Why do some Catholics have a problem with Pope Francis?

[Tis_Bearself]

Yeah, most of Europe doesn’t even bother to go to church, yet let’s name a heresy after the United States where many if not most people, Catholic or not, strongly believe in Jesus Christ.

Typical.

 

[Genesis315]

Since the faith is always the same, there should be no difference in matters of revealed truth or morality before and after the Council. If there appears to be a difference and if, indeed, many in the Church are teaching different things, then we should follow the advice of St. Viincent de Lerins:

What, if some novel contagion seek to infect not merely an insignificant portion of the Church, but the whole? Then it will be his care to cleave to antiquity, which at this day cannot possibly be seduced by any fraud of novelty.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3506.htm

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

To be fair, it’s warranted. Many of the founding ideologies of the United States are inherently anti catholic.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

If the Church leaders in past centuries hadn’t allowed themselves to get so wrapped up in the worldly doings of civil goverments, maybe that wouldn’t have happened.

Still, I can accept the statement perhaps in 1899 when Pope Leo made it, when there was still a huge amount of anti-Catholic prejudice. To make it today sounds more like a condemnation of how the USA, specifically, practices religion. Which to me seems pretty unfair in view of the fact that so many people do practice it.

 

[misstherese]

Yeah, most of Europe doesn’t even bother to go to church, yet let’s name a heresy after the United States where many if not most people, Catholic or not, strongly believe in Jesus Christ.

Typical.

the Americanism heresy originated in the United States. Doesn’t matter if they believe in Jesus, that belief is tainted if it’s mixed with heresy.

 

[whyeyeman]

Judge them by their fruits… the fruits of the Francis Papacy is mass confusion.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

the Americanism heresy originated in the United States. Doesn’t matter if they believe in Jesus, that belief is tainted if it’s mixed with heresy.

I find this to be a shortsighted and unproductive view. If we want to work for positive change in the USA then we need to join together with our other Christian brethren as much as possible, not start alienating them by saying heresy this and heresy that. But if you want to think this way, go right ahead and isolate yourself. It will not do you or the Church any good in the long run.

 

[Genesis315]

With regard to the crisis, past Popes and others in the Church have spoken often of it–it is mostly one of a loss of faith at every level of the Church and it’s fruits are obvious–empty churches, empty seminaries, empty convents and monasteries. The abuse of holy things. The abuse of children. The approval of the world being sought, while salvation is presumed, etc., etc.

Modernism boils down to the denial of an objective revelation for all men (which is why it is the synthesis of all heresies–it removes the foundation of all dogmas). The attitudes leading to this “silent apostasy” as St. John Paul II called it, while similar, are more subtle I think, but are found where ever anyone tries to adapt or minimize the truths of the faith, the nature of the sacraments, or the commandments (I’m not talking about adapting the means of spreading them or teaching them).

 

[omgriley]

Still, I can accept the statement perhaps in 1899 when Pope Leo made it, when there was still a huge amount of anti-Catholic prejudice. To make it today sounds more like a condemnation of how the USA, specifically, practices religion. Which to me seems pretty unfair in view of the fact that so many people do practice it.

Do you think there isn’t a large amount of Anti-Catholic prejudice these days?

Besides, much of what Leo XIII condemned as Americanism (he used the phrase Liberalism) included things that are central to the American character: Liberal democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, separation from Church and State.

 

[misstherese]

No one’s alienating anyone. A heresy is a heresy. In this instance, Pope Leo XIII condemned it. I’m not saying anyone’s a heretic. Positive change will only come about if we make sure to preserve the Truths. At times I’ve seen people try to distort them, which is a good reason Pope Leo XIII condemned it outright.

 

[JanSobieskiIII]

Liberal democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, separation from Church and State.

The Church historically didn’t approve of the fruits of the Enlightenment

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Do you think there isn’t a large amount of Anti-Catholic prejudice these days?

Besides, much of what Leo XIII condemned as Americanism (he used the phrase Liberalism) included things that are central to the American character: Liberal democracy, freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, separation from Church and State.

I had parents and grands who dealt with actual anti-Catholic prejudice on one side of the family, and grands who actively practiced anti-Catholic prejudice on the other side, and there is WAY LESS of it now than there used to be.

As for having a problem with separation of church and state, and all the other things that flowed from it, see my comment above.

I think Pope Leo was a holy guy in many respects, but I am just as committed to the American ideals as I am to my faith. As my father used to say, the US system may not be perfect, but I’ve yet to see any other system I thought worked better.

 

[omgriley]

This is true. Stated positively, one could say the Enlightenment was anti-Catholic, and the fruits of the Enlightenment are seen no where more clearly than in the United States.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

You did, in effect, call everyone who practices a non-Catholic but Christian faith in the USA a heretic. In fact, according to this thread, all of us who believe in the principles of American government are heretics.

it’s ridiculous and I’m done responding to it.

 

[Genesis315]

Leo XIII didn’t condemn the policies or government style in America (which were fine for the circumstances in America at the time), but rather making those things a universal standard or ideal including within the Church herself.

“Liberalism,” also condemned by the Church, makes individual reason the only criterion of truth or at least the only possible principle for public society. The Church on the other hand, teaches (and still teaches) that the truth of faith matters too. We don’t believe in an absolute freedom of the press, of speech, or of religion, but ones that stay within the bounds of the common good (properly understood according to the objective criterion of both natural and supernatural truth). We believe in the separation of the Church and State in regard to two powers governing within two orbits of competence, but not with regard to the state completely disregarding the true religion.

 

[misstherese]

what? Americanism ideas originated in a group of Catholics. I’m not talking about Protestants or non Catholics. This isn’t about governing systems or anything like that either.

This is Americanism:

“The underlying principle of these new opinions,” wrote Leo,
Americanism is that, in order to more easily [sic] attract those who differ from her, the Church should shape her teachings more in accord with the spirit of the age and relax some of her ancient severity and make some concessions to new opinions. Many think that these concessions should be made not only in regard to ways of living, but even in regard to doctrines which belong to the deposit of the faith. They contend that it would be opportune, in order to gain those who differ from us, to omit certain points of her teaching which are of lesser importance, and to tone down the meaning which the Church has always attached to them.

 

[omgriley]

Leo XIII didn’t condemn the policies or government style in America (which were fine for the circumstances in America at the time), but rather making those things a universal standard or ideal including within the Church herself.

You’re right. Specifically, Pope Gregory XVI condemned them in Mirari Vos (1832) before Leo XIII built upon it. He did not specifically mention the United States, but it’s obvious he was describing such a society.

We don’t believe in an absolute freedom of the press, of speech, or of religion, but ones that stay within the bounds of the common good (properly understood according to the objective criterion of both natural and supernatural truth)…

…As defined by the Church. I think it is of import to note that separation of Church and State (even done withing an orbit of competence) is already an imposition upon the rights of the Church. What you’re saying is essentially true. However, with regard to “completely disregard the true religion” is important. Because when the State passes judgement on anything pertaining to morality, it must be subject to the judgement of the Church.

Pius IX says in Quanta Cura:

Which false and perverse opinions are on that ground the more to be detested, because they chiefly tend to this, that that salutary influence be impeded and (even) removed, which the Catholic Church, according to the institution and command of her Divine Author, should freely exercise even to the end of the world — not only over private individuals, but over nations, peoples, and their sovereign princes

St. Thomas, along with the various popes and the tradition of the Church have say that civil governments exist for the happiness of the citizens --i.e., the virtue of it’s citizens. What the Pope is saying here is that because both civil governments and the Church pass judgement on matters of morals, it falls on the Church to pass judgement on whether the State’s conduct is in accord with the Natural Law and the Divine Positive Law. This can’t be done when the State sets itself up as the standard of morality. It becomes a usurpation of the rights of the Church.

 

[Augustinian]

Do you think there isn’t a large amount of Anti-Catholic prejudice these days?

Not here in the United States there isn’t. A lot of people have disagreements with one teaching or another of the Catholic Church- but they rarely will discriminate against Catholics as far as employment, housing or other services.

I don’t even think that there was as much anti-Catholic prejudice in the golden age of anti Catholic prejudice as sometimes presumed. Back in the day, I think that a lot of the prejudice was against immigrants and that, and most of the immigrants just happened to be Catholic.

 

[Hereiam]

I have found the overwhelming majority of those calling themselves Traditionalists are into it because they see it as somehow chic and cool.

And I have found that those who simply prefer the liturgy of the TLM don’t hang labels on themselves or others.

 

[omgriley]

I don’t even think that there was as much anti-Catholic prejudice in the golden age of anti Catholic prejudice as sometimes presumed. Back in the day, I think that a lot of the prejudice was against immigrants and that, and most of the immigrants just happened to be Catholic.

A majority of the founding fathers were anti-Catholic, so…

And of course there was also the scandal regarding JFK being a Catholic, which only ended after he essentially refused any allegiance with the Roman Pontiff.

And I have found that those who simply prefer the liturgy of the TLM don’t hang labels on themselves or others.

I agree.