Why are these Fora so overwhelming Conservative

[Jimmygill88]

If I were a person seeking for religious truth I think in general I would be put off the Catholic religion by some of these fora. Many of them are over concerned with externals and sacramentals. Many of them (particularly the threads regarding creationism and Jose Escriba and snake handling) are astonishingly undereducated. And others display an a almost uniform demand that the Church is viewed through an arch conservative lens.

 

[Rolltide]

It’s fairly simple really. The highly devout are highly likely to be very conservative, and the highly devout are most likely to be regular visitors to a forum about Catholicism. Those who are less devout would be less likely to visit a board like this, and those who interpret the rules of the church more liberally are apt to be less concerned with official church teachings anyway.

 

[St_Francis]

I think the problem is that when you have a very Catholic-thinking Catholic, the US conservatives look at him as too liberal, and the liberals look at him as too conservative.

The reality is that there are Catholics, and there are those who are hopefully struggling to become more Catholic. But those who are a still on the way are often in a place where they see the problems of US liberalism: the advocacy and acceptance of sinful behavior, the disastrous and controlling ways of “helping” the poor, but they do not yet see the problems of serious conservatism: the rampant individualism which allows for the sins which are the precursors of abortion and same-sex “marriage,” and the desire on a social level to rectify the errors of helping the poor as instituted by the liberals by a social abandonment of those in need.

Those farther along on the path helped me to see the errors of conservatism and now I am embarking on a new stage, you might say. But it’s a totally different territory, and some of it does look conservative, and some of us are forced to vote conservative for lack of a better alternative.

But probably the hardest part of all this is that Wentern political thinking these days is based on the so-called Enlightenment, a coalition of materialist, often anti-Catholic philosophies, and the jump is a big one.

 

[JRKH]

If I were a person seeking for religious truth I think in general I would be put off the Catholic religion by some of these fora.

You may be right…But then a person who is seeking religious truth is likely to visit many different forums and will gather a lot of different viewpoints…That is simply a part of the journey

Many of them are over concerned with externals and sacramentals.

And many here are genuinely knowledgeable in Church teaching and more than will into gently and lovingly impart that knowledge along with many references for further reading.

Many of them (particularly the threads regarding creationism and Jose Escriba and snake handling) are astonishingly undereducated.

Well - I hope that you will do your best to educate those who can use it - also with charity and references for further reading.

And others display an a almost uniform demand that the Church is viewed through an arch conservative lens.

Not even sure what this means……
Conservatism is really not a word that applies to Catholicism…one is either orthodox or heterodox.
Do you perhaps it mean that many people here are loyal to the teachings of the magisterium and therefore teach others that if one is Catholic that they too should be loyal to these teachings?

Peace
James

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

If I were a person seeking for religious truth I think in general I would be put off the Catholic religion by some of these fora. Many of them are over concerned with externals and sacramentals. Many of them (particularly the threads regarding creationism and Jose Escriba and snake handling) are astonishingly undereducated. And others display an a almost uniform demand that the Church is viewed through an arch conservative lens.

This is the Internet. This is not the Catholic Church. You’re reading thoughts and opinions expressed by anonymous Internet strangers, not official Church teachings or anything even approaching that. As with any information you get from anonymous sources, take everything you read here with a massive grain of salt.

Luna

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

If I were a person seeking for religious truth I think in general I would be put off the Catholic religion by some of these fora. Many of them are over concerned with externals and sacramentals. Many of them (particularly the threads regarding creationism and Jose Escriba and snake handling) are astonishingly undereducated. And others display an a almost uniform demand that the Church is viewed through an arch conservative lens.

Arch-conservative? I wish.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

If I were a person seeking for religious truth I think in general I would be put off the Catholic religion by some of these fora. Many of them are over concerned with externals and sacramentals. Many of them (particularly the threads regarding creationism and Jose Escriba and snake handling) are astonishingly undereducated. And others display an a almost uniform demand that the Church is viewed through an arch conservative lens.

This website is run by apologists. Apologists seem to be more of the “Peter” and “James” types. Tradition, dotting i’s and crossing t’s, vehemently holding one’s intellectual position. Others, like me, see ourselves more as “Paul” or “John” type. We want to know, where is the love? Why are our leaders hypocrites? We talk more about the Holy Spirit – not a good topic for the Peter and James type because they like traditional rules and the Holy Spirit implies there is guidance beyond what is written and what we can humanly extrapolate from it.

Also I notice a great deal of emphasis on sins of the flesh. I have ideas about why, but so does everyone else I suspect.

That said, over my years on the forum it seems we have had increasing numbers of people posting about mysticism and touchy-feely stuff than before. About the allegorical and deeper levels of scripture and not just the same old arguments about literal meanings. My CAF experience, anyway, seems like it’is evolving in a positive direction. The biggest thing that has helped me lose my anxiety for CAF is to convince myself I neither have to be seen as right, nor do I have convince anyone else they are wrong. I can try to do it, but no longer do I feel the aching compulsion of trying to fix everyone and everything.

This is the Internet. This is not the Catholic Church. You’re reading thoughts and opinions expressed by anonymous Internet strangers, not official Church teachings or anything even approaching that. As with any information you get from anonymous sources, take everything you read here with a massive grain of salt.

Luna

While that’s true, the opposite is also very true. I see discussions on things that people who never talk about in person. For example, sins of the flesh. People who try to be “good Catholics” get precious little information through other means, about what is or isn’t permitted in a marital bedroom. (Which I personally think is and overrated discussion.) Or in a non-marital situation for that matter. And any friends they’d even possibly be able to open up to, are just a ill-informed. Or other personal issues not related to sex such as family issues that result in all sorts of problems and divides. We hear confessions of one family member holding grudges against other family members, even though the families themselves know nothing about the issues discussed. Plus we do get a lot of discussions about how a person can improve with regard to a particular sin or virtue. That’s why I like it here – many hearfelt discussions. I’m sure there are phony posters who just lead others on, but if I can’t tell from the discussion then I may as well treat it as an authentic problem.

Actually I don’t mind getting many opinions on each issue because it gives me the best chance that some combination of them is actually true, or at least helpful. I’d much rather that than listen to any one source which supposedly is accurate – according to itself and or others. I have yet to find such a source on this earth – including my pastor and SD – that I consider infallible and can safely ignore all other sources.

Also I’ve learned that one does not need to get personally upset when threads go stupid or wrong. If we get upset, then that’s our own spiritual problem to deal with – not the fault of the other poster. Gosh if we are that touchy, all it would take would be a 'bot to get us all agitated.

Alan

 

[RPRPsych]

“Conservative”, like “love” (or “depression”), is a word that means different things to different people. Let’s do a bit of analysis, and see if we can shed some light on this issue

There is social conservatism, which covers such issues as traditional views of marriage and parenting, respect for life from the moment of conception, complementary views of men and women, moral standards, and so on. From that point of view, I’m a pretty big “social conservative”.

There is economic conservatism, which favours few governmental regulations, property rights, private enterprise, and a smaller government (inter alia). Since I don’t have a dog in this race (my country is de facto socialist regardless of which party rules it, and I work for the Government), I generally don’t have any views on it, though I subscribe to some of the ideas that it encompasses (most notably, private enterprise, less bureaucracy, and less “big idea” programmes). I just don’t see them coming to my part of the world any time soon.

There is religious conservatism, which strives to maintain traditional forms of worship, liturgy and devotion, as opposed to modern innovations. I am a religious conservative, in that I don’t feel the Church is in need of “modernization” or “reform”, and am quite happy with existing teachings and disciplines.

Personally - as a long-time lurker - I’ve seen a variety of viewpoints here. But since official Church teaching overlaps to a large extent with social conservatism, and to a lesser (but still significant) extent with economic conservatism, I guess most folks who try to follow Church teachings - especially in the West - are considered “conservative” (as a blanket term.) Not that there’s anything wrong with that!

 

[mercytruth]

I remember what happened to the economy after 9/11. Media advertisers cleaned up their act, so did radio and television commentators and entertainers. Few of us were pursuing our old pleasures, and the consumer driven economy sank.

After a few weeks, the president had to appear on television and encourage people to go out and shop again, and live like they did previously to 9/11. Eventually, the somberness and refection of living a morally gentle life was replaced with the drums and excitement of war 24/7.

The pursuit of mammon drives western economies. One can say all they want about this philosophy, or that philosophy being the bane of Catholic conservatism. The truth is, the pursuit of mammon is destroying Western Christianity. Too often, conservative Christianity in a culture driven by mammon becomes the desparate show and tell of schizophrenics.

There seems to be no escape, except for taking the extreme teachings of Jesus Christ seriously.

Just my thoughts, but as Alan says, maybe we all have a part of the answer to the Why question.

 

[Joe_5859]

This is the Internet. This is not the Catholic Church. You’re reading thoughts and opinions expressed by anonymous Internet strangers, not official Church teachings or anything even approaching that. As with any information you get from anonymous sources, take everything you read here with a massive grain of salt.

Luna

Except for my posts. My posts are always 100% accurate and a person would only ignore what I have to say to their spiritual detriment.

Okay, maybe not…

I think that whenever we use the terms “conservative” and “liberal” in reference to the Church, we need to do so with a dozen big red disclaimers and cautionary statements. Sure, it can sometimes be useful to use those terms, but it also can stunt the conversation quite quickly.

I think one of the biggest reasons that this forum seems so “conservative” is because those who are concerned over authentic Catholic doctrine, quite frankly, are more likely to give a hoot and engage in the conversation. If Catholic teaching is just one opinion among many, or is probably wrong on a whole host of moral issues, then why bother talking to people about it?

I wouldn’t worry too much about the “undereducated.” Most of the time, it’s the same few people carrying on the same few conversations over and over again, which can give the false impression that it is the dominant ethos of the forum.

 

[TimothyH]

The more I learn about Church teaching, the more socially liberal I have become.

A change in my position on the death penalty is one example. Being against the wholesale deportation of illegal immigrants - and necessarily breaking up families - is another.

These two issues by themselves makes any affiliation with Tea Party type conservatism impossible for me.

Quite frankly, some of the extreme “Hunt them down and ship them back” attitudes toward illegals and “Let them burn” attitude toward crimminals which some of my close friends who are otherwise good Catholics have is disgusting.

-Tim-

 

[empther]

There’s an old Wall Street saying:

“We enter new eras, but the old laws still rule.”

( My license plate reads ‘OLS RULE’ )

What works? The laws, rules, mores, conventions, whatever, that have been around a long time and have done will by real people in the real world.

The Catholic Church has been a success because it has stuck to the truths from the beginning.
If we ever get a Pope who is a liberal, it will be the beginning of the end for the Church. But the Holy Spirit won’t let it happen.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Personally - as a long-time lurker - I’ve seen a variety of viewpoints here. But since official Church teaching overlaps to a large extent with social conservatism, and to a lesser (but still significant) extent with economic conservatism, I guess most folks who try to follow Church teachings - especially in the West - are considered “conservative” (as a blanket term.) Not that there’s anything wrong with that!

I don’t see how the Church teachings overlap with economic conservatism. Economic conservatism is rugged individualism. In Acts, we see the believers actually practicing socialism – they pooled their resources.

Acts 4
32 The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had everything in common.
33 With great power the apostles bore witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great favor was accorded them all.
34 There was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them, bring the proceeds of the sale,
35 and put them at the feet of the apostles, and they were distributed to each according to need.

Right?

Alan

 

[choose_to_love]

@ alan and practial socialism: yes and no. I think when the term “socialism” is used it denotes an economic system put in place by government, so that the tax system does the collecting/pooling, and the government would own certain means of production. So in general I think your larger point is well taken, but maybe not entirely accurate?

 

[St_Francis]

In Acts, we see the believers actually practicing socialism – they pooled their resources
Acts 4
32 The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had everything in common.
33 With great power the apostles bore witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great favor was accorded them all.
34 There was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them, bring the proceeds of the sale,
35 and put them at the feet of the apostles, and they were distributed to each according to need.

Right?

Alan

emmmm, *no. *
First of all, socialism is the ownership of the means of production by the government, no government involved in the early Christian set-up. Secondly, it is imposed on all by force, and this was not the case for the early Christians, either. And thirdly, the early Christian community described was in response to the idea that Christ would return very quickly, and so was a temporary situation; after that experiment, the Christian structure changed so that not all Christians were living communally.

I don’t see how the Church teachings overlap with economic conservatism. Economic conservatism is rugged individualism. In Acts, we see the believers actually practicing socialism – they pooled their resources.

In the US, we have two major economic ideas, which we call liberal and conservative. The liberal ideas range from socialism to mere redistribution, and the conservative range from what we’ve got but with less redistribution all the way to free market libertarianism which seriously restricts government involvement in the economy.

So you have two *ranges *of ideas. Not all “conservatives” are for rugged individualism, but not all “liberals” are for socialism.

Church teaching appears to have some agreements with each side and some disagreements, but in reality, Church teaching is based on Catholic thought, and liberal and conservative are based on “Enlightenment” thought, so any agreement is superficial and coincidental.

The Church teaches that we should not hamper the poor, but that we should help the poor. But the most striking thing to me about Church teaching in this area is the idea that we should be working together, not competing against each other or being at odds with each other. All these dichotomies: worker against management; rich against poor; are *not *what the Church teaches.

Additionally, the Church teaches that God gave us humans a lot of resources, and they are not there just for some. We need to have an economic set-up which helps the less fortunate, because, again, we are all supposed to be working together.

So I think you can see that the Church would have about the same amount to say to economic liberals and to economic conservatives in the US in 2012.

 

[empther]

Acts 4

32 The community of believers was of one heart and mind, and no one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they had everything in common.

33 With great power the apostles bore witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great favor was accorded them all.
34 There was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them, bring the proceeds of the sale,
35 and put them at the feet of the apostles, and they were distributed to each according to need.

Interesting that this ecomomic system didn’t last. Why not?

It’s not hard to guess why not. Lazy deadbeats heard about this great racket where you could get free food and shelter just for saying you’re a Christian. So lazy deadbeats came in thinking they would get early retirement at 20.

Obviously this system couldn’t work for long. It’s like a Ponzi scheme. It works in the beginning, but eventually the outflows exceed the inflows.

 

[mercytruth]

Interesting that this ecomomic system didn’t last. Why not?

It’s not hard to guess why not. Lazy deadbeats heard about this great racket where you could get free food and shelter just for saying you’re a Christian. So lazy deadbeats came in thinking they would get early retirement at 20.

Obviously this system couldn’t work for long. It’s like a Ponzi scheme. It works in the beginning, but eventually the outflows exceed the inflows.

Monasticism continues(d) this apostolic tradition.

Every ‘political and economic system’ is bound for failure. Daniel’s vision of the statue and its ultimate demise is representative of the failure of man’s attempt to bring about permanence. None of the systems by man are regulated by “God’s will be done on earth, as it is in heaven”.

 

[LisaA]

Interesting that this ecomomic system didn’t last. Why not?

It’s not hard to guess why not. Lazy deadbeats heard about this great racket where you could get free food and shelter just for saying you’re a Christian. So lazy deadbeats came in thinking they would get early retirement at 20.

Obviously this system couldn’t work for long. It’s like a Ponzi scheme. It works in the beginning, but eventually the outflows exceed the inflows.

My parents who were totally secular, atheists and highly educated said the same thing. Socialism/communism or any of the “isms” that depend on the honesty and generous spirit of EVERYONE will always fail. As my father said, the problem with socialism and communism is that it doesn’t take into account lazy people or ambitious people. No matter how many times these systems fail, people still think they will work, it’s just a matter of tweaking them…too bad you cannot change our sinful human nature.

As to the thread, why are the CAF so conservative? I think what used to be ordinary traditional values have become “conservative.” If you believe in personal responsibility (which includes responsibility for a life you may create), strong marriages and families (man woman normal marriages not Sue and Jill or Bob and Fred), earned success rather than learned dependency, working to achieve goals such as education, “the American dream,” helping your neighbor, well you are suddenly a dinosaur mired in the 50s. What used to be taken for granted is now considered an anomoly. The Church supports what used to be traditional values and if one is a serious Mass attending and faithful Catholic you are probably going to be labeled “conservative” because of social and fiscal alignment with the conservative politics.

Lisa

 

[Swiss_Guy]

If I were a person seeking for religious truth I think in general I would be put off the Catholic religion by some of these fora. Many of them are over concerned with externals and sacramentals. Many of them (particularly the threads regarding creationism and Jose Escriba and snake handling) are astonishingly undereducated. And others display an a almost uniform demand that the Church is viewed through an arch conservative lens.

Well coming to CAF as a wanderer, I wasn’t put off by the site’s (arch)conservatism. In fact there was something about it being not so conservative and intolerant that kept me lurking and eventually joining. Although I was really really conservative before I accepted the Catholic Church as Christ’s Church, so that might have something to do with it.

With that said, keep in mind conservatism can mean different things. There’s social conservatism, which is basically being against abortion and gay marriage, and other stuff like that. You’ll see plenty of socially conservative people because what we call social conservatism lines up with Catholicism fairly well. There is cultural conservatism as well, which is slightly different from social conservatism but goes hand-in-hand with it, so naturally there will be plenty of those. Finally, there is economic conservatism. You’ll probably find a mixture of economic conservatives and liberals on this site (who are Catholic) without many to the extremes (laissez-faire capitalism or socialism) of each. Catholicism kind of calls for a “third way” (subsidiarity to prevent socialism or a welfare state, solidarity to prevent individualism), so I guess you could call that economically moderate if you want to stick with labeling.

 

[mercytruth]

My parents who were totally secular, atheists and highly educated said the same thing. Socialism/communism or any of the “isms” that depend on the honesty and generous spirit of EVERYONE will always fail. As my father said, the problem with socialism and communism is that it doesn’t take into account lazy people or ambitious people. No matter how many times these systems fail, people still think they will work, it’s just a matter of tweaking them…too bad you cannot change our sinful human nature.

As to the thread, why are the CAF so conservative? I think what used to be ordinary traditional values have become “conservative.” If you believe in personal responsibility (which includes responsibility for a life you may create), strong marriages and families (man woman normal marriages not Sue and Jill or Bob and Fred), earned success rather than learned dependency, working to achieve goals such as education, “the American dream,” helping your neighbor, well you are suddenly a dinosaur mired in the 50s. What used to be taken for granted is now considered an anomoly. The Church supports what used to be traditional values and if one is a serious Mass attending and faithful Catholic you are probably going to be labeled “conservative” because of social and fiscal alignment with the conservative politics.

Lisa

Without discounting much of what you have written, 'the American Dream" is an outgrowth of the fiction that 'we are endowed by our Creator with the inalienable right to pursue happiness". I can not find that in the teachings of our Lord Jesus Christ.

This myth that began with the American Revolution has rejected the teaching of Jesus Christ which is 'the denial of self, the taking up of one’s cross daily for the sake of Jesus Christ. ’

Where else but in America, do we need to be reminded every day 'not to love the world, neither the things that are in the world"? “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life are not of the Father, but are of the world.”