them by stating things that are public knowledge? By all accounts these politicians hold their disobedience as a virtue and feel no shame in proclaiming it.
Archbishop Chaput is being a good shepherd by warning his flock about the wolves in the fold. It is a shepherd’s duty to drive the wolves out before they lay waste to the flock.
R
RedFox0456
Guest
That is not an argument. In fact, if John the Baptist set that example - to call out the powerful when they are in great error, even when it might mean persecution or death - then one would think that we should be emulating that behavior.
J
Joe_5859
Guest
I don’t think Benedict’s point was that the Church would be better off. He (as then Cardinal Ratzinger) was making a prediction of the coming crises in the Church and in the world. He noted that good could come from it as the many trials the Church would face would cause her to reevaluate, grow in holiness, and that hope of the believers would then be attractive.
In other words, growing smaller isn’t an end in and of itself.
My suspicion is that Chaput’s comments are along the same lines and that the headline stating he “welcomes” a smaller Church as “preferable” is misleading as to his main point. Yes, good can come from it in that it might require people to be more honest with themselves and what they really believe. But we don’t want the Church to become smaller. We want everyone to be Catholic.
J
Jesus_123
Guest
+*A gentle correction . . .the above reference leaves out the crucial word . . . *“teach” . . .
Bishop Chaput is following his and our . . . Wonderful Lord’s . . . clear instruction as it is revealed in the portion of Sacred :bible1: Scripture below . . .
. . . :compcoff: . . .
"And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying:
May God tenderly and richly bless and protect Bishop Chaput for his courage in proclaiming truth . . .‘All power is given to Me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.’ " - Matthew 28:18-20
*In dedication to the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart . . . *
. . . all for Jesus+
O
OraLabora
Guest
Given human nature, I suspect all we’d end up with is a smaller Church. Since Original Sin, humans have a funny habit of messing up any institution they get involved with, large or small.
But what really frightens me is the notion that we can somehow designate our own selves as holy enough for admission. Or will I have to pass some kind of test?
If we can make our own decision about our supposed holiness, I fear this goes completely against the notion of humility, and that would ensure that this smaller “holier” Church would skid out of control sooner rather than later.
Thus colour me, if you will, of the Pope Francis school. All are welcome into the Church to grow into holiness, it shouldn’t be an exclusive club for those who already think they are holy.
But what really frightens me is the notion that we can somehow designate our own selves as holy enough for admission. Or will I have to pass some kind of test?
If we can make our own decision about our supposed holiness, I fear this goes completely against the notion of humility, and that would ensure that this smaller “holier” Church would skid out of control sooner rather than later.
Thus colour me, if you will, of the Pope Francis school. All are welcome into the Church to grow into holiness, it shouldn’t be an exclusive club for those who already think they are holy.
W
Wesrock
Guest
These are public officials, not ordinary private citizens And if anyone has authority to lecture on right doctrine, faith, and morals, it’s a Bishop. It’s not as if Kain or Biden’s positions aren’t clearly against Church teaching.
A
Ad_Orientem
Guest
I don’t think either Benedict XVI or Archbishop Chaput wants a church of people who think they are holy. At least for then-Cardinal Ratzinger, it was more like a prediction. The Church will grow smaller, because at many levels, the Church Militant is ostensibly self-destructing. Of course the gates of hell will not prevail. It may be that conservatives have a narrow conception of Catholic identity; it is no less true that the Modernists do as well. They would turn the Church into an exclusive club for secular humanists.
S
shockerfan
Guest
So Chaput calls out those who don’t merely sin (like everybody does), he calls out public Catholics who publicly state heretical views on abortion and so-called same sex marriage. As far as I know, he didn’t excommunicate them.
Francis actually excommunicated an Australian priest for teaching heretical views about the ordination of women.
Seems to me Francis took the harder line than Chaput!
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
Does anyone have a link to the actual speech the Archbishop gave?
It is difficult to have any meaningful discussion without knowing exactly what was said and in what context.
Media, even Catholic media, sadly, seems to be operating out of its own agenda lately, and it does not alway mean we are getting completely accurate information.
It is difficult to have any meaningful discussion without knowing exactly what was said and in what context.
Media, even Catholic media, sadly, seems to be operating out of its own agenda lately, and it does not alway mean we are getting completely accurate information.
U
Usige
Guest
Here is the linked speech from the original article: Remembering who we are and the story we belong to
In particular this is what he said “shaming” politicians
He is calling them, and others, out who have abandoned loyalty to the Church in exchange for loyalty to our ambitions.
B
Beautiful
Guest
True…
I’d like to see some good homilies that resonate to the heart of every parishioner Sunday after Sunday. My witness in the past was that those who couldn’t stand to hear The Truth got up and walked out. That is how is in the Gospel readings…
Homilies around where I live have gotten soft and humorous…like lukewarm water in the mouth.
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
Thanks! Don’t know how I missed that!
S
Sy_Noe
Guest
To become a smaller church with fewer Catholics, the Catholic Church would need to change its teaching by no longer claiming all baptized Catholics to be Catholic.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13411600&postcount=2
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=13411600&postcount=2
7
7_Sorrows
Guest
excellent!
W
Wendy1989
Guest
I found this quote from the speech quite enlightening:
“…G.K. Chesterton once quipped that America is a nation that thinks it’s a Church. And he was right. In fact, he was more accurate than he could have guessed. Catholics came to this country to build a new life. They did exceptionally well here. They’ve done so well that by now many of us Catholics are largely assimilated to, and digested by, a culture that bleaches out strong religious convictions in the name of liberal tolerance and dulls our longings for the supernatural with a river of practical atheism in the form of consumer goods.” (emphasis mine)
While AB Chaput named names - he also included the rest of Catholics in America. The job of a Bishop is to defend the Church. He does that quite eloquently!
“…G.K. Chesterton once quipped that America is a nation that thinks it’s a Church. And he was right. In fact, he was more accurate than he could have guessed. Catholics came to this country to build a new life. They did exceptionally well here. They’ve done so well that by now many of us Catholics are largely assimilated to, and digested by, a culture that bleaches out strong religious convictions in the name of liberal tolerance and dulls our longings for the supernatural with a river of practical atheism in the form of consumer goods.” (emphasis mine)
While AB Chaput named names - he also included the rest of Catholics in America. The job of a Bishop is to defend the Church. He does that quite eloquently!
S
shockerfan
Guest
So given the full context of Chaput’s statements (at least those reported), is he wrong?
Is the Church better off having Catholics in the public arena spouting heretical positions? Or, more in line with his point, we would all be better off if Catholics in the public arena would just stay quiet about their non-Catholic beliefs.
U
Usige
Guest
What would be better is obedience and for them (and us) to not be apostate by our actions. A smaller Church is not the goal, but rather conversion of sinners. In an ideal world the who of humanity would be obediently converted to the Church.
People love to trot out the saying that the Church is a hospital for sinners, but seem to misunderstand that you go to the hospital to get better, even if it is an unpleasant experience. It seems those who trumpet that phrase aren’t talking about a hospital, but a hospice. In otherwords they don’t want to be cured, but have made peace with their impending moral death and simply want to be made comfortable in their sin. It sometimes reminds me of the Black Knight in monty python who has had both arms and legs cut off, but refuses to accept that he’s mortally wounded.
It is that type of invincible spiritual blindness that is so sad to see in people who willingly turn their backs on church teaching, but still proclaim that they are faithful children of the Church. Yes they are still Her children, but faithful? Not in the least.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
I think a lot of people are missing the broad view here.
When Archbishop Chaput makes a statement (as did Pope Benedict) which spoke of a smaller, holier Church, neither one meant to say that this would be the case for the rest of recorded time, or that the Church should somehow reinvent the definition of what the Catholic Church is from ‘all people’ to ‘only a few’.
But you know, there have been times in history (as far back as the first Christians, then the Arian times, France in the time of terror, etc) where the numbers of those who adhered to the gospel would get pretty small, and the numbers of CINOs and those who apostasized got rather large. BUT, 10, 20, 30 years down the road (and that’s a mighty small percentage of historical time), that 'smaller church" drew more and more numbers to it, each and every time.
So if say in 2020 after a few years of WHOEVER’S presidency, church attendance fell more and more, people made up more ceremonies about ‘debaptizing’, children were left more and more ‘untaught’, etc., while the fewer people who attended their church actually got more and more involved in Christ’s gospel, we would see the same things we have seen over and over through Christianity–those ‘smaller’ groups would shine brighter and brighter, and would bring more and more people around to them.
So if in 2017, say, 500,000 people in the US ‘left’ Catholicism for various and sundry reasons, there is no reason to believe that a year, 2, 3, 10, that they wouldn’t start to COME BACK. And in coming back, they wouldn’t be any ‘less Catholic’ than the persons who had stayed. And by 2028, perhaps, instead of having ‘lost’ 500,000 people we’d have brought them, and another 500,000, to the Church.
It’s happened before and it will happen until, as Christ told us, the full number of those who are saved have been drawn in. We have His word on it.
When Archbishop Chaput makes a statement (as did Pope Benedict) which spoke of a smaller, holier Church, neither one meant to say that this would be the case for the rest of recorded time, or that the Church should somehow reinvent the definition of what the Catholic Church is from ‘all people’ to ‘only a few’.
But you know, there have been times in history (as far back as the first Christians, then the Arian times, France in the time of terror, etc) where the numbers of those who adhered to the gospel would get pretty small, and the numbers of CINOs and those who apostasized got rather large. BUT, 10, 20, 30 years down the road (and that’s a mighty small percentage of historical time), that 'smaller church" drew more and more numbers to it, each and every time.
So if say in 2020 after a few years of WHOEVER’S presidency, church attendance fell more and more, people made up more ceremonies about ‘debaptizing’, children were left more and more ‘untaught’, etc., while the fewer people who attended their church actually got more and more involved in Christ’s gospel, we would see the same things we have seen over and over through Christianity–those ‘smaller’ groups would shine brighter and brighter, and would bring more and more people around to them.
So if in 2017, say, 500,000 people in the US ‘left’ Catholicism for various and sundry reasons, there is no reason to believe that a year, 2, 3, 10, that they wouldn’t start to COME BACK. And in coming back, they wouldn’t be any ‘less Catholic’ than the persons who had stayed. And by 2028, perhaps, instead of having ‘lost’ 500,000 people we’d have brought them, and another 500,000, to the Church.
It’s happened before and it will happen until, as Christ told us, the full number of those who are saved have been drawn in. We have His word on it.
B
Brendan
Guest
Well, it shows what a man needs to do to be considered great among those born of women
- Status