Progressive Catholic?

[CrunchyCathMom]

I have a long story but I will shorten it for now. I received a request from a non-Catholic to partake in a serious discussion about gay-marriage. In her message (via fb), she refers to a progressive Catholic school (calling it progressive because it has accepted a lesbian couple
s daughter into the school). What is a progressive catholic? Is this the new term for Catholics who do not follow the Magisterium?

 

[Swiss_Guy]

It is often used as a term for Catholics who don’t agree with the Magisterium. But other times it can be used to refer to Catholics who are liberal on economic issues (e.g taxes). But sometimes even in politics is hard to be progressive.

 

[CrunchyCathMom]

Ok.Thank you. I was trying to figure out if this was a dig to traditional catholics or just another term for liberal catholics.

 

[Marocchino]

“Progressive Catholic” is a label often used by those who dissent from the teachings of the Magisterium. Yes, I would say that it is essentially the same as “Liberal Catholic”, whom Bl. Pius IX called the “greatest enemies of the Church.” I would agree with his characterization, because instead of being honest with themselves and the world and leaving the Church, they bring direpute to the Church because they deceive people into thinking that in the Church it is acceptable to reject God’s revealed truths on faith and morals, and still retain the Catholic name. May God deliver “Progressive Catholics” from the diabolical disorientation that Our Lady of Fatima warned of and have mercy on all our souls.

 

[Bismarck]

When I hear liberal or progressive Catholic it was on full display at the DNC. Caroline Kennedy saying first she was Catholic than espoused abortion throughout her speech. It’s a growing movement sadly within our beloved religion.

Just as bad not one high rank Catholic leader called Caroline out for beliefs contrary to Catholicism.

 

[SaintPatrick333]

There is no such thing as liberal or traditional catholic in the political/societal sense. There is only Catholic. And depending on where you fall in regards to political/societal issues decides how much of a practicing/faithful Catholic you are. For example. Someone who is baptized and confirmed Catholic and goes to Mass every weekend who also supports same sex unions and believes abortion is a womans choice. They are still Catholic. They are simply bad catholics who need to repent opposing Christ’s One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church on moral issues. Their pride often clouds them to their call from Christ to be obedient to Him and His Church out of love.

 

[wmw]

Think it’s unusual that a Catholic school would take a Lesbian “couple’s daughter” into their school? No, you have it all turned around it’s unusual that such a pair would put their charge into a Catholic school. The schools, hospitals and all Catholic institutions are there to serve all sinners. They do try harder to make it more affordable and give priority for their own parish’s children, but all parish, non-parish and non-Catholic sinners are welcome.

 

[Pleonic]

I would just mention that “Progressiveism” in the Catholic Church is part of a larger “Progressive Theology” that unfortunately pervades Christianity in general. Its overarching idea is that we are modern, intelligent, sophisticated people who know better than to believe in primitive events (e.g., Christ’s bodily Resurrection) or teachings (e.g., that God would concern Himself with one’s sex life or that Jesus was not just a man but fully God as well). Not just the Magisterium is passe in their view but traditional Christianity in general. Well known “Progressives” include John Dominic Crossen (a former Priest), Hans Kung (Catholic theologian), John Shelby Sprong (Episcopalian bishop), Dr. Bart Ehrman, Dr. Marcus Borg, Dr. Robert Funk (Bible Scholars), most participants in the famous ‘Jesus Seminar,’ and numerous Catholic and Protestant politicians and talking heads to the left of the political spectrum.

The desire to find a solid place to stand while this movement advances is one thing that is moving me towards returning to the Catholic Church. We both have “Progressives” in our midst but you have something to stand against it that we Protestants do not: The Magisterium.

---

'Stipendia enim peccati, mors. Gratia autem Dei, vita æterna, in Christo Jesu Domino nostro."

–Letter to the Romans, chapter 6, verse 23

 

[RogerDeCourcy]

Well, look at the word: “Progressive”. It suggests they believe our religion can progress. It’s normally used to describe Catholics who believe core doctrines can and should change e.g. Abortion, Homosexuality, the authority of the Pope, Transubstantiation and so on.

Traditionalists would also apply the term to liturgical experimentalists.

There are overtones of thinking the industrial-style progress, as positive value, is something that can be applied to religion.

 

[yukonbrad]

There is no such thing as liberal or traditional catholic in the political/societal sense. There is only Catholic. And depending on where you fall in regards to political/societal issues decides how much of a practicing/faithful Catholic you are. For example. Someone who is baptized and confirmed Catholic and goes to Mass every weekend who also supports same sex unions and believes abortion is a womans choice. They are still Catholic. They are simply bad catholics who need to repent opposing Christ’s One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church on moral issues. Their pride often clouds them to their call from Christ to be obedient to Him and His Church out of love.

I quite agree but this does not include those who may vote for say the dems because of social justice issues but are opposed to such moral issues mentioned. Lets not go down the path of confusing politics and faith.

As to the issue at hand, while the parents are gay the child is not and regardless is entitled if all other enterance requirements are met to attend a catholic school - I don’t see anything “progressive” about this.

 

[Franciscanguy]

This discussion always amuses me. We have to seperate “progressive theologians” from “Progressive politicians” from "Progressive praxis, from “progressive history”… so on and so forth. They may go together sometimes but are not the same thing.

My guess is your friend percieves this move, to accept a gay couples child, as “progressive” theologically and politically. They have just never heard of it and it’s cool that they have because now they can see a broader view of what Catholicism is and how its members minister.

We often use labels that evoke a viseral reaction because it is easier than being intellectually and emotionally honest. Say “Tea Party” or “SSPX” or “Charasmatic Catholic” to people and they have a gut reaction. It creates an “us and them” stance. And theologically speaking we equate those that don’t agree with us as “in sin” or “heresy” or any other number of cliche concepts. Politically speaking we understand the “other” as “abusing the system.” I would challange us to be more honest and open with one another here on the forums remembering that all Christians are “faith seeking understanding.”

Aquinas was the “progressive” of his day. All that Aristotle was a problem. It was Bonaventure holding up the old school Augustinian views. Man, have we come a long way.

 

[PJM]

=CrunchyCathMom;9769646]I have a long story but I will shorten it for now. I received a request from a non-Catholic to partake in a serious discussion about gay-marriage. In her message (via fb), she refers to a progressive Catholic school (calling it progressive because it has accepted a lesbian couple
s daughter into the school). What is a progressive catholic? Is this the new term for Catholics who do not follow the Magisterium?

At BEST it is a “catholic” in name ONLY

In FACT it is a person who choses to call themselfs " a catholic" but are unwilling to live the life of a Catholic

It is one knowingly or unknowingly in schism.

God Bless,

Don’t let this person didcate the terminology.

pat /PJM

 

[Dirt]

i actually prefer the terms we are given in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd edition;

2088 The first commandment requires us to nourish and protect our faith with prudence and vigilance, and to reject everything that is opposed to it. There are various ways of sinning against faith: (157)
**Voluntary doubt **about the faith disregards or refuses to hold as true what God has revealed and the Church proposes for belief. Involuntary doubt refers to hesitation in believing, difficulty in overcoming objections connected with the faith, or also anxiety aroused by its obscurity. If deliberately cultivated doubt can lead to spiritual blindness.
2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. “Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”11 (162, 817)

text of the CCC from
usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/what-we-believe/catechism/catechism-of-the-catholic-church/epub/index.cfm

 

[Stylites]

Well, look at the word: “Progressive”. It suggests they believe our religion can progress. It’s normally used to describe Catholics who believe core doctrines can and should change e.g. Abortion, Homosexuality, the authority of the Pope, Transubstantiation and so on.

Traditionalists would also apply the term to liturgical experimentalists.

There are overtones of thinking the industrial-style progress, as positive value, is something that can be applied to religion.

Likewise, cancer and dementia are said to be ‘progressive’ at times, so it must be a really great thing!

 

[OraLabora]

At BEST it is a “catholic” in name ONLY

In FACT it is a person who choses to call themselfs " a catholic" but are unwilling to live the life of a Catholic

It is one knowingly or unknowingly in schism.

God Bless,

Don’t let this person didcate the terminology.

pat /PJM

Catholic IN FACT is a person who has received the indelible mark of Baptism. There is no such thing as a Catholic “in name” only. Even if that person doesn’t practice.

Here’s a hint: when someone is officially excommunicated from the Church, they don’t cease to be Catholic.

There is no way to IN FACT, in the current code of Canon Law, to cease being a Catholic.

Of course one can be a very poor Catholic, and one can be an excommunicated Catholic, and one can be an invincibly ignorant Catholic on some issues. But one remains, a Catholic not in name but in fact.

A lost sheep that strays away from the flock does not cease being a sheep! It is simply a lost sheep and in charity we can say the same about Catholics who strayed. They are Catholics, but lost Catholics, no matter the reason why they strayed (inattention, poor catechesis, stubbornness, ill-intent, etc.). The shepherd’s duty is to try to find it and bring it back.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Catholic IN FACT is a person who has received the indelible mark of Baptism. There is no such thing as a Catholic “in name” only. Even if that person doesn’t practice.

Here’s a hint: when someone is officially excommunicated from the Church, they don’t cease to be Catholic.

There is no way to IN FACT, in the current code of Canon Law, to cease being a Catholic.

Of course one can be a very poor Catholic, and one can be an excommunicated Catholic, and one can be an invincibly ignorant Catholic on some issues. But one remains, a Catholic not in name but in fact.

A lost sheep that strays away from the flock does not cease being a sheep! It is simply a lost sheep and in charity we can say the same about Catholics who strayed. They are Catholics, but lost Catholics, no matter the reason why they strayed (inattention, poor catechesis, stubbornness, ill-intent, etc.). The shepherd’s duty is to try to find it and bring it back.

Thank you for reminding us of this. Our belief in the actions of Baptism means it cannot be undone. One may die an unrepentant Catholic, but a Catholic nonetheless. Further, we do not believe that *only *Catholics are in heaven, or that *all *Catholics are in heaven. We must all “work out our salvation in fear and trembling”.

 

[PJM]

=OraLabora;9772487]Catholic IN FACT is a person who has received the indelible mark of Baptism. There is no such thing as a Catholic “in name” only. Even if that person doesn’t practice.

Here’s a hint: when someone is officially excommunicated from the Church, they don’t cease to be Catholic.

There is no way to IN FACT, in the current code of Canon Law, to cease being a Catholic.

Of course one can be a very poor Catholic, and one can be an excommunicated Catholic, and one can be an invincibly ignorant Catholic on some issues. But one remains, a Catholic not in name but in fact.

A lost sheep that strays away from the flock does not cease being a sheep! It is simply a lost sheep and in charity we can say the same about Catholics who strayed. They are Catholics, but lost Catholics, no matter the reason why they strayed (inattention, poor catechesis, stubbornness, ill-intent, etc.). The shepherd’s duty is to try to find it and bring it back.

REALLY?

so “all baptized christians are catholics too?”

God Bless, and thanks for your insights,

Pat /PJM

 

[OraLabora]

REALLY?

so “all baptized christians are catholics too?”

God Bless, and thanks for your insights,

Pat /PJM

As it happens, the Church does not require that Protestants who have undergone a valid, trinitarian water baptism be re-baptized when joining the Church. In a sense they are part of the Church though they might now know it and nor are they in perfect communion.

Of course my point was made with respect to validly baptized Catholics who were baptized by the Church. The Church does not recognize the possibility that a baptized Catholic cease being Catholic. There used to be a clause in Canon Law that allowed one to make a formal act of renunciation, but that was abolished in the 1983 Code of Canon Law. Once baptized by the Church into the Church, always Catholic.

 

[Pleonic]

I didn’t know that at all. This is very happy news to me since I’m seriously interested in returning to the Catholic Church. My family left the Church when I was 13 and I’ve belonged to several churches since – was even ordained in one. I always assumed there was a point in all that where the Church would no longer consider me Catholic.

Does this mean that now, 40 years later, I could walk in, confess, do my penance, and effectively pick up where I left off?

---

Stipendia enim peccati, mors. Gratia autem Dei, vita æterna, in Christo Jesu Domino nostro."

–Letter to the Romans, chapter 6, verse 23

 

[Mrs_Sally]

I didn’t know that at all. This is very happy news to me since I’m seriously interested in returning to the Catholic Church. My family left the Church when I was 13 and I’ve belonged to several churches since – was even ordained in one. I always assumed there was a point in all that where the Church would no longer consider me Catholic.

Does this mean that now, 40 years later, I could walk in, confess, do my penance, and effectively pick up where I left off?

---

Stipendia enim peccati, mors. Gratia autem Dei, vita æterna, in Christo Jesu Domino nostro."

–Letter to the Romans, chapter 6, verse 23

Yep it does. All assuming you have not been marrried, divorced, and remarried which would cause you to need to have those sacramental issues worked out.

Why don’t you call your local parish and see? I bet the priest would be very happy to schedule an appointment for confession and to welcome you back!

Welcome back Home! I’ll pray for you.