Time for Change

[rstegeman]

I think it’s time that we, as Catholics, start to wake up. Instead of looking outside for the reason our world is in the shape it’s it, let’s look inside. Are we truly doing everything we can to combat liberalism/relativism or are we silent onlookers? I know in my case, I’ve been quiet. When I do voice my concerns, it’s only to those that I know have a sympathetic ear, “preaching to the choir” as it were. And what exactly does that accomplish? Nothing. I know there are many Catholics that do their part, but I’m willing to bet that the vast majority are more like me and we must change that.

No longer can we just lead by example, because secular society is all too willing to overlook us. We must become the squeaky wheel. This will be extremely hard for me, as I know it will be for others, but if we continue to do the same thing we’ve always done, then we will continue to lose to the fight.

 

[Oscarthecat]

I understand what you’re saying, but I don’t think that Catholics, as a whole, have really been doing a good job of “leading by example”-

Judging only by the example of Catholics in this country, it would appear- albeit incorrectly-that the Catholic Church is uncertain about issues like abortion, gay marriage, property rights, divorce, moral relativism, and any number of other issues-

Those of us who are both Catholics and adherents to what the Catholic Church teaches (as if a differentiation between the two should even need to be made) need to start shoring up our own ranks by having the courage to stand up to those dissident Catholics who have spread like cancer throughout the Church.

Once Catholics are able to stand on a united front, then we can start the work of being examples to the rest of society.

 

[JonW]

Those of us who are both Catholics and adherents to what the Catholic Church teaches (as if a differentiation between the two should even need to be made) need to start shoring up our own ranks by having the courage to stand up to those dissident Catholics who have spread like cancer throughout the Church.

Once Catholics are able to stand on a united front, then we can start the work of being examples to the rest of society.

This is the first and harder part of the mission, I think. Our fellow Catholics (cafeteria) are effectively indistinguishable from their secular counterparts at the deepest level of confusion. This is because they take for granted the relativism which is at root the cause of the culture of death. That’s why they get so flustered and angry when we would dare question their “ideals” about killing their children, destroying Christian marriage, and controverting God’s plan for true sexual union. They haven’t thought about it much, but they see that everyone else around them thinks with their feelings and gets quite a bit done that way, and it sure looks good and sounds good, and it’s so much easier and “nicer” to others than taking objective morality seriously, drawing out the implications, obeying God, and fighting the culture of death.

So, this first step will divide, and is dividing, the Church. For faithful Catholics to stand up stronger, more united, and with a louder and more firm voice against our brothers and sisters in the cafeteria, will be very difficult and very ugly. Does anyone have any ideas about how exactly we could work on this first step? Part of the difficulty is that we don’t want to “market” morality to them by making it sound attractive to them, which would mean to present it as it is not. I suppose one of the first things we need to do is simply fight relativism, show how and why it is wrong philosophically. That does need to be palatable to average folks, who might otherwise not be terribly interested in philosophy. Any other ideas?

God Bless

Jon Winterburn

 

[Fitswimmer]

I’ve been gone from here for months-because I was basically told that my opinion on social issues made me not fit to be a Catholic. However, whether I’m still a Catholic or not, I still have a soft spot for American Catholics and wish only the best for them.

I wholeheartedly agree that it is time for American Catholics to change-but not in the way you folks do.

Catholics should live their lives according to their beliefs and values to the absolute best of their ability. No argument there.

However, what American Catholics must realize that the rights of those who are not members of the Catholic church are just as important as the rights of those who are. They must realize that if God influenced the outcome of elections and issues that they agree with, then God influenced the outcome of elections that they did not agree with. If God was behind the banning of gay marriage in CA and FL, then God was also behind the election of the President.

 

[Michael_David]

We are all suppose to lead by example… even if we are not perfect yet. I look at St. Paul’s summary of the many different parts of the Church, and yes, not everyone is given the gift of evangelizing. What does the Shepherd do with his sheep? What IS my part in this as a follower of the Church? What is the Church elect’s part of this? Who does have the right gift to do this? Are we stuck in the ‘do not throw your pearls to the swine…’. Or are we like sheep going to slaughter? Even the landowner said not to pull the weeds, ‘let them grow together… till harvest’… we, with this, are to do as best we can to produce our fruit with the weeds that surround us. It may not be a ‘bumper’ crop, but that is all He asks.

Yes, it may be time for change, but I prefer to call it renewal. There are many ‘prodigal sons and daughters’ that have not so decided to return to their Father yet, and as I recall, it took hitting a bottom of sorts for that change to happen. The Free-Will thing.

I do not think the Good Lord is interested so much in ‘quantity’ as He is with ‘quality’ in His followers… and that challenge has to do with ‘oneself’ more so then the ‘other’. With the quality comes the gifts to produce the fruit, in spite of the weeds.

 

[fix]

They must realize that if God influenced the outcome of elections and issues that they agree with, then God influenced the outcome of elections that they did not agree with. If God was behind the banning of gay marriage in CA and FL, then God was also behind the election of the President.

God’s will is always done. But, He has an ordaining will and a permitting will.

 

[Fitswimmer]

God’s will is always done. But, He has an ordaining will and a permitting will.

Ah, but how do we know which He is using?

Truth is-we don’t. We can surmise based on our interpretation of the Bible and Tradition-but if we think we know, we’re headed for a fall.

 

[fix]

Ah, but how do we know which He is using?

Well, the first test would be is the act in accord with Church teaching or does it contradict it.

Truth is-we don’t. We can surmise based on our interpretation of the Bible and Tradition-but if we think we know, we’re headed for a fall.

No, we have a living magisterium to guide the Church.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Well, the first test would be is the act in accord with Church teaching or does it contradict it.

No, we have a living magisterium to guide the Church.

You believe that following the Church is following God’s will-but you can’t KNOW the will of God. No created being can KNOW the will of God-claiming that one does is placing oneself above their station as created being and claiming God-like power.

 

[fix]

You believe that following the Church is following God’s will-but you can’t KNOW the will of God. No created being can KNOW the will of God-claiming that one does is placing oneself above their station as created being and claiming God-like power.

Do you think God wills sin? Is it ever God’s will to sin? If you violate the ten commandments you sin. That is not God’s will.

 

[edwest2]

To my brothers and sisters in Christ -

Ask God, in prayer, to guide you.

First, live as a Christian. Jesus said, “If you love me keep my commandments.”

For those who can:

Contact your local parish. Talk to your priest about what you can do.

There are societies devoted to the Sacred Heart.

There are Soup Kitchens where you can live out your faith by helping your neighbor.

Listen to Catholic radio. If there is no station in your area. Keep the radio off.

Turn off the TV. Except for news or something special, it is not Godly or edifying to the mind or spirit.

Avoid magazines that promote immorality.

Buy Catholic newspapers and magazines. They will assist you in viewing the world from a Catholic perspective.

Develop whatever God given talents you may have.

God bless,
Ed

 

[bubba451]

Let’s not confuse the Church and its policies and the US government and its policies. They don’t agree. Rights are a matter of the government giving the people an affirmative item the people already possess like life, liberty, free speech, etc.

Gods hand is in everything, even the decisions on abortion. He allows us to sin- to decide what is best with our free will, but will hold us accountable for our action and inaction on the last day. He allowed Saul to be King even after he had sinned.

What was being commented on (I believe) was that AS CATHOLICS we have a responsibility as a matter of faith to act and behave consistently with the teachings of the faith we say we belong to. People say privately what they believe and then really do not involve themselves in the process. However, as a Catholic, failure to do this is to fail the test of being a practical Catholic-one in communion with the Holy See-in agreement with the teachings of the Church.

Here’s a clear statement: If you do not believe WHAT the Church teaches, it makes you, indeed, not a Catholic.

Logically, if we believe what the Church teaches, we will recognize the truth and based on that teaching, begin to conform our lives to those teachings. Alternatively, be something else.
As an adult, being Catholic is a choice, not a social standing or right of birth. Saying I’m a Catholic makes me NOT a Methodist. We cannot continue to say I believe this but not that or pick and choose what parts to accept. In or out- hot or cold. If you are” in”(for the sake of this example), then act like it.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Let’s not confuse the Church and its policies and the US government and its policies. They don’t agree. Rights are a matter of the government giving the people an affirmative item the people already possess like life, liberty, free speech, etc.

Gods hand is in everything, even the decisions on abortion. He allows us to sin- to decide what is best with our free will, but will hold us accountable for our action and inaction on the last day. He allowed Saul to be King even after he had sinned.

What was being commented on (I believe) was that AS CATHOLICS we have a responsibility as a matter of faith to act and behave consistently with the teachings of the faith we say we belong to. People say privately what they believe and then really do not involve themselves in the process. However, as a Catholic, failure to do this is to fail the test of being a practical Catholic-one in communion with the Holy See-in agreement with the teachings of the Church.

Here’s a clear statement: If you do not believe WHAT the Church teaches, it makes you, indeed, not a Catholic.

Logically, if we believe what the Church teaches, we will recognize the truth and based on that teaching, begin to conform our lives to those teachings. Alternatively, be something else.
As an adult, being Catholic is a choice, not a social standing or right of birth. Saying I’m a Catholic makes me NOT a Methodist. We cannot continue to say I believe this but not that or pick and choose what parts to accept. In or out- hot or cold. If you are” in”(for the sake of this example), then act like it.

I agree totally, being Catholic is a choice that means that Catholics should not attempt to force others to “choose” the same beliefs through legislation.

 

[fix]

I agree totally, being Catholic is a choice that means that Catholics should not attempt to force others to “choose” the same beliefs through legislation.

How does one legislate another to believe anything? You cannot make people believe. What can be done is control conduct to some extent.

There is no reason anyone should be allowed to do certain things.

 

[rstegeman]

I agree with a lot of the comments made. We do need to clean up the division in our own Church (cafeteria vs. devoted) and we do need to improve our own lives and grow within the faith. The first part is part of the same spiritual battle that I originally was referring to. We are in a battle against secularism/relativism and it has most definitely invaded our Church.

What I was trying to say is that we are losing that battle right now and as such, we need to change our approach in combating it. And it does start at the self, we must be able to reject the temptations of the secular world. The Lord knows that this is very difficult for me. Once we can live the right way, then we can begin to truly fight with conviction. Maybe once they all see that we actually practice that which preach, they will be more inclined to listen…to change themselves.

This is basically an open letter from me to me. It’s a challenge to myself to live in more accordance with His will. It’s a realization that complaining about the rapid moral decline of our civilization does nothing, especially if complaining to like minded individuals. It’s going to take much more. It’s the prayer that I might finally gather the strength to do what I need…and possibly others as well.

 

[Fitswimmer]

How does one legislate another to believe anything? You cannot make people believe. What can be done is control conduct to some extent.

There is no reason anyone should be allowed to do certain things.

I’m all for controlling conduct that is harmful to others. Things like murder, rape, theft…these are things that transcend the teachings of any particular faith and can be viewed by any reasonable person as dangerous to a well-functioning society. However, I believe that any law which has any religious teaching as it’s only basis is wrong. If you would not want to be forced by legislation to live by the teachings of any faith other than your own, I would think you would want the same.

 

[fix]

I’m all for controlling conduct that is harmful to others. Things like murder, rape, theft…these are things that transcend the teachings of any particular faith and can be viewed by any reasonable person as dangerous to a well-functioning society. However, I believe that any law which has any religious teaching as it’s only basis is wrong. If you would not want to be forced by legislation to live by the teachings of any faith other than your own, I would think you would want the same.

Well, your idea of only a religious basis may be very peculiar. We know the examples…homosexual unions, abortion, and all the rest. They are not sectarian matters but matters of natural law that all know, even when they try to destroy that knowledge in themselves.

1958 The natural law is *immutable *and permanent throughout the variations of history;10 it subsists under the flux of ideas and customs and supports their progress. The rules that express it remain substantially valid. Even when it is rejected in its very principles, it cannot be destroyed or removed from the heart of man. It always rises again in the life of individuals and societies:

I am thinking particularly about this election.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Well, your idea of only a religious basis may be very peculiar. We know the examples…homosexual unions, abortion, and all the rest. They are not sectarian matters but matters of natural law that all know, even when they try to destroy that knowledge in themselves.

1958 The natural law is *immutable *and permanent throughout the variations of history;10 it subsists under the flux of ideas and customs and supports their progress. The rules that express it remain substantially valid. Even when it is rejected in its very principles, it cannot be destroyed or removed from the heart of man. It always rises again in the life of individuals and societies:

Abortion and homosexual unions are VERY different. Homosexual unions refer to 2 consenting adults. Abortion is the taking of a life and there is an innocent victim.

 

[fix]

Abortion and homosexual unions are VERY different. Homosexual unions refer to 2 consenting adults. Abortion is the taking of a life and there is an innocent victim.

Both are gravely immoral and both harm society.

 

[Fitswimmer]

Both are gravely immoral and both harm society.

How does the union of two consenting adults, from a segment of society that is less than 10% of the total population harm society as a whole?