Though hardly an expert myself, I’ve never heard/read any “liberal” Catholic state that such things were a matter of interpretation of the magisterium.
They all know what the Church teaches. Rather, it is a matter that their God-given intellect and free will have lead them to disagree with the Church’s conlusions.
I’ve encountered them stating things such as “it wounds their hearts that the Church continues hold views which” they see as outdated or contrary to modern scientific discoveries/understandings or simply built upon weak arguments. Libs are not saying conservatives are misinterpreting the Church, quite the contrary. They’d be saying that the cons have got a hold on Her and wish they would let Her fully express Christ’s Love. What and How this “love” would be expressed IS a matter of interpretation and theology and philosophy and too big a discussion for this already overwrought thread.
But let’s get to a real example. One came to me in the hours since my previous post: the death penalty. I’ve encountered many, many conservatives who claim their own support of the death penalty is sanctioned by the Church. They even go so far as to cite the Catechism, paragraph 2267, saying: “the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty”. While this is indeed part of the Catechism, they ignore (hence my “cherry picking” accusation) the rest of the paragraph which concludes, “the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity ‘are very rare, if not practically non-existent.’”
As I understand it, the Church allows that one may not necessarily, even with a willing heart, come to the same intellectual conclusions as divined by the Church itself. She does not condemn the honest, devoted Truth-seeker who takes a different path in their mind. Expounding and promulgating these ideas is another matter. Is your understanding different? I’d be interested in hearing it. Honest and sincere.
And that, I believe, is the point anamchara was trying to make with her “warm fires” vs “cold stone” metaphor, though I’ve never seen libs behave so uncharitably unless they were either a) somewhat young or b) beset by several conservatives “attacking” them. On the other hand, I am not saying that all conservatives are more prone to be mean. Far from it. But to add a new wrinkle to this, I’ve noticed from my personal dealings on this and other boards like it, that if there was one group from which one would be more likely to receive an uncharitable response, it would be from a convert from a more evangelical (Pentacostal or non-denom) church than from a Mainstream Protestant convert or, certainly, from a cradle Catholic. I can only guess that this might be a learned behavior pattern garnered from years of “perceived persecution” and/or a psychological desire for a great deal of structure from their religion. But that’s just a guess.
I am not accusing you of anything. I was asking you what you thought. Strummer had made this statement in a previous post:
It wasn’t an attack or a trial. If you prefer not to engage in civil discourse about the differences between “liberals” and “conservatives,” then I’m okay with that.
Yes I do agree with strummer 
but I don’t believe he is referring to your list from earlier.
