Why do liberal Catholics stay in the Church?

[CathModerate]

Well, I think the reason that people use the term liberal Catholic instead of dissedent Catholic is precisely shown in yoir comment: there are various kinds of dissedent Catholics.

In the context of the original post, why don’t liberal Catholics leave the Church, it is quite clear what is meant: Catholics who dissent in a liberal way, Catholocs who think women shoild be ordained, Catholocs who think that abortion should be legal, etc

What I find ironic and wanna know if anyone else ever noticed is this:

First, I disagree with the pope on a few issues but I also dont think catholics should leave the church if they disagree…

But isnt it ironic tha tthose who agree with the pope on everything say if ya dont agree with the rules then leave…while the main man himself hasnt ever told a catholic to leave the church?

 

[Tsuwano]

Tswano,
You seem to have trou le understanding that words can have seveal meanings, and that we derive the meaning intended by the context in which they are used. The OP, by mentioning liberals, dissidents, and leaving the Church, clarified which meaning of the word liberal he meant. I also stated outright what I meant and what I didn’t mean, and included that a person cojld be an orthdox Catholic and a political liberal in many areas.

Feminiism, of the sortthat a liberal kind of heterodox dissident might support, is an odious set of ideas that has reduced a woman’s position and laid waste to society and is based on the anti-Catholic so-called Enlightenment thinkkng, is quite clearly what the poster meant.

Nope, I don’t have trouble understanding that a word may have several meanings. Indeed, I even understand that a word, such as liberal, may have no meaning at all. It’s only purpose is to paint someone as beyond the pale without having to consider what that person’s views actually are or how they have arrived at those views. That is often how the word “liberal” is used in this forum and is why I felt it necessary to clarify the point that there are liberals and liberal positions which fall squarely within Church teaching. Of course, there are some views labeled as liberal which fall outside of that teaching, just as there are some views labeled as conservative which are also questionable. The OP by mentioning liberals, dissidents and leaving the Church clarifies nothing, but rather, intentionally or not, associates liberals with dissidents and seems to suggest they should leave the Church. I’m glad you have seen fit to clarify the OP’s post for him, for as I mentioned before, his meaning was not clear to me. I’m gratified to know you believe there is a place for liberals in the Church after all.

 

[Robintrinket]

Yes indeed, words often take on meanings for a reason, but those meanings don’t necessarily reflect reality. Sometimes they reflect ideology and emotion rather than understanding. The word “liberal,” for example, is often used as a weapon rather than as a description.

You still haven’t answered, what exactly do you call “liberal”? What is your description of a liberal thinker? The people you mentioned, what exactly do they support that you would call liberal? “Liberal” has taken on such a negative meaning because the philosophy is a negative thing. Liberals themselves gave the ammunition to make the word a weapon.

 

[Robintrinket]

You mention the word “feminism,” but you fail to acknowledge that there are aspects of the feminist movement which fall squarely within the teaching of the Church and that the dignity of women has been upheld by Church leaders. You seem to have defined feminism in a narrow manner and use it as a derogatory term rather than as a category which encompasses a variety of thinking.

Again, the word “feminism” has taken on a negative meaning for the things which feminists themselves supported and brought about in society: abortion, basically saying there is no difference between men and women and that women must do everything that men do, and the push for married women with children to work outside the home so that the kids are put into daycare and no one is even raising them anymore. These are the things the philosophy that I call “feminism” is about, not the dignity of women.

 

[Robintrinket]

Nope, I don’t have trouble understanding that a word may have several meanings. Indeed, I even understand that a word, such as liberal, may have no meaning at all. It’s only purpose is to paint someone as beyond the pale without having to consider what that person’s views actually are or how they have arrived at those views.

When you say liberal, everyone knows exactly what it means.

 

[Robintrinket]

I’m gratified to know you believe there is a place for liberals in the Church after all.

It would seem that you believe that there really are liberals, and that is not just a meaningless label put on people.

 

[Robintrinket]

What I find ironic and wanna know if anyone else ever noticed is this:

First, I disagree with the pope on a few issues but I also dont think catholics should leave the church if they disagree…

But isnt it ironic tha tthose who agree with the pope on everything say if ya dont agree with the rules then leave…while the main man himself hasnt ever told a catholic to leave the church?

I don’t know why everyone keeps misunderstanding the original post. The OP did not tell anyone to leave the Church, just asked why people choose to stay in the Church when they don’t believe what it teaches.

 

[St_Francis]

Nope, I don’t have trouble understanding that a word may have several meanings. Indeed, I even understand that a word, such as liberal, may have no meaning at all. It’s only purpose is to paint someone as beyond the pale without having to consider what that person’s views actually are or how they have arrived at those views. That is often how the word “liberal” is used in this forum and is why I felt it necessary to clarify the point that there are liberals and liberal positions which fall squarely within Church teaching. Of course, there are some views labeled as liberal which fall outside of that teaching, just as there are some views labeled as conservative which are also questionable. The OP by mentioning liberals, dissidents and leaving the Church clarifies nothing, but rather, intentionally or not, associates liberals with dissidents and seems to suggest they should leave the Church. I’m glad you have seen fit to clarify the OP’s post for him, for as I mentioned before, his meaning was not clear to me. I’m gratified to know you believe there is a place for liberals in the Church after all.

1. It seems that you believe a contradiction, for you say that the word liberal is meaningless, and then you say it has meanings.
2. If you post in the fourth page of a thread a comment relating directly to the OP, you should quote the OP. Since you say the OP was unclear, and apparenly the next four pages, including a post of mine in which I clarified exactly what I meant, and what I believe is commonly meant in this context, didn’t clarify the issue under discussion, it was hard to understand exactly what you were trying to say.
3. Since i long ago said that I wasn’t referring to every single Catholic that anyine could possibly describe as liberal under any meaning of that word, I don’t know what to make of your gratification.

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

Nope, I don’t have trouble understanding that a word may have several meanings. Indeed, I even understand that a word, such as liberal, may have no meaning at all. It’s only purpose is to paint someone as beyond the pale without having to consider what that person’s views actually are or how they have arrived at those views. That is often how the word “liberal” is used in this forum and is why I felt it necessary to clarify the point that there are liberals and liberal positions which fall squarely within Church teaching. Of course, there are some views labeled as liberal which fall outside of that teaching, just as there are some views labeled as conservative which are also questionable. The OP by mentioning liberals, dissidents and leaving the Church clarifies nothing, but rather, intentionally or not, associates liberals with dissidents and seems to suggest they should leave the Church. I’m glad you have seen fit to clarify the OP’s post for him, for as I mentioned before, his meaning was not clear to me. I’m gratified to know you believe there is a place for liberals in the Church after all.

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

When you say liberal, everyone knows exactly what it means.

Obviously, that is not the case. Perhaps they think they know what is being said, but that is a very different thing. Communication only occurs if we mean the same thing when we use words. Or at the very least, if I know what you mean when you use a word. I posited a few possible meanings for the phrase liberal Catholic.

"Liberal=Heretic? Liberal=democrat? Liberal=someone who disagrees with the Church? Liberal=someone who disagrees with me? Liberal=someone who favors reform/progress? "

Since then I have learned that some here apparently think that liberal means supporting of abortion, homosexual rights and female ordination. I have learned that to some the phrase means a Catholic who dissents “in a liberal way.” I expect to soon learn even more notions of the word.

To me, and I am glad to see I am not alone, the phrase, liberal Catholic, does not denote dissension of any kind. It is certainly possible to be a dissenting liberal Catholic, but that is a separate question.

A liberal may be someone who tries to keep their morality and their politics separate. Someone who insists that their religious beliefs are not to be imposed on those who do not share them. This broad insistence might force people to draw lines in the sand, and in different places. I do not want the government to mandate Church attendance, although missing mass is a grave matter. I do want the murderers jailed. Somewhere in between we draw a line and insist that it is a sensible line for moral legislation.

A liberal may be someone who agrees with the democratic platform on 90% of our nation’s current issues. The fact that the last 10% include big issues, like abortion, that preclude them from voting democrat does not make them conservative, or even make them disavow the title liberal.

A liberal may be someone who prefers to think of themselves, generally and without any specifics, as progressive. This last example will be ridiculed for to vague for discussion or disagreement. When you arrive at that frustration, you will realize the frustration of those who have voiced irritation at different but equally vague usage.

In current language, the word generally has a political connotation, if not denotation as well. Merriam Webster lists, as the third definition of six, “lacking moral restraint.” Perhaps that is the meaning of many posters here? Merriam Webster believes that definition to be obsolete, but perhaps it is experiencing new life.

Or maybe my frustration is rooted in the insult that the OP, and later posters agree, lays on liberals by equating them with dissenters. Maybe it is not that I do not know what he meant, but that I irritated that that equation be first made and then defended. If just wanted to ask about why people who dissent stay in the pews we could have had a fruitful conversation about humility, authority, understanding, and catechesis. Instead, we have a mud-slinging contest.

 

[Robintrinket]

Since then I have learned that some here apparently think that liberal means supporting of abortion, homosexual rights and female ordination. I have learned that to some the phrase means a Catholic who dissents “in a liberal way.” I expect to soon learn even more notions of the word.

That is because all of these things are part of the liberal philosophy. These are things that people who call themselves liberal support (most of them if maybe not yourself), and that is how they merited the label “liberal”.

There are basically two different philosophies, and everyone knows it. Some people may take ideas from both of them, but don’t pretend you don’t know what people are talking about when they say “liberal” or “conservative”.

A complete liberal, who supports the whole philosophy, would be dissenting, since they do not believe in the Church’s teaching on marriage, abortion, etc. That is why it is fine for the OP to call liberals dissenting.

 

[Robintrinket]

A liberal may be someone who tries to keep their morality and their politics separate. Someone who insists that their religious beliefs are not to be imposed on those who do not share them. This broad insistence might force people to draw lines in the sand, and in different places. I do not want the government to mandate Church attendance, although missing mass is a grave matter. I do want the murderers jailed. Somewhere in between we draw a line and insist that it is a sensible line for moral legislation. .

Well, the idea that you should keep your religion to yourself, because it has no application in the real world is part of liberal philosophy. This is the attitude of liberal Catholic politicians who support abortion. If you really believe something, it flows over into every aspect of your life. Your beliefs on what government should be like will be influenced by your religion and understanding of morality.

I don’t think that anyone would support something such as mandating church attendance, not because everyone wishes to “keep their morality and their politics separate”, but because it would obviously be very impractical, and do more harm than good.

 

[Robintrinket]

A liberal may be someone who agrees with the democratic platform on 90% of our nation’s current issues. The fact that the last 10% include big issues, like abortion, that preclude them from voting democrat does not make them conservative, or even make them disavow the title liberal.

People who choose to call themselves liberal should not be surprised when people connect them with the whole liberal philosophy.

 

[Robintrinket]

A liberal may be someone who prefers to think of themselves, generally and without any specifics, as progressive. [END QUOTE]

From what I’ve heard of people who call themselves “progressive”, it seems to be kind of a euphemism for “liberal”. I look for the word to eventually become as negative a word as liberal.

 

[Robintrinket]

A liberal may be someone who prefers to think of themselves, generally and without any specifics, as progressive.

From what I’ve heard about people who call themselves “progressive”, it seems to be kind of a euphemism for “liberal”. I look for that word to take on as negative a meaning as liberal.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Because the Catholic Church is, really, the coolest group to belong to … with all those saints … and the miracles … and Mary … BUT, sometimes, some of the Church’s teachings are … inconvenient. So they want some degree of … “flexibility” …

Jesus said His yoke was easy and His burden was light … but it’s still a yoke and a burden.

And some people just … don’t want any … burden …or … yoke.

 

[Aboveallbereal]

In discussing this issue it is important to take on board the true nature of our madern culture. An inchoate Post-Christian secular liberal humanism is the unofficial religion and mindset of our age.

The assualt on the primacy of choice though to be implicit in acceptance of the magisterium is so radically counter to the assumptions of public morality that it is in the truest sense shocking. Modern western culture is rocky ground for Catholic Christianity.

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

That is because all of these things are part of the liberal philosophy. These are things that people who call themselves liberal support (most of them if maybe not yourself), and that is how they merited the label “liberal”.

There are basically two different philosophies, and everyone knows it. Some people may take ideas from both of them, but don’t pretend you don’t know what people are talking about when they say “liberal” or “conservative”.

A complete liberal, who supports the whole philosophy, would be dissenting, since they do not believe in the Church’s teaching on marriage, abortion, etc. That is why it is fine for the OP to call liberals dissenting.

How easy it must be so set people aside when they fit so neatly into artificial boxes. You ascribe the title liberal to those who support these things.

The thing about your two opposing philosophies is that you are conflating them with an issue list. That is an odd way to define the terms. I don’t have to pretend anything. To you the word liberal means, apparently, supports xyz issue list- which I presume to be the democratic platform. To me the word mean something else entirely. Neither usage is the one which Pope Pius (IX?) used when he condemned liberals.

Liberals support a lot of things. Whether you believe it of not, abortion is not high on the list for many. It is not on the list at all for others. Self-describing liberals are not so predictable as you would like.

The term “complete liberal” does not make sense except in your bizarre and yet unclarified definition of a liberal who hold certain specific views on certain specific issues. If you want to talk about dissenters, talk about dissenters. It does not have to be political. There are just as many conservative dissenters are there are liberal ones. The Catholic Church defies political categorization.

 

[Beth_Cecilia]

From what I’ve heard about people who call themselves “progressive”, it seems to be kind of a euphemism for “liberal”. I look for that word to take on as negative a meaning as liberal.

It is revealing, but not surprising, that the word liberal is necessarily a negative.

 

[anilorak13ska]

I am a moderate, cradle Catholic. I have differed and had inner struggles with some church teachings and doctrine over the years but I stay in the church because of the real presence of the Eucharist, the sacraments and many, many other things. Catholic is who I am. I could not be anything else.

I answer this type of question this way. Catholics who disagree with parts of the church teaching stay Catholic for the same reason that people still call themselves part of their family even though they might not agree with everything family members do.

Have I agreed with everything my parents thought or did during my lifetime? No, but I love them and the family they created and I would never abandon it.

Same with being a citizen of the United States. I don’t agree with everything this country or its government does, have problems with some aspects of American society, but would never consider renouncing my citizenship.

It’s the same with the church. Just because my human nature causes me to doubt and disagree with things doesn’t mean I am going to automatically leave behind a Church that is a treasured part of who I am.
Just my two cents — God bless.

Couldn’t have said it better myself. I too am a cradle Catholic. I left the church and went on a spiritual journey to find the one church I would feel 100% about. God used this time to draw me closer and closer to Himself. Contrary to what my confessor thinks, God is near even outside the church. God meets you where you are. He met me where I was, and over a year later, brought me back home. I realized that it is not the Church that I owe my life to, but God, and I believe that I can experience His presence and mercy best in the context of the faith I am already familiar with. All the others made my trying to relate to God seem foreign and artificial. I have made my peace with having to get it all out there in the confessional, enduring some differences of opinion at a Cursillo weekend for the sake of putting my Catholicism into full swing, and now when I am made aware of disagreements I have with the teachings of the church, first I question my own thoughts on the subject, and if they persist, I turn it over to God. I allow the idea that God can show meaning to individuals rather than in a swooping generalization that by it’s nature the catechism is (and I mean no disrespect by that). I’m no longer trying to be right with other Catholics, for the reasons some mentioned here with the example of slavery. It was secular social justice movements that freed the slaves (with a huge influence by the Quakers, not Catholics), or gave women the right to vote. I don’t think God is done forming us until the day we die, and likewise I don’t think He created the world, but rather that He is continually creating it. I think we (and I include myself in this absolutely) tend to presume too much about God. God is far beyond our understanding, and it is not for us to figure out what He would do in every situation. Each situation is unique, hence the need for discernment between the individual and God. Granted, it is immensely helpful to have the guidance of the church, but I think there is a real danger of making the church our idol.