Should liberals leave the catholic church?

[sosayi1960]

That is correct. There are hairs to split about the nature of the rejection, and so on, but it is generally right.

The classic example is a person who divorces and remarries, and continues to receive communion. This is a serious sin, each and every time.

That’s a meaningless comment.

What do you mean “one who obeys the magisterium?” Obedience and belief are two different things – one may obey, that is attend Mass regularly, abstain when required, and so on, and yet reject the teaching of the Church in their hearts and so excommunicate themselves.

And one may believe, and yet not attend Mass regularly.

That’s your definition of “liberal,” not mine.

One may find some doctrines hard to accept. That’s not unusual. Where one falls into sin is how one handles that issue. Does he pray for grace to understand and accept? Does he simply reject in his heart with no attempt to understand and accept? Or does he publicly reject – and perhaps seek to lead others in that path?

That’s not how I understand it, nor do I say anyone is unwelcome in the Church. Each person must deal with his own demons – and be responsible for the outcome.

I don’t know why you persist in using labels like “liberalism.”

A person who does not accept the core doctrine of the Church has two choices – to pray and seek grace to understand and accept, or to reject. If the latter decision is taken, one can reject silently, or one can attempt to persuade others. The last act, which is open opposition to the Church puts one clearly outside the Church – through one’s own actions.

I am very sorry for you. You will be in my prayers – as I hope I will be in yours.

It’s not my notion – it’s the Church’s doctrine. And if you have decided as you say " I realised I could no longer call myself a Catholic in any sense" then you have proven that position is correct – you made the decision to excommunicate yourself.

With no intent to offend at all, your posts indicate that you do not understand what the Church presents. You do not understand the Magisterium. You seem to be in rebellion against a church that exists nowhere but in your imagination.

I notice you speak only in generalities – what are the real issues?

Again, not meaning to offend, but that is your imagination at work. The Church is not like that.

Again, you indict the Church on generalities. What are the real issues? What is the Church teaching that you can’t accept?

I considered myself a progressive Catholic. I and my wife attend mass according to our conscience. We accept the basic teachings of the church.
If the pope told us to buy Pepsi, rather than Coke. We wouldn’t do it. The second Vatican Council, also discussed conscience. It’s a revelation from the church. If I eat meat on a Friday, am I going to hell? What nonsense!

I am not leaving, I vote for the person who I believe is better qualified. I will not “obey” anyone IF it conflicts against my values.
I don’t bow to statues.

I don’t care what “compassionate conservatives” say nor believe.
I don’t think everything is always black or white. I can’t comprehend the finger pointing of relativism. Point it at me I don’t care. Some of the greatest Saints in the church were Liberals.
Francis of Assisi, and Jesus Christ were “Liberals” like it or not.

You can beat your chest till the cows come home. “As for me and my house, we shall serve the Lord”.
Peace!
Joe

 

[vern_humphrey]

I considered myself a progressive Catholic. I and my wife attend mass according to our conscience. We accept the basic teachings of the church.
If the pope told us to buy Pepsi, rather than Coke. We wouldn’t do it. The second Vatican Council, also discussed conscience. It’s a revelation from the church.

Huh? When did the Pope tell you to rather than Coke?

You do understand that the Magisterium extends to faith and morals? Not to economics, the weather, or which horse is going to win the third race on Saturday?

If I eat meat on a Friday, am I going to hell? What nonsense!

You say you’re a Catholic?

And you don’t know abstaining from meat when required is a penance and a sacrifice?

I am not leaving, I vote for the person who I believe is better qualified. I will not “obey” anyone IF it conflicts against my values.
I don’t bow to statues.

You sound to me like you’ve already left in your heart.

I don’t care what “compassionate conservatives” say nor believe.
I don’t think everything is always black or white. I can’t comprehend the finger pointing of relativism.

But that’s exactly what you’re doing in this post.

Point it at me I don’t care. Some of the greatest Saints in the church were Liberals.
Francis of Assisi, and Jesus Christ were “Liberals” like it or not.

Right – we can put 21st Century labels on people who lived hundreds or thousands of years ago. Yep.:whacky:

You can beat your chest till the cows come home. “As for me and my house, we shall serve the Lord”.
Peace!
Joe

You seem very angry – and I didn’t come to you and attack you. You addressed me with your anger.

 

[ncjohn]

No. Those who find themselves unable to accept the Church’s teaching should pray for the grace to understand and believe. No on should leave the Church. All should pray for grace.

Exactly!

If we’re going to weed out based on worthiness (as defined by whom?) the churches will all be empty. I know I can’t stand up to any worthiness criterion. I’m one of those struggling sinners Jesus said he came to eat with.

 

[Godi]

Liberalism, is a Wolf Pack that the Bishops should expunge from the Catholic Church. The book, " Liberalism is a Sin ", written in 1886 by Dr. Don Felix Sarda Y. Salvany, is as apropriate today as it was then. Americanism was condemned by Pope Leo XIII in 1899.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Exactly!

If we’re going to weed out based on worthiness (as defined by whom?) the churches will all be empty. I know I can’t stand up to any worthiness criterion. I’m one of those struggling sinners Jesus said he came to eat with.

Back in an era when anti-Catholicism was rampant, Bishop Fulton J. Sheen said many Protestants hate what they think is the Catholic Church. If they knew the Church, they would not hate it.

I think many Catholics hate what they think is the Catholic Church. The positions they present (“If the Pope told me to buy Pepsi instead of Coke”) indicate a fundamental lack of understanding of the Church and its doctrines.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

This discussion has become extremely nasty and unpleasant for me, so I will not be making any further comments here on the issues earlier discussed.

Your decision. But I must say that I agree with you that labelling folks is nasty and unpleasant and that that is why I believe that using terms such as ‘liberal Catholics’ or ‘regressive Catholics’ does little to build bridges. One more time: there is no such thing as a liberal Catholic or a regressive Catholic – only a Catholic.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

This discussion has become extremely nasty and unpleasant for me, so I will not be making any further comments here on the issues earlier discussed.

Your decision. But I must say that I agree with you that labelling folks is nasty and unpleasant and that that is why I believe that using terms such as ‘liberal Catholics’ or ‘regressive Catholics’ does little to build bridges. One more time: there is no such thing as a liberal Catholic or a regressive Catholic – only a Catholic.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Your decision. But I must say that I agree with you that labelling folks is nasty and unpleasant and that that is why I believe that using terms such as ‘liberal Catholics’ or ‘regressive Catholics’ does little to build bridges. One more time: there is no such thing as a liberal Catholic or a regressive Catholic – only a Catholic.

Help me out here Ani. I don’t see any substance here.

What is it that those who identify as “liberals” or “conservatives” believe? What are the specifics that sparked this argunment?

Now if someone said, “I don’t believe in Transubstantiation” we could discuss that (and not need labels to do it.)

When someone says

In the end I couldn’t force myself to accept something against my will and conscience

What does he** mean**? What is it he couldn’t force himself to accept?

 

[sirduckjr]

Interesting subject matter. I ran across this article last month in my NOR. It was in interview with Archbishop Niederauer of Northern California, and home to Nancy Pelosi. calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=c0b3f577-93db-4a08-9d50-b73e14d8f4b9

If this bishop will not engage Mrs. Pelosi, and the previous ArchBishop Neveda didn’t either, (who is now in the position held previously by our current Pope) what is a faithful to all the teachings of the Church Catholic suppose to think?

 

[estesbob]

The second Vatican Council, also discussed conscience. It’s a revelation from the church. If I eat
meat on a Friday, am I going to hell? What nonsense!

There was NO revelation concerning conscience at Vatican II . The Church teachings on primacy of conscience are the same they have been for the last 2,000 years. Unfortunately many “catholics” have seized on this phrase to justify everything from abortion to homosexual behavior. The Primacy of Conscience refers ONLY to a well formed conscience-a conscience formed by the teachings of the Church. You can find out more here:

catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0610uan.asp

No one, BTW, ever went to hell for eating meat. The sin comes from denying the authority of the Church. Since Christ and the Church are one in the same rejecting Church teaching is rejecting Christ.

I

am not leaving, I vote for the person who I believe is better qualified. I will not “obey” anyone IF it conflicts against my values.
I don’t bow to statues

.

As I read your post I Knew that you were one of those Catholics that puts their politics before their faith. I find you comment that you will obey no one to be quite telling… You deny the authority of the Church, you pick and choose what doctrines you want to follow and you mock those of us “foolish” enough to follow the teachings of the Church.

My friend you have already left the Church. Your household doesn’t serve the Lord-it serves you. You have met god and he is you.

You and your family will be in my prayers.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Originally Posted by sosayi1960
The second Vatican Council, also discussed conscience. It’s a revelation from the church. If I eat
meat on a Friday, am I going to hell? What nonsense!

There was NO revelation concerning conscience at Vatican II . The Church teachings on primacy of conscience are the same they have been for the last 2,000 years.

This is exactly what I mean when I say we have people here attacking a church that exists only in their own minds. A person claiming to be Catholic talks about “a revelation from the church.”

One doesn’t have to study Catholicism very deeply to know that there is no such thing as “a revelation from the church.”

Per

 

[estesbob]

This is exactly what I mean when I say we have people here attacking a church that exists only in their own minds. A person claiming to be Catholic talks about “a revelation from the church.”

Per

When i saw that I was wondering if he was confuisng the Church with the LDS.They come uo with revelations quite often

 

[Ani_Ibi]

vern humphrey:

What is it that those who identify as “liberals” or “conservatives” believe? What are the specifics that sparked this argunment?

I have never found it to be a question which has been deeply thought out, Vern. I suspect this ‘labelling’ has more to do with peer group subscription and assumed status and jockeying for position than about any particular point of theology.
vern humphrey:

Now if someone said, “I don’t believe in Transubstantiation” we could discuss that (and not need labels to do it.)

Yes. And all parties to the discussion might stand to benefit from the sharing of substantive ideas. N’est-ce pas?
vern humphrey:

When someone says

What does he** mean**? What is it he couldn’t force himself to accept?

Perhaps it is the existence of the ‘other’ that is unacceptable. Now this is ironic because the notion of the ‘other’ has been inappropriately manufactured in the first place. The ultimate strawman. Go figure.

As for helping you out, Vern, I suggest having some nice lemonade and sitting in the shade for a bit.

 

[vern_humphrey]

As for helping you out, Vern, I suggest having some nice lemonade and sitting in the shade for a bit.

I’ll go sit on the porch with the Holy Grail (my 1938 Colt Woodsman) and a box of bulk-pack Remingtons from Wal-Mart and plink away at my dangle plate from 80 yards.

 

[vern_humphrey]

When i saw that I was wondering if he was confuisng the Church with the LDS.They come uo with revelations quite often

My thoughts exactly, Bob. Great minds run in the same channels.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Has anyone read the Gospel reading today? I don’t have the cite, but it’s the one about Jesus sitting with the tax collectors and saying that he has come for the sinners not for those who are righteous.

Maybe oddly enough all these folks who hate the Church are better off inside the Church than floundering around outside.

What do all yall think about that notion?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Has anyone read the Gospel reading today? I don’t have the cite, but it’s the one about Jesus sitting with the tax collectors and saying that he has come for the sinners not for those who are righteous.

Maybe oddly enough all these folks who hate the Church are better off inside the Church than floundering around outside.

What do all yall think about that notion?

I don’t think anyone should leave the Church – and I’m at a total loss to understand how the terms “liberal” and “conservative” apply in this context.

I do point out that most acts of excommunication are performed by the individual – they excommunicate themslves by their own acts. And as an exercise in rational thinking I ask such persons, “If you cannot accept the Church’s teaching, why do you remain in the Church?”

A proper answer to that would lead to a deep self-examination, “Why do I remain in the Church?” and that ought to lead to a deeper understanding of the Church and a willingness to study and accept the true teachings of the Church – and not sit and curse the supposed “sins” of the church of their imagination.

 

[sosayi1960]

Huh? When did the Pope tell you to rather than Coke?

You do understand that the Magisterium extends to faith and morals? Not to economics, the weather, or which horse is going to win the third race on Saturday?

You say you’re a Catholic?

And you don’t know abstaining from meat when required is a penance and a sacrifice?

You sound to me like you’ve already left in your heart.

But that’s exactly what you’re doing in this post.

Right – we can put 21st Century labels on people who lived hundreds or thousands of years ago. Yep.:whacky:

You seem very angry – and I didn’t come to you and attack you. You addressed me with your anger.

No, forgive me if you thought i was attacking you. I can support some of the teachings. I don’t blindly follow every crossed t and dotted i. My point is my conscience needs to play a role in my relationship with God and my relationship with the church. I abstain from meat on Fridays in lent because of my choice. It’s a tradition, I have no problem with that. If my bishop stated for example, that all the members in our diocese had to do something
against our conscience. i wouldn’t do it. Pehaps i’m wacky, so be it. The church needs voices to point out injustice. The church needs all her children. Progressive and Traditional. I find the irony that’s says “You have left yourself”. “You are excommunicated”.
that’s somebodies personal opinon. When I’m told my Rome get out, then and only then I’ll leave.
Peace to all, Christ died for all of us.
Joe.

 

[vern_humphrey]

No, forgive me if you thought i was attacking you. I can support some of the teachings. I don’t blindly follow every crossed t and dotted i.

Then why don’t we talk about the real problem?

Which crossed ts and dotted is are you having problems with?

My point is my conscience needs to play a role in my relationship with God and my relationship with the church. I abstain from meat on Fridays in lent because of my choice. It’s a tradition, I have no problem with that. If my bishop stated for example, that all the members in our diocese had to do something
against our conscience.

At a tent revival, the Minister shouted, “Who’s willin’ to do what the Lord asks?”

And an old hillbilly jumped up and said, “I’m willin’ to do whatever the Lord wants me to do - - providin’ of course, it’s honorable?”

What did the Lord – or your Bishop – want you to do that wasn’t honorable?

Give us the specifics.

i wouldn’t do it. Pehaps i’m wacky, so be it. The church needs voices to point out injustice.

Jesus realized that – that’s why He commissioned His Apostles. Their successors continue to point out injustice.

The church needs all her children. Progressive and Traditional. I find the irony that’s says “You have left yourself”. “You are excommunicated”.

But people do excommunicate themselves. There’s not a church in the land where some of the people in the Communion line don’t have their arms crossed over their breasts.

Most of these are people who have divorced and remarried – but there are plenty of other reasons, too.

that’s somebodies personal opinon.

That’s why I keep asking you what the real problem is. Which Ts aren’t crossed and which Is are not dotted? What specific doctrinal issues do you have with the Church?

When I’m told my Rome get out, then and only then I’ll leave.
Peace to all, Christ died for all of us.
Joe.

No one wants you to leave. We want you to move closer to the Church.

 

[Ender]

I can support some of the teachings. I don’t blindly follow every crossed t and dotted i. My point is my conscience needs to play a role in my relationship with God and my relationship with the church.

This is really what it comes down to: the Church says we must do X and must not do Y and we don’t want to do X and do want to do Y. To some extent we all experience this and there are only two choices: do what we think is right or do what the Church says is right.

The belief that our conscience alone allows us to decide in our favor against the Church is a misunderstanding of what the conscience is and what its limits are. Beyond this, however, is the failure to recognize the full implication of rejecting what the Church teaches, for when we reject a major teaching we also reject the claims the Church makes about herself. (Dei Verbum 10): *"*the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ." You cannot believe this claim if you believe the Church has misinterpreted the word of God in a significant way, but once you reject this claim you reject the Church’s authority to correctly interpret anything.

(Fides et ratio 7): *"*The knowledge which the Church offers to man has its origin not in any speculation of her own, however sublime, but in the word of God which she has received in faith." Again, if you reject what the Church teaches you cannot believe she has received the word of God but that she is making up morality as she goes along - that her morality is man made and not from God.

What is the appeal of being in a Church whose moral laws cannot be trusted either to be right or to endure beyond the tenure of the latest occupant of the Vatican?

Ender