Splitting the Roman Catholic Church

[Peter_J]

You won’t agree with this, but while she is pregnant, until that baby can be placed into someone else’s body, it’s pretty much hers too.

What do you mean by “hers”?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

I believe I am one of the two who have been critical of the Episcopal Church. I am a he who is middle aged and lives in your state. I’ve been critical of The Episcopal Church just as I’ve been critical of the Roman Catholic Church and other mainstream churches. I know I am not on topic to discuss this here but want to set the record straight. Being a dues paying former Episcopalian for 28 years gives me the right to criticize to call the church on bad behavior and heretical thinking. I try not to attack the person. If I have attacked you, I apologize. The institution is another matter, and we as laity have an obligation to do so when it errs.

I was also baptized as a Roman Catholic along with scads of others who no longer practice the faith but I am open minded enough to know with God’s Grace and the Holy Spirit anything is possible in our lifetime.

This is a Catholic site and I feel privileged to post here. We all have strong opinions and sometimes we are lacking in humility when we post. Maybe the moderators need to step in more often than they do. We can also continue this discussion under “non-Catholic religions”.

I must be the other “culprit” that has a supposed personal hatred of Episcopalians. Absurd. SpiritMeadow comes on CAF and accuses everyone of intolerance, hatred, bigotry, and being neanderthals spiritually and then gets all huffy when some Catholics shoot back and don’t stand for it. I feel the same way that you do. While you were an Episcopalian FAR longer than I was, I experienced the contradictions, absurdities, and at a national level, full-on heresies and baffling slaps in the face of 2,000 years of orthodoxy. And one need not be Episcopalian to know of the insanity that goes on with that ecclesiastical community at a national level–ordinations of adultering gay ‘bishops,’ Buddhists being ordained, indaba meetings (hilarious), carbon footprint stations of the cross, thanking God for abortions (recently) in sermons, you name it.

Spirit might be right. I do dislike, detest actually, all that the Episcopal Church stands for. I loathe any mockery of Christ, the Scriptures, and moral decency. But when she says I hate Episcopalians personally, that’s a different matter and that’s obviously silly as heck.

Some of us read the Scriptures and the Fathers and learn the true lesson of what it means to be a Christian–obedience. Obedience is our lot, our destiny, not rationalizing sins and perverting the ecclesiology and theology for our own selfish purposes. Some folks would disagree. That’s fine. Every day an Episcopalian leaves that denomination, God be praised!

 

[GodIsGracious]

I couldn’t let that pass. Right now the legislation is supporting abortion of babies who are perfectly capable of living outside their mother’s body, but they still kill it before it gets delivered (partial birth abortion). How do you support that? It meets all of your criteria so that it can live without it’s mother’s body but you are still saying they can kill it with the current abortion laws.

With current technology any fetus over 22 weeks can theoretically survive outside it’s mother’s body. Logically that means that all abortions after 21 weeks are murder because it is not the woman’s body any more that is in question, but the baby’s.

Do you agree with that?

Actually, I did not say that at all.

If the baby can survive outside of the mother’s body, and she wishes to terminate the pregnancy, an interesting idea would be to have her “deliver” the baby but she terminates all parental rights to the child since she would be going in to terminate her pregnancy.

BTW, people, no one is going to convince me otherwise to not vote pro-choice. I’ve heard pretty much all of the arguments. I will continue, all things being equal, vote pro-choice.

 

[GodIsGracious]

What do you mean by “hers”?

The baby’s body is hers too.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Whoa, hold on a sec … just how old do you think I am?!

When the sexual abuse scandals came to light, the Church took steps against the same happening in the future. (That’s not really a great example, though. A Catholic who doesn’t believe what the Church believes but continues coming to a Catholic church every week – rather than going off and joining a denomination that agrees with his/her views – is a whole lot different from a Catholic priest abusing children.)

In what sense ? Abusers are less objectionable ? A priestly predator can at least administer the sacraments; so it might conceivably be argued that such men are more tolerable than someone who is not an abuser, but is not orthodox either. I’m trying to work out what your meaning is, that’s all. ​

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Marsha, do you see any other Christian denominations who are “pure” in the sense that you are advocating? Or do you see Rome as leading the way in that? Demanding a standard of belief that everyone is required to adhere to? Would it involve removing from the Church those who do not attend Mass regularly? Or some kind of oath? How would you determine who is faithful and who is to be put out?

Some people seem to want a Church of three members - “I, myself, and me”. When it comes down to it, only those three can be relied upon to be doctrinally pure. Anyone else might (for all anyone knows) be a deviationist of some kind. This however would mean sacrificing the universality of the Church in favour of something like a sectarian solution. ​

The problem with wanting a schism - apart from the detail that it amounts to wanting people to commit a mortal sin; & that amounts to wanting people to do something that will damn them; which does not seem terribly charitable - is that those who don’t leave, can’t guarantee that they will not themselves be found wanting by yet others who have not left. If the CC were a political party, there might be some sort of sense
in such suggestions; but it is not.

There seems to be an unresolved - & unresolvable ? - tension between two ideas about the CC:

• It is necessary for salvation, so people should join it
• Orthodoxy is important for being Catholic, so the unorthodox should get out & become something else

 

[Peter_J]

In what sense ?​

Different in what sense? I didn’t really have a particular “sense” in mind, but how about this: one of them abused children, one of them did not abuse children.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Shooting off on a tangent, I note that your first paraphrase is likely of the Chesterton “quote” that usually is given as something like “When a man stops believing in God, he doesn’t believe in nothing, he’ll believe in anything”.

It was for a long time the Holy Grail of Chesterton quotes, in that it was often cited, and never sourced. In fact, it is impossible to do so, though, like a number of Chesterton fans, I think the origin lies in a mistaken reference to words found in Emile Cammaert’s book on Chesterton, THE LAUGHING PROPHET.

The second quote is, I believe, Oscar Wilde’s.

I now return you to your thread.

GKC

In that case, it is like “Beam me up, Scotty” & “Elementary, my dear Watson” - two other quotations that “everybody knows”, even though they don’t exist in the source material. Or so it is said by those in a position to know. ​

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Different in what sense? I didn’t really have a particular “sense” in mind, but how about this: one of them abused children, one of them did not abuse children.

I was trying to work out how they were different. Given the subject of the thread, it seemed possible that unorthodox laity might be regarded as more repellent than clerical predators. I may be over-interpreting your post, & seeing ambiguity where it is absent. That was all.​

 

[elts1956]

The “crack down” would have to begin with some of the priests!

Let’s start even higher, Cardinals, Archbishops, Bishops. Those who talk out of both sides of their mouths at the same time they are talking in the middle.

 

[GKC]

In that case, it is like “Beam me up, Scotty” & “Elementary, my dear Watson” - two other quotations that “everybody knows”, even though they don’t exist in the source material. Or so it is said by those in a position to know. ​

True.

Play it again, Sam.

GKC

 

[elts1956]

The “crack down” would have to begin with some of the priests!

Oh the contrary Kalt. I included the vote for Obama strictly on the issue of abortion rights. The RCC has been the leader in open borders as far as I can see. At least where I live they have been in the forefront of protecting migrants historically and today. Much to the chagrin of some conservative members.

No I agree, the CC doesn’t tell its members how to vote. They leave that to CAF! (just a joke!) But technically, no church is allowed to tell its members how to vote. It is against the tax code.

kalt I understand you continue to think I know nothing about the RCC but I was a member for a long time, and was quite active as well as well trained. Your assumtions are mostly wrong here. The RCC socially is much more liberal I believe than many of her conservative minority will admit or agree to.

To be accurate, you should say “many” members of the RCC are more liberal… The RCC theologicaly remains constant.

I don’t understand what you mean when you say the RCC 'socially" is much more liberal.
Please explain the difference as you see it, between socially liberal and theologically liberal.

I am quite aware that there are many who call themselves Catholic who are more theologically liberal than many Conservative Catholics are aware of.

 

[elts1956]

I tend to agree with you. I’ve never thought the church in dire trouble. But this forum does make one feel like the sky is about to fall any moment. I have read a couple things on Catholic sites linking to Vatican sources that suggest they are quite worried about the increasing right wing rhetoric coming out of some of the Catholics in this country.

But I tend to agree that when you are in the parishes you see basically happy people. I guess that seems the problem for the right wing of the Church. They are in an uproar yet the majority of Catholics seem profoundly satisfied and peaceful with the church. At least so say those Catholics I talk with who don’t frequent forums and are just basic average Catholics. Those satisfied and peaceful church goers, are, for the most part blissfully ignorant of what they believe and what is happening in the world.Thanks for your imput.

 

[elts1956]

I tend to agree with you. I’ve never thought the church in dire trouble. But this forum does make one feel like the sky is about to fall any moment. I have read a couple things on Catholic sites linking to Vatican sources that suggest they are quite worried about the increasing right wing rhetoric coming out of some of the Catholics in this country.

But I tend to agree that when you are in the parishes you see basically happy people. I guess that seems the problem for the right wing of the Church. They are in an uproar yet the majority of Catholics seem profoundly satisfied and peaceful with the church.

At least so say those Catholics I talk with who don’t frequent forums and are just basic average Catholics.

Thanks for your imput.

Since God i Gracious has been unable to find the reference she had seen elsewhere to the Vatican’s reaction, I looked up a couple of things I had: I don’t assume validity to these, only that I read them on Catholic sites:

vox-nova.com/2009/05/05/the-american-problem/

nytimes.com/2009/05/09/us/09beliefs.html?_r=2&ref=todayspaper

americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=11636

These articles sparked my questions and I was interested in what Catholics here thought. Most all of you have responded with serious and thoughtful answers. But I cannot let it go that there is an undercurrent by some that this is some how made up. Thus the above “sources”. I’d be interested on your take of course, since you are closer to this issue than I am certainly.

The difficulties with the Anglican/Episcopal church are often stated here. Our solutions, given over very different heirarchy, will have to be different as well. But hopefully we can both learn from our ongoing struggles among ourselves to worship together while disagreeing on a lot of fundamental issues.

I remain seriously interested in your respective thoughts.

Have you tried the “Catholic” sites, such as Life Site News, or Priests for Life?

 

[Peter_J]

In that case, it is like “Beam me up, Scotty” & “Elementary, my dear Watson” - two other quotations that “everybody knows”, even though they don’t exist in the source material. Or so it is said by those in a position to know. ​

Interesting. I seen a lot of Star Trek and also read a lot of Doyle’s short stories, but I’m embarrassed to say that I never realized that those two quotes aren’t real quotes.

I’m pretty sure I at least remember a crew member saying “Scotty, beam me up.”

I wonder if “Elementary, my dear Watson” originated from the old radio programs? Or maybe the old films, for that matter?

 

[elts1956]

I guess the next question is how do you think the Vatican views all this?

I visit a number of Catholic sites and monitor some news sources. I am reading that some Vatican sources are “concerned” at the right wing of the American church and it’s over emphasis on only one issue, abortion, its increasing vilification of Obama, which they (the Vatican) believes is a moderate and man they can at least work with, and the increasing adherence to one political party that is being exhibited by some few bishops and members. I’m reading that they were thinking the Notre Dame thing was way over the top from their prospective.

Some here seem to suggest that the Church will crack down on dissidents as they call them. Others, what?

Do you hear these things about the Vatican’s concerns? Is the American Catholic right more right than the Pope and the Vatican?

I’m trying to understand the balance here.

We hear “more Catholic than the Pope” when we get into discussions regarding theology, Tradition/tradition, etc. The liberals just don’t understand where we are coming from. It is mostly “Huh”. I have not seen ANY article claiming that 1. Conservative Catholics are dissidents 2. That the Vatican is going to “crack down” on them. You must have read the articles in a Liberal Catholic paper or on a website such as Catholics United. Please give sources.

It would be quite interesting for the Vatican to crack down on the Catholics who realize the evil of abortion since in at least one encyclical I have read,
the Pope, (Pope John Paul II) says abortion is the most important issue of our time.

Evangelium Vitae Pope John Paul II.

 

[elts1956]

I guess the next question is how do you think the Vatican views all this?

I visit a number of Catholic sites and monitor some news sources. I am reading that some Vatican sources are “concerned” at the right wing of the American church and it’s over emphasis on only one issue, abortion, its increasing vilification of Obama, which they (the Vatican) believes is a moderate and man they can at least work with, and the increasing adherence to one political party that is being exhibited by some few bishops and members. I’m reading that they were thinking the Notre Dame thing was way over the top from their prospective.

Some here seem to suggest that the Church will crack down on dissidents as they call them. Others, what?

Do you hear these things about the Vatican’s concerns? Is the American Catholic right more right than the Pope and the Vatican?

I’m trying to understand the balance here.

Please do not attribute to me things others have said. I would not characterize Catholics in the same way others do. As one example, I do not characterize “Christmas/Easter” Catholics (and I’m not even sure who they are or how many, or who knows how often they really go to Mass) as not “real” Catholics. Nor do I have any idea what you mean by “the people who aren’t really Catholic but think they are”.

I think a great number of Catholics go through periods of more orthodoxy or less; more devotion or less; more faithfulness or less. People have changes in their lives.

I don’t know how much time Obama spends thinking about anthing at all, and neither does anyone else, except perhaps his wife. There are those who even think of him as a figurehead or puppet for others; who gives a pretty speech and is then put back in the box. I couldn’t say about that. However, I do note that he has appointed a substantial number of Catholics to posts of consequence, and every single one of them is an active abortion supporter, with perhaps two exceptions. And those two exceptions appear, by history and political activity, to be people who consider abortion on a par with all other typically Democrat issues, such as healthcare, welfare, etc.

The appointment of Daschle to preside over abortion funding, then the appointment of Sebelius when Daschle flamed, is highly suggestive. Maybe Obama didn’t spend 1/2 a second crafting his “seamless garment” Notre Dame speech, but someone sure did.

But, as I said, Obama (and one may include his “handlers” if that what he has) is unlikely to appoint anyone to anything other than people who supported him. That automatically excludes Catholics who are faithful to the Magesterium of the Church as regards abortion…at least at this point in their lives.

I think we are going to have to come up with different descriptions other than right wing and left wing as people instantly associate those terms with Politics when what we believe has nothing to do with Politics, but are the fundamentals of our Catholic Faith. Maybe true Catholics and false Catholics? Bring on the Inquisition? Seriously, I am tired of being associated with politics. How about you?

One’s faith should support their politics, not v.v. Politics will fade, the truth of the Catholic Church will not.

 

[elts1956]

I think we know which side you are on! LOL…Thanks for all the information.

Is this why you are here SM? To see which “side” we Catholics fall on? To see how “split” we are? To see you were right to leave the Catholic Church for a more liberal one which endorses your views?

 

[elts1956]

I think we know which side you are on! LOL…Thanks for all the information.

Like I stated above, I doubt that any such thing will happen, but I did come across this article.

Also here…

I don’t know where all of this is heading. It’s quite obvious there is some kind of disconnect between the traditional Catholic church and the bulk of the modern American laity (and some priests) but all this talk about schism looks to be more geared toward selling articles with sensationalism.

catholica.com.au/breakingnews/025_bn_231108.php

The major Catholic Church reform organisations in the United States are in the process of organising a large scale, joint meeting in 2011 tentatively titled an “American Catholic Council”. Catholica is aware discussions have been underway between leaders of the largest reform organisations such as Call to Action (CtA), Voice of the Faithful (VoTF), and the Association for the Rights of Catholics in the Church (ARCC) and leaders of a number of other major lay organisations have also been involved in the discussions and are at various stages of consulting their wider memberships. Combined these organisations have tens of thousands of members. The scale of this initiative is of particular interest as it could well be the largest lay-generated reform initiative that has ever occurred anywhere in the world. The development might suggest that the continued attrition in Church membership is now cutting into sectors of the population who are no longer prepare to leave the Church without voicing their criticisms of where the ecclesial leaders have been taking Catholicism.

freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218844/posts

Of the links given by you, the first, the article by CATHOLICAS is clearly one of the dissident majoritys support. Clue: Fist sentence.

The rest of the organizations, also in red, are also dissident Catholic sites, Call to Action being one who misinformed voting Catholics that it would be ok to vote for bo in spite of Church teaching. They voted according to their own will, not the will of the Church and its teachings.

 

[elts1956]

I think we know which side you are on! LOL…Thanks for all the information.

Like I stated above, I doubt that any such thing will happen, but I did come across this article.

Also here…

I don’t know where all of this is heading. It’s quite obvious there is some kind of disconnect between the traditional Catholic church and the bulk of the modern American laity (and some priests) but all this talk about schism looks to be more geared toward selling articles with sensationalism.

catholica.com.au/breakingnews/025_bn_231108.php

The major Catholic Church reform organisations in the United States are in the process of organising a large scale, joint meeting in 2011 tentatively titled an “American Catholic Council”. Catholica is aware discussions have been underway between leaders of the largest reform organisations such as Call to Action (CtA), Voice of the Faithful (VoTF), and the Association for the Rights of Catholics in the Church (ARCC) and leaders of a number of other major lay organisations have also been involved in the discussions and are at various stages of consulting their wider memberships. Combined these organisations have tens of thousands of members. The scale of this initiative is of particular interest as it could well be the largest lay-generated reform initiative that has ever occurred anywhere in the world. The development might suggest that the continued attrition in Church membership is now cutting into sectors of the population who are no longer prepare to leave the Church without voicing their criticisms of where the ecclesial leaders have been taking Catholicism.

freerepublic.com/focus/news/2218844/posts

Of the links given by you, the first, the article by CATHOLICAS is clearly one of the dissident majoritys support. Clue: Fist sentence.

The rest of the organizations, also in red, are also dissident Catholic sites, Call to Action being one who misinformed voting Catholics that it would be ok to vote for bo in spite of Church teaching. They voted according to their own will, not the will of the Church and its teachings. The fact that Catholica has as it’s heading “keep the faith, change the church” should give a hint too.

Also they are addressing an American Catholic Council No such thing. They are splitting themselves. The little old Church that sits in the Vatican is all we need.