Why do so many Catholics defy the Catholic bishops?

[Charlemagne_II]

With respect to complex moral issues such as abortion rights, gay marriage, etc. why do so many Catholics seem to defy the Catholic bishops? What has happened either in the world or inside the Catholic Church that has led to so much rebellion of Catholics against the teachings of the Church? Not only lay men and lay women, but even some bishops and priests seem to be at war with Rome.

What gives?

 

[centurionguard]

With respect to complex moral issues such as abortion rights, gay marriage, etc. why do so many Catholics seem to defy the Catholic bishops? What has happened either in the world or inside the Catholic Church that has led to so much rebellion of Catholics against the teachings of the Church? Not only lay men and lay women, but even some bishops and priests seem to be at war with Rome.

What gives?

Not only lay men and lay women, but even some bishops and priests seem to be at war with Rome.

I’m going to do my best to be charitable here without going into any long writ.

I suppose its because first of all theirs a gross lack of catechesis amongst lay Catholics and Bishops are not always listening to the Pope or the Magisterium.

 

[valentino]

I believe a lot of lay Catholics forget what the particular missions of the clergy are.For instance thePope is to try to get all people to come to Christ and the Church and therefore be saved.Many Catholics think they have a better idea o f how to bring this world to the knowledge of Christ.They may say he’s sacrificing to much to meet the needs of non Catholics.He may be and we have a right to our personal opinions. But we must believe that He is directly Insprired by the Holy Spirit and God directs the Church through Him.Unless there is ssome outright sacriledge or some abomination we should let our clergy do their jobs.There jobs are much harder than most of us realize.Remember they often have to be outfront in social issues and they have to go against an entire society.We as lay people can do alot in strenghtening their faith by being the Godly community we are called to be.we should pray for our clergy daily.

 

[Birdpreacher]

Hierarchy of the Catholic Church was never meant to serve this many literate laypersons.

 

[PatrickSebast]

I also would blame it on the lack of strong catechesis for lay Catholics. In a world where a wealth of information is being presented to people daily and much of that information is against the teachings of the Church it isn’t hard to imagine why people would begin to doubt the Church and their bishops. If someone gets presented information about the benefits artificial birth control again and again through their culture and the media then how likely are they to even really know about much less understand the Churches teaching on the matter? We simply haven’t kept up with the world in making information about doctrine and teachings easily accessible.

Essentially the modern man’s knowledge of what is going on in the world around him and how it works is expanding greatly, but his knowledge of the Church has not been given the same opportunity to grow.

 

[GloriousOrder]

The fact of concupiscence (and the way our Western culture celebrates it) is the greatest factor. Our world is based mostly on Mammon, with usury being the norm in economics and pure moral license the norm in civil policy. There is no moral virtue or belief in absolute principle left thanks to a progressive line of men from Occam through to Kant and Sartre. What do you expect? The West is totally degenerate now. All that’s left in this total disaster of a civilisation is to pray.

 

[1ke]

I believe your mistake lies in believing this is a new or novel phenomenon.

 

[GloriousOrder]

It certainly isn’t novel! It started before time even began.

 

[BriaMarie]

I think the big problem is lack of proper catechesis so Catholics don’t understand the whys behind the Church’s teachings, plus what I feel is a very Western, Protestant tendency to try to figure things out for ourselves. I can name several Church teachings that don’t make sense using Protestant theological logic, but are natural extensions of Catholic beliefs.

 

[JM3]

With respect to complex moral issues such as abortion rights, gay marriage, etc. why do so many Catholics seem to defy the Catholic bishops? What has happened either in the world or inside the Catholic Church that has led to so much rebellion of Catholics against the teachings of the Church? Not only lay men and lay women, but even some bishops and priests seem to be at war with Rome.

What gives?

“In the consciousness of mankind today, freedom is largely regarded as the greatest good there is, after which all other good things have to take there place. In Legislation, artistic freedom and freedom of speech take precedence over every other moral value. Values that conflict with freedom, that could lead to its being restricted, appear as shackles, as ‘taboos’, that is to say, as relics of archaic prohibitions and anxieties. Political action has to demonstrate that it furthers freedom. Even religion can make an impression only by depicting itself as a force for freedom for man and for mankind. In the scale of values with which man is concerned, to live a life worthy of humanity, freedom seems to be the truly fundamental value and to be the really basic human right of them all. The concept of truth, on the other hand, we greet rather with some suspicion: we recall how many opinions and systems have already laid claim to the concept of truth; how often the claim to truth in that way has been the means of limiting freedom.”

A quote from Truth and Tolerance by Pope Benedict XVI

 

[John21652]

With respect to complex moral issues such as abortion rights, gay marriage, etc. why do so many Catholics seem to defy the Catholic bishops? What has happened either in the world or inside the Catholic Church that has led to so much rebellion of Catholics against the teachings of the Church? Not only lay men and lay women, but even some bishops and priests seem to be at war with Rome.

What gives?

Lack of leadership.

The Bishops are supposed to be leaders within the Church. If they allow moral laxity to permeate the rank and file of Catholicism, then they lose the respect of Catholics as leaders. That said, many Catholics will view the lack of leadership from the Bishops as licence to interpret the rules as they see fit, ot to even make their own rules. The Bishops need to step up to the plate, show some moral courage and start leading by enforcing some basic rules.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

John

The Bishops are supposed to be leaders within the Church. If they allow moral laxity to permeate the rank and file of Catholicism, then they lose the respect of Catholics as leaders. That said, many Catholics will view the lack of leadership from the Bishops as licence to interpret the rules as they see fit, ot to even make their own rules. The Bishops need to step up to the plate, show some moral courage and start leading by enforcing some basic rules.

There is an Italian proverb that seems to agree with your analysis.

“The fish stinks from the head.”

I agree that leadership is always the problem. When there is a crisis in any institution. Look at the trouble our economy is in. It isn’t the people who racked up trillions of dollars of debt to themselves. It’s the politicians.

An earlier poster said this is nothing new. I beg to differ. That poster did not live in or before the 1950s when bishops and priests were highly respected in American society. Even the Protestants were glued to the tube when Bishop Sheen was lecturing every Tuesday night. I know because my grandfather, who didn’t even go to church, tuned in religiously to Bishop Sheen.

Catholic did not defy the Church or its bishops the way they do today. I think it’s as you say. There isn’t so much to admire and a great deal to be disappointed in.

This could turn around, but it will take a brave new world of bishops and priests to do it.

The seminaries are not turning out many priests. Maybe that’s a good thing for now, as the cleansing of the priesthood is a great deal more important than the numbers.

 

[JFarrish]

1. Because Catholicism is hard.

Consider CCC 2478. Taken literally (and it is a lesson in Matthew and related to one of the Beatitudes), this discussion is, itself, distinctly poor Catholicism. The idea that individuals and their failings are one homogenous group is dehumanizing. Speculating on their failings and assigning character flaws to them does not instruct them in love or offer them an opportunity for correction or salvation.

1. Lack of knowledge.

In my short time here I have been accused of ‘ignoring the Bishops’ twice. Once because I quoted the Dogmatic Constituion of the Church to assert that Bishops are authentic teachers whose instructions do carry the authority of Christ. Once because I dared to confess that, although I accept the Church’s teaching on the human family, I, personally, feel more pity than threat from homosexuals. After all, with 50% divorce rates, the human family and the Sacrament of Marriage are being shredded by heterosexuals.

In both these cases, it wasn’t actual conflict with Church teaching. I had no problem citing direct support from the Catechism, Doctrinal Notes, and Eucumenical writings. It appears that people were appalled that my position was not in lock step with their own, even though theirs was well beyond Church teaching, which leads to…

1. Exposure.

I stop in and help out an elderly parishioner. She is a wonderful lady, but she gets 10 minutes of homily each week and about 20 hours of Glenn Beck. Is it any wonder that she frequently confuses Beck’s unusual Mormon based version of Christianity with the true faith?

When rhetoric is wrapped in the same phrases it is easy for anyone to forget that they are not listening to the rightful heirarchy for their instruction.

 

[John21652]

1. Because Catholicism is hard.

It is not. It requires the development of self discipline and moral courage and that is what we should all do if we wish to develop fully as human beings…

Consider CCC 2478. Taken literally (and it is a lesson in Matthew and related to one of the Beatitudes), this discussion is, itself, distinctly poor Catholicism. The idea that individuals and their failings are one homogenous group is dehumanizing. Speculating on their failings and assigning character flaws to them does not instruct them in love or offer them an opportunity for correction or salvation. Did you not notice the section heading above 2478? It is offenses against Truth. It says to avoid rash judgement of another, and to not be too quick to condemn. However, it is a duty to correct the error of someone’s ways.

1. Lack of knowledge.

In my short time here I have been accused of ‘ignoring the Bishops’ twice. Once because I quoted the Dogmatic Constituion of the Church to assert that Bishops are authentic teachers whose instructions do carry the authority of Christ. Once because I dared to confess that, although I accept the Church’s teaching on the human family, I, personally, feel more pity than threat from homosexuals. After all, with 50% divorce rates, the human family and the Sacrament of Marriage are being shredded by heterosexuals.

I doubt anyone who is Catholic would have corrected you on pitying homosexuals. We all do. If someone said otherwise, please show us the relevant post and the response.Their behaviour is disordered, as per the Catechism. I take it you agree with that section of the Catechism? The institution of Marriage is indeed taking a beating. Lack of government support for the institution is also to blame. Pope Benedict and the Church state the union of a man and a woman is the foundational unit of a sound society. Unfortuanely, not everyone is a Catholic!

In both these cases, it wasn’t actual conflict with Church teaching. I had no problem citing direct support from the Catechism, Doctrinal Notes, and Eucumenical writings. It appears that people were appalled that my position was not in lock step with their own, even though theirs was well beyond Church teaching, which leads to…

Well, if it is the case that you follow the Catechism to the letter, criticism should wash over you.

1. Exposure.

I stop in and help out an elderly parishioner. She is a wonderful lady, but she gets 10 minutes of homily each week and about 20 hours of Glenn Beck. Is it any wonder that she frequently confuses Beck’s unusual Mormon based version of Christianity with the true faith?

When rhetoric is wrapped in the same phrases it is easy for anyone to forget that they are not listening to the rightful heirarchy for their instruction.

Why don’t you drive her to Church? And guide her in her choices of TV program!

 

[Elizabeth502]

In my short time here I have been accused of ‘ignoring the Bishops’ twice. …Once because I dared to confess that, although I accept the Church’s teaching on the human family, I, personally, feel more pity than threat from homosexuals. After all, with 50% divorce rates, the human family and the Sacrament of Marriage are being shredded by heterosexuals.

… it wasn’t actual conflict with Church teaching.

It was, and most certainly is, in conflict with Church teaching, particularly this part that you asserted:

Here is what you asserted:

Answering for myself, I don’t feel threatened at all. In fact, I have empathy for people wanting love, stability, and family. It has been the best part of my life for 40 years, how could I not see how others would want it?

Here is what your Bishops say:

Because the marital relationship offers benefits, unlike any other, to persons, to society, and to the church, we wish to make it clear that the institution of marriage, as the union of one man and one woman, must be preserved, protected, and promoted in both private and public realms. At a time when family life is under significant stress, the principled defense of marriage is an urgent necessity for the wellbeing of children and families, and for the common good of society.

Thus, we oppose attempts to grant the legal status of marriage to a relationship between persons of the same sex. No same-sex union can realize the unique and full potential which the marital relationship expresses. For this reason, our opposition to “same-sex marriage” is not an instance of unjust discrimination or animosity toward homosexual persons. In fact, the Catholic Church teaches emphatically that individuals and society must respect the basic human dignity of all persons, including those with a homosexual orientation. Homosexual persons have a right to and deserve our respect, compassion, understanding, and defense against prejudice, attacks and abuse.

We therefore urge Catholics and all our fellow citizens to commit themselves both to upholding the human dignity of every person and to upholding the distinct and irreplaceable community of marriage.

www.usccb.org/laity/marriage/samesexstmt.shtml

Your Church does not recognize non-traditional marriage as:

people wanting love, stability, and family

equal or similar to what is possible with traditional marriage.
They are entirely different categories. One (traditional marriage) is truly unitive; the other (same-sex partnering) is an artificial equivalence with something that can never be equivalent with traditional marriage, as it is not complimentary in a radical sense.

Further, I think that there are legitimate civil rights issues involved, particularly in a pluralistic society where contitutional rights are the mechanism we use for protecting the inalienable rights of the human person against the will of the majority.

…Further illuminating that you do not understand where your Church officials stand on the issue with regard to “civil rights” and society. Such positions are elucidated here:

www.usccb.org/laity/marriage/samesexunions.shtml

 

[Elizabeth502]

I had no problem citing direct support from the Catechism, Doctrinal Notes, and Eucumenical writings. It appears that people were appalled that my position was not in lock step with their own, even though theirs was well beyond Church teaching, which leads to…

No. It is not even in basic step with The Bishops.

www.nccbuscc.org/laity/marriage/samesexfaqs.shtml

Why is a same-sex union not equivalent to a marriage?
A same-sex union contradicts the nature and purposes of marriage. It is not based on the natural complementarity of male and female. It cannot cooperate with God to create new life; and the natural purpose of sexual union cannot be achieved by a same-sex union. Because persons in a same-sex union cannot enter into a true conjugal union, it is wrong to equate their relationship to a marriage.

What unique contributions does marriage between a man and woman make to society?
Marriage is the fundamental pattern for male-female relationships. It contributes to society because it models the way in which women and men live interdependently and commit, for the whole of life, to seek the good of each other. The marital union also provides the best conditions for raising children: namely, the stable, loving relationship of a mother and father present only in marriage. The state rightly recognizes this relationship as a public institution in its laws because the relationship makes a unique and essential contribution to the common good.
Pope Benedict XVI recently said of marriage: “To recognize and assist this institution is one of the greatest services that can be rendered nowadays to the common good and to the authentic development of individuals and societies, as well as the best means of ensuring the dignity, equality and true freedom of the human person” (Homily at the Concluding Mass of the Fifth World Meeting of Families, July 9, 2006).

Ideas about marriage have changed over the years. Isn’t same sex marriage just one more change?
The institution of marriage has experienced many developments. Some of these are related to our contemporary understanding about the equality of men and women. These developments have enhanced marriage, but none has conflicted with the basic purpose and nature of marriage. Proposals to legalize same sex marriage would radically redefine marriage.

If people of the same sex love and care for each other, why shouldn’t they be allowed to marry?
Love and commitment are key ingredients of marriage, and the Church recognizes that a basic purpose of marriage is the good of the spouses. The other purpose, however, is the procreation and education of children. There is a fundamental difference between marriage, which has the potential to bring forth children, and other relationships. The fact that marriage between a man and a woman will usually result in children remains a powerful human reality, even if circumstances do not prmit every marriage to result in children. This makes marriage between a man and a woman a unique institution.

What difference would it make to married couples if same sex partners are allowed to marry?
We need to answer this question not simply as individuals, but as members of society, called to work for the common good. If same sex marriage were legalized, the result would be a significant change in our society. We would be saying that the primary purpose of marriage is to validate and protect a sexually intimate relationship. All else would be secondary. While we cannot say exactly what the impact of this change would be, experience suggests that it would be negative. Marriage would no longer symbolize society’s commitment to the future: our children. Rather, marriage would symbolize a commitment to the present needs and desires of adults.

Isn’t the Church discriminating against homosexual persons by opposing same sex unions?
To uphold God’s intent for marriage, in which sexual relations have their proper and exclusive place, is not to offend the dignity of homosexual persons. Christians must give witness to the whole truth and, therefore, oppose as immoral both homosexual acts and unjust discrimination against homosexual persons.
It is not unjust to deny legal status to same-sex unions because marriage and same-sex unions are essentially different realities. In fact, justice requires society to do so.

The legal recognition of marriage, including benefits associated with it, is not only about personal commitment, but also about the social commitment that husband and wife make to the well-being of society. It would be wrong to redefine marriage for the sake of providing benefits to those who cannot rightfully enter into marriage

 

[PatrickSebast]

That reply was completely off topic, and it wasn’t even relevant to what the poster was espousing. Why not reply in that particular topic?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

JFarrish

**When rhetoric is wrapped in the same phrases it is easy for anyone to forget that they are not listening to the rightful heirarchy for their instruction. **

Would **you **be the rightful hierarchy?

 

[Elizabeth502]

That reply was completely off topic, and it wasn’t even relevant to what the poster was espousing. Why not reply in that particular topic?

It was totally on-topic, and directly so. The poster was claiming that he is not only in union with the Bishops on moral issues (which included several he cited), but that he is more conformed to their instruction than his opposers on CAF are. He couldn’t be more incorrect.

He is spectacularly in disunion with the US Council of Catholic Bishops, and either has not acquainted himself with those teachings, or interprets his Church’s teachings inaccurately for some possibly political reason/preference.

My post addressed the very issues he is wrong about, issues he re-addressed within this very thread.

Have a nice day.

 

[BriaMarie]

When rhetoric is wrapped in the same phrases it is easy for anyone to forget that they are not listening to the rightful heirarchy for their instruction.

I completely agree, especially with the prevalence of evangelical non-denomination churches out there.