O
OraLabora
Guest
That’s essentially what I did after a 22 year absence back in 1997. Were you confirmed? That might be something to look after, as well as the possible marriage impediments.
- Status
J
JReducation
Guest
Do not let people define terms like this one for you. Examine the context. Terms such as this can mean a variety of things depending on the context. On many issues, Catholicism is much more progressive than the rest of the world and always has been and on other issues, Catholicism is much more conservative than the rest of the world and always has been.
For example, in the field of science, Catholicism has always taken the lead in astronomy, anthropology, archeology and psychology. When the Catholic Church was debating with Galileo, the rest of Europe couldn’t even understand the discussion, because people did not have the language to engage in the discussion.
By the time Sigmund Freud came around, men and women such as Bonaventure, Catherine of Siena, Teresa of Avila, and Francis de Sales had probed the human mind and had written extensively on human behavior in a much more comprehensive manner than Freud ever did, because they included every aspect of human behavior: intellect, will, soul, relationships and nature.
In the area of education, Catholicism has been much more progressive than secular society. Non Catholic school students were writing on hand-held slates while Catholic school teachers were using the blackboard and the students using what they called copybooks, both of which were introduced into the classroom by St. John Baptist de La Salle and his Brothers in the late 17th century.
In areas of theology, Catholic theologian have always been much more progressive than Protestant theologians. Protestant theologians were trying to do exegesis in order to understand the bible, Catholic theologians had grown past that and were doing Systematic Theology, Spiritual Theology, Theology of History, Ecclesiology, Hermaneutics, Soteriology, Catechesis, Christology, Cosmology and many other branches of theology that the common Catholic does not know they exist, much less do outsiders.
The Catholic Church has had social teachings dating back to the Apostles, while Protestants have not. James’ challenge on faith and good works is a perfect example of early social teachings. Luke’s descriptions of the early Christian community are also excellent examples that the Church had social teachings.
Then we’re very conservative in certain areas of morality, especially those that deal with human sexuality. A fundamentalist may tell you that you’re going to hell in a hand-basket because he sees you smoking a cigarette and drinking a beer and doesn’t bat an eyelash if you use contraception. So, what is conservative and progressive really depends on context.
As to the invitation to participate in a serious discussion on same-sex marriage, we (theologians, clergy and religious) do this every day, as do many Catholic laymen who are either theologians or apologists. The key is to know the agenda of the discussion. If the agenda is to persuade the participants that same-sex marriage is acceptable, it’s not much of a discussion. The group is being directed. If the agenda is to look at the different points of view without throwing mud at each other, it can prove to be very educational. It’s a good thing to know what others think on a subject and how they arrive at their conclusions, even if we know that their conclusions are mistaken. Everyone is entitled to a hearing. Listening does not equal agreement. It is important to be very knowledgeable on the subject, if you’re going to participate and to represent the Catholic position well.
To go in and say that same sex marriage is wrong, because the Church says so is not a very intelligent approach. Even the Church does not use that approach. Before the Holy See put out its decree on the pastoral care of homosexual people, it spent millions of dollars to pay theologians, scripture scholars, anthropologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, social workers, historians, physicians, geneticists and any other professional who could contribute to the Church’s understanding of homosexual attractions and homosexual activities. The Church needed to explain why she held her position and she needed to figure out how to use her faith tradition to guide science and reason. You can’t learn those things in a vacuum. You learn those things in a dialogue that has no agenda other than to learn what others think and to explain how we reach our conclusions on the issue.
Those three little paragraphs in the CCC are a tiny summary of thousands of pages of discussion which had been previously introduced into a directory of about 100 pages and then reduced again to a three paragraph statement. Once the Church understood what the world thinks and once she understood some of her own errors on the subject, she was able to guide human reasoning with faith.
As far as accepting the child of a lesbian couple, that’s not a sign of progressivism. There is no Church law that prohibits the education of such children. This was already tested in the Archdiocese of Boston. The Cardinal consulted with the national Catholic council on ethics and with the CDF. Both agreed that the school could educate the child. What the school cannot do is hire the adults to teach.
In social sciences, which is what education is, this is called discrimination, not progressivism. Discrimination is when you can distinguish between two issues. 1) the relationship of the adults, and 2) the Church’s mission to education children. You see, even the term “discrimination” has different meanings in different discipline.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
P
Pleonic
Guest
Well, I’ve only been married once, and the same goes for my wife. 
We were married in a Christian – but not Catholic – wedding. Does the Church accept that or is something additional we’d need to do?
We left just as we were preparing for Confirmation, so no I’m not confirmed. How does one get confirmed when they’re an adult?
Sorry to drag this thread off subject but I’m just so excited to learn this.
We were married in a Christian – but not Catholic – wedding. Does the Church accept that or is something additional we’d need to do?We left just as we were preparing for Confirmation, so no I’m not confirmed. How does one get confirmed when they’re an adult?
Sorry to drag this thread off subject but I’m just so excited to learn this.
M
Mrs_Sally
Guest
I’m excitied for you! You and your wife, if she is interested, will probably do best to go through RCIA and then get confirmed at Easter. RCIA- Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults - is a series of classes to help adults like you and your wife learn enough about the Church to decide to be confirmed. Usually the course starts now and ends at Easter, so this is perfect timing!Well, I’ve only been married once, and the same goes for my wife.
We left just as we were preparing for Confirmation, so no I’m not confirmed. How does one get confirmed when they’re an adult?
Sorry to drag this thread off subject but I’m just so excited to learn this.
Again, best person to talk to is the pastor at your local parish. Whichever is closest to your house or most convenient to get to. Call and ask for an appointment, then explain what you’ve said here - that you are a baptised Catholic who wants to return to the Church and be confirmed. He will need to know how you were married, and there will be a few steps to take there because your wife is not also a Catholic (I assume she was baptised in her protestant denomination). However it sounds like nothing will be too difficult, and you will likely be able to receive communion again before Easter.
Again, welcome back Home!
E
edwest2
Guest
Without seeing the full message, it’s hard to say. Generally, there are many threads trying to push gay marriage as something good that Catholics should support. Catholics should not support gay marriage since the Church tells us that under biology, natural law and Divine Revelation, such an idea is wrong and bad for society in general.
I would ask what is meant by “serious discussion.” And there is no such thing as a “progressive Catholic.” More often than not, the “progress” these people want includes accepting gay marriage as a good thing. If you do not know this person well, or you are asked to go to a physical location, even a school, I would probably say no.
Peace,
Ed
J
JReducation
Guest
I would want to see the agenda, know who’s going to be there and what’s the purpose of the discussion before I say yes or no. Some discussions are a waste of time and some are very educational. I don’t agree with the subject of every discussion. But I certain want to know how people think and how they arrive at their ideas.
A scholar does not waist his time in discussions with an agenda. On the other hand, he never passes up an opportunity to learn, even if it’s about things that he knows are in error. It’s important to understand how people reason.
I can’t create a persuasive teaching tool, if I have no idea what the reader thinks I’m saying. Archbishop Sheen said it best. More people hate what they believe to be what the Church says than what the Church actually says.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
F
Faithdancer
Guest
I think that “progressive” when preceding “Catholic” more often than not means heterodoxy. It is very much like lipstick on a pig.
J
JReducation
Guest
Any label preceeding Catholic, other than:
Roman
Chaldean
Greek
Melkite
Maronite
Syriac, etc
is a waste of ink. There will always be someone more conservative than you and someone more liberal than you.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
F
Faithdancer
Guest
“Conservative” and “liberal” are political terms. The relevant terms are actually “orthodox” and “heterodox,” i.e. “in accordance with” or “contrary to” the teachings of the Magisterium.Any label preceeding Catholic, other than:
Roman
Chaldean
Greek
Melkite
Maronite
Syriac, etc
is a waste of ink. There will always be someone more conservative than you and someone more liberal than you.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, FFV
S
SaintPatrick333
Guest
I would argue for those who vote for democrats based on other social issues that they have to do an examination of conscience and get their priorities straight. The Church has said time and again (and common sense tells us) the right to life supersedes every other right. If you don’t even have the right to be born into the world, little else matters does it? So I would say given this, its impossible to morally justify voting democrat and ignoring the right to life issue. This alone should be the biggest (not exclusive) deciding factor for every Catholic Christian to form their conscience when voting in a couple months. Hard to use the poor as a defense as some I’ve spoken with do. How can we morally justify feeding an underprivileged child with one hand while ripping another child out from its mothers womb limb from limb with the other hand?
F
Faithdancer
Guest
And btw the child is certainly innocent of the mortal sin of the parents. Hopefully her catechism will include special attention to Romans 1: 26-27.
R
red85
Guest
I think it’s a contradiction in terms. It implies the (progressive) Catholic making progress in the spiritual life of the faith. Deviation from the Magisterium of the Church is hardly progress - it’s a regression to an unfortunate state in nature, being enslaved to sin and vice. Besides, the Church condemns homosexuality activity - supporting homosexuality strikes me as heretical.
Charity is the key, though. I think a gentle disagreement would draw out a discussion of some length, where you share the teaching of the Catholic Church on the issue of homosexuality, and even if it seems to avail to little, it’ll stay with her. When it seems she wins, she might realize how erroneous her position later on, with God’s grace, of course. I’ve been on the wrong side before of debates, and realize later on, “gosh, I had a really poor case there.” It seemed like I won, but I was wrong, I realized.
Well, God bless you.
Charity is the key, though. I think a gentle disagreement would draw out a discussion of some length, where you share the teaching of the Catholic Church on the issue of homosexuality, and even if it seems to avail to little, it’ll stay with her. When it seems she wins, she might realize how erroneous her position later on, with God’s grace, of course. I’ve been on the wrong side before of debates, and realize later on, “gosh, I had a really poor case there.” It seemed like I won, but I was wrong, I realized.
Well, God bless you.
Y
yukonbrad
Guest
You have to remember some feel they can, over time, change the party’s position and others while pro life may find too many policices of the republicans against what they percieve as christian/catholic values. One must be careful not to ascribe faith to politics - this leads down a dangerous path to theocracy or similar religous based states that many muslims have fallen into the trap.
Here in Canada there are Catholics in every major political party -ranging from support for pro-life to pro-choice. Unfortunately even pro-life parties do little to change things just as has been the case in the US during years of rule by republicans. In what way do you see this election as reaping results that were never seen during Regan’s years or the Bushes’?
S
scipio337
Guest
Unfortunately, the abortion issue has had more purview via the courts of late.
There has bene countless legislation passed, from parental consent to ultrasound, to even bans for reasons other than the mother’s, but a vast majority have been struck down by the courts, including SCOTUS.
The “reaping results” will come by nominating pro-life judges to the bench.
It’s intersting to note that the recent major victories in the coutroom, like Gonzales v. Carhart, Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, Inc, etc. came under judges nominated by George W. Bush.
R
Rich_C
Guest
I just followed a link to a *National Catholic Reporter *article and read some comment. Look there for an example.
C
CrunchyCathMom
Guest
I wrote her back. Thanks for the words/advice.
F
Faithdancer
Guest
Likewise, cancer and dementia are said to be ‘progressive’ at times, so it must be a really great thing!
R
Rocky24
Guest
Also known as the National Catholic Distorter or Fishwrap
E
edwest2
Guest
The progressive Catholics almost universally see “progress” in the Church as it is proposed by those who are outside the Church or from dissidents inside the Church.
The fruit of the last 40 years is clear. The Freedom that is being preached now is more and more slavery to the flesh, and less and less understanding of what the Church teaches and why. We, the laity, are called to preach not just the Gospels centering on Christ’s death and resurrection but all He taught us. Too many, even Catholics, are so greatly distracted by the constant message of this age: satisfy your flesh, and the Church has no reasonable arguments, only “because God said so.” The Church offers its teachings not just to Catholics but to all men of good will.
Witness to those you can, knowing that you have planted a seed of Truth. Its effects may not grow until much later, and helping to save even one human being is more valuable than all the wealth and pleasure on earth.
Peace,
Ed
The fruit of the last 40 years is clear. The Freedom that is being preached now is more and more slavery to the flesh, and less and less understanding of what the Church teaches and why. We, the laity, are called to preach not just the Gospels centering on Christ’s death and resurrection but all He taught us. Too many, even Catholics, are so greatly distracted by the constant message of this age: satisfy your flesh, and the Church has no reasonable arguments, only “because God said so.” The Church offers its teachings not just to Catholics but to all men of good will.
Witness to those you can, knowing that you have planted a seed of Truth. Its effects may not grow until much later, and helping to save even one human being is more valuable than all the wealth and pleasure on earth.
Peace,
Ed
O
OraLabora
Guest
I vote that we ban the notion of “labeled” Catholics. It only seeks to divide the Church, and to turn us away from charity; as such labeling Catholics is Satan’s tool to divide us. Today the monk giving the homily at our abbey emphasized the necessity of charity towards those who don’t think the way we do.
We should focus our concern on the erroneous ideas themselves, not on the persons holding them. We can certainly label an idea heterodox, but should refrain from labeling the person holding them.
We should focus our concern on the erroneous ideas themselves, not on the persons holding them. We can certainly label an idea heterodox, but should refrain from labeling the person holding them.
- Status