Should liberals leave the catholic church?

[Walt_Oliver]

The use of ill defined labels such as “liberal”, “conservative” and “moderate” in this thread is creating problems. Please be a little more descriptive so that you can quit discussing definitions and get back to the original topic (which unfortunately includes one of those labels). If you can’t reach a common ground for discussion, the thread will have to be closed. Thanks for your cooperation.

Walt

 

[Ahimsa]

Troy7:

See? Its all about trying to fit people into boxes. You types want everything simplified to the point of Sean Hannity bumper sticker bullet points.

“You types”? Huh? What type am I?

By “type”, do you mean my astrological sign? (I’m scorpio.) My Myers-Briggs? (I’m INTP.) My enneagram? (I’m a 5.)

 

[Penny_Plain]

Reinventing Liberal Catholicism

Good Lord.

Did you read this article before you posted the link? I’ll quote:

But I would argue that insofar as we can humanly tell, liberal Catholicism is essential to the flourishing of that church in the United States and, I believe, in the rest of the world. I don’t deny the need for currents in the church that emphasize preservation and the risks of change or currents of either right or left that call for prophetic confrontation and sectarian witness. But if the church is to remain a healthy organism it needs the self-criticism, open inquiry, and spirit of dialogue that liberal Catholicism has provided.
http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/img_pack/puce.gif The world-historical change in control of fertility and in the relations between men and women and in the meaning of both sexuality and the inherited language and imagery of religion.

http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/img_pack/puce.gif The extension of scientific knowledge and technological control over genes and the mind. Entirely new relations between world religions.

http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/img_pack/puce.gif The modern quantum leap in historical consciousness and cultural pluralism.

http://www.commonwealmagazine.org/img_pack/puce.gif A worldwide revolution of individual freedom and democracy.

Will Catholic Christianity persuade the world that the key to making these developments serve life rather than death is the Paschal Mystery of Jesus Christ and the sacramental life of the Spirit lived in the community of his disciples? Not from behind barred gates or armed ramparts. Not from a stance that refuses to acknowledge change, that tries to evade historical consciousness, that pits itself against pluralism, freedom, and democracy. If, once again, there is no liberal Catholicism, due to hierarchical repression, internal disintegration, or the combination of both, we will undoubtedly, as so often before and at such a high price, reinvent it.

That’s some good stuff, and maybe we’re not as far apart as I thought.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[frommi]

vern humphrey:

The essential feature of the Magisterium is that it is infallible. When one disagrees with that, one rejects the Magisterium.

Wrong Vern…the essential feature is that the Pope can excercise infallibility along with the college of Bishops because of the uniqueness of this gift given to the church.

Everything taught by the magisterium is not infallible. We’ve been over this. Several times. The Pope has to make something infallible. You have to separate the gift of infallibility from the person exercising it.

This is the infallibility which the Roman Pontiff, the head of the college of bishops, enjoys* in virtue of his office*, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (cf. Lk 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals.

 

[buffalo]

Penny Plain:

Good Lord.

Did you read this article before you posted the link? .

Yup!

 

[vern_humphrey]

frommi:

Wrong Vern…the essential feature is that the Pope can excercise infallibility along with the college of Bishops because of the uniqueness of this gift given to the church.

Everything taught by the magisterium is not infallible. We’ve been over this. Several times. The Pope has to make something infallible. You have to separate the gift of infallibility from the person exercising it.

This is the infallibility which the Roman Pontiff, the head of the college of bishops, enjoys* in virtue of his office*, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (cf. Lk 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals.

Wrong – or rather a mis-interpretation. The Magisterium is not a thing, it is the teaching authority of the Church. The Church cannot teach error.

Now, not all teachings are de fide, since the Church allows dissent in many areas (I already gave the example of war and the death penalty.)

 

[frommi]

vern humphrey:

Wrong – or rather a mis-interpretation. The Magisterium is not a thing, it is the teaching authority of the Church. The Church cannot teach error.

Now, not all teachings are de fide, since the Church allows dissent in many areas (I already gave the example of war and the death penalty.)

Wait a second…so under you image of the Catholic church…you can’t go against the magisterium…unless your told its ok?

What exactly was the church teaching when the said Gaillelo was a heretic? What was the church teaching prior to Vatican II when we had Jews equated with Christ killers in many cases?

I think those might be considered errors.

 

[fix]

frommi:

Wrong Vern…the essential feature is that the Pope can excercise infallibility along with the college of Bishops because of the uniqueness of this gift given to the church.

Everything taught by the magisterium is not infallible. We’ve been over this. Several times. The Pope has to make something infallible. You have to separate the gift of infallibility from the person exercising it.

This is the infallibility which the Roman Pontiff, the head of the college of bishops, enjoys* in virtue of his office*, when, as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (cf. Lk 22:32), he proclaims by a definitive act some doctrine of faith or morals.

Perhaps we need to define things properly?

85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."47 This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a “supernatural sense of faith” the People of God, under the guidance of the Church’s living Magisterium, "unfailingly adheres to this faith."417

890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. The exercise of this charism takes several forms:

 

[Troy7]

Liberal Catholicism and Conservative Catholicism by themselves serve nobody. They both contain elements of truth. But until they mingle together and create a MODERATE Catholicism then we arent going to be anywhere approaching perfection and oneness.

Good find on that article Penny!

When Captain Kirk was split in 2, he realized he couldnt survive, cause his “good” nature was too wishy washy and couldnt take a stand on anything; while his “bad” nature was too self indulgent…they needed BOTH to make a whole. I am catholic, I am a moderate in my orthodoxy and people are just going to have to accept that we are in great numbers and make up the church…yes…EVEN after reading all the documents. Can one expect less when even Bishops and Priests cannot cede on all points? Some are bad, some are good and most are in the middle.

And this doesnt in any way align me (as much the Orthodox want to pigeon hole us) into siding with gay marriage, abortion, etc. for me some are black and white while there are layers to be found within which are certainly grey. And in those grey areas God exists maybe even more in those areas of black and white, this or that, orthodox or unorthodox, rejector or disagreer…etc. Sorry, cant fit God into those neat little boxes, columns etc. For many things yes we can…but for many more, no way no how

 

[fix]

Troy7:

I am a moderate in my orthodoxy and people are just going to have to accept that we are in great numbers and make up the church…

Perhaps you can explain what you mean by that? How can one be moderate to fidelity to truth? Do you mean that we each cannot trust the Church as the authentic authority in matters of faith and morals?

 

[rlg94086]

It was a joke…in response to Ahimsa’s joke. Sorry if you took offense.

Troy7:

As a moderate I find this offensive and an attack on not only my charactor but ohers as well assuming based on their political beliefs how they will respond to a crime and someone in need.

How much longer are the moderators going to allow this coded hate to continue?

 

[JSmitty2005]

You’re either a faithful Catholic or you’re not. There’s no such thing as a Spectrum of Catholicism.

 

[fix]

JSmitty2005:

You’re either a faithful Catholic or you’re not. There’s no such thing as a Spectrum of Catholicism.

Thanks that was great:

…They assume-and insist everyone else assume-that with regard to what authentic Catholicism is, there is and must be a wide spectrum of opinions. Within that spectrum there will be many disagreements and even contradictions. But everyone who makes any claim to being Catholic has a right to the inclusion of his or her opinions on the spectrum. Catholics, they say, simply have to learn to respect one another’s opinions…

“Whoever denies these truths would be in a position of rejecting a truth of Catholic doctrine and would therefore no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church” (section 6; italics in the St. Paul edition of this commentary).

Why does rejection of one of the Church’s official teachings cut off one’s communion with the Catholic Church?..
catholic.com/thisrock/2001/0105fea1.asp

 

[rlg94086]

frommi:

Wait a second…so under you image of the Catholic church…you can’t go against the magisterium…unless your told its ok?

What exactly was the church teaching when the said Gaillelo was a heretic? What was the church teaching prior to Vatican II when we had Jews equated with Christ killers in many cases?

I think those might be considered errors.

frommi,

There is a great Q&A that I posted from This Rock concerning this issue on post #277: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1394533&postcount=277

God bless,

Robert

 

[rlg94086]

Troy7:

When Captain Kirk was split in 2, he realized he couldnt survive, cause his “good” nature was too wishy washy and couldnt take a stand on anything; while his “bad” nature was too self indulgent…they needed BOTH to make a whole. I am catholic, I am a moderate in my orthodoxy and people are just going to have to accept that we are in great numbers and make up the church…yes…EVEN after reading all the documents. Can one expect less when even Bishops and Priests cannot cede on all points? Some are bad, some are good and most are in the middle.

And this doesnt in any way align me (as much the Orthodox want to pigeon hole us) into siding with gay marriage, abortion, etc. for me some are black and white while there are layers to be found within which are certainly grey. And in those grey areas God exists maybe even more in those areas of black and white, this or that, orthodox or unorthodox, rejector or disagreer…etc. Sorry, cant fit God into those neat little boxes, columns etc. For many things yes we can…but for many more, no way no how

Troy7,

I think the Captain Kirk scenario describes Taoism more than Catholicism, but it was a good episode.

I bolded one statement you made that I agree with. There are items in the Church which are black and white - dogma or infallible doctrine, if you will. The grey areas are the areas where good Catholics can disagree, debate, etc.

I don’t agree that God is found in the grey areas, anymore than I believe that God is found in dogma. The teaching of the Church defines our relationship with God, more than defining God Himself.

Really, it comes down to what you believe the Church’s role is and what you believe your role is. If you believe everyone should be able to determine for themselves the proper way to follow Jesus, than there really is no need for a Catholic Church.

God bless,

Robert

 

[mike182d]

Troy7:

Liberal Catholicism and Conservative Catholicism by themselves serve nobody. They both contain elements of truth. But until they mingle together and create a MODERATE Catholicism then we arent going to be anywhere approaching perfection and oneness.

The foundation of conservative Catholicism: The Pope is the Pope
The foundation of liberal Catholicism: I am the Pope.

Apples and oranges, my friend. Apples and oranges.

 

[mikew262]

Penny Plain:

One can still believe without proof. And one can feel them to be true, without proof. But one can’t prove them (or disprove them).

I believe they call that “Faith”. “Blessed are they who have not seen, but believe”.

 

[rlg94086]

mikew262:

I believe they call that “Faith”. “Blessed are they who have not seen, but believe”.

Yes. But, once you have faith that something is true, you can build on that. That’s what developed doctrine is all about. It goes something like this:

I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and earth;
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son Our Lord,
Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended into Hell; the third day He rose again from the dead;
He ascended into Heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and life everlasting.
Amen.

Okay. Based on that…Since you believe in the holy Catholic Church, then you understand that infallible doctrine, the Bible, etc. flow from the Church.

 

[mikew262]

rlg94086:

What in my posts leads you to call me Torquemada?

What is a Torquemada?

 

[mikew262]

rlg94086:

And a moderate is the one standing there watching the mugging without doing a thing to help the victim because he’s not sure who the victim is - the person with money being mugged or the poor individual who has no choice but to mug him.

A “moderate” is a person who thinks for himself/herself, and makes a decision based on the issue at hand, not on whether they adhere to a liberal or a conservative agenda.