Why?

[Silent_Knight]

Why are liberal priests allowed to be in the position they are in?
I don’t get it, really I don’t and it bothers me.

Liberalism goes against what the Bible teaches, having liberal priests then promotes such things.
I know some Anglican Priests who promote gay marriage and all sorts of lewd things… it really doesn’t make sense to me.

Am I off to feel this way?

 

[Stylites]

Not enough information to go on. What positions? What such things? Why mention Anglican priests? In other words: What? Why?

 

[Silent_Knight]

I thought my question was quite clear. When I say “such things” I mean like the gay marriage I had mentioned. Why are liberal people allowed to be priests, that is the “position” I am referring to. The Anglican part was just an afterthought since I know some personally.

 

[MacMcCarver]

Liberalism is a very broad word which is often a very positive word to apply to someone’s thinking. When you mention homosexual unions, do you mean that that is what this post is about or do you care to expand what you mean by liberal priests? It really is important to explain what you mean because the word liberal has many connotations in today’s socio-political climate.

 

[puzzleannie]

Why are liberal priests allowed to be in the position they are in?
I don’t get it, really I don’t and it bothers me.

if you have that question about a specific priest in your diocese, ask your bishop but be prepared to back up your definition of liberal with evidence.

 

[jtodisco]

Why are liberal priests allowed to be in the position they are in?
I don’t get it, really I don’t and it bothers me.

Liberalism goes against what the Bible teaches, having liberal priests then promotes such things.
I know some Anglican Priests who promote gay marriage and all sorts of lewd things… it really doesn’t make sense to me.

Am I off to feel this way?

No one is worthy of becoming a priest. But God in His infinite patience and mercy has allowed many flawed men to serve as priests in His Church. I could say the same for even being lay members of Christ’s Mystical Body the Church. None of us are worthy.

With that said, your post is far too vague as others have pointed out. What is “liberal” for you may not be for another person. Terms like “liberal” and “conservative” are used so much by so many people that they hardly have much meaning at all anymore. Someone is only liberal or conservative in respect to your own political beliefs. Sure, they mean something to the individuals who use such words, but just try getting a clear consensus.

I could just as easily ask why “conservative” people are allowed to become priests? I could then go on to generalize like you have done and indirectly relate conservatism with such social ills as racism, sexism, and war-mongering. Would that be a truly accurate picture of what all, or even most, conservatives support? Absolutely not. And again the terms are far too subjective.

Lastly, since you may already suspect this, I’m what some might classify as a “liberal” and I love the Church and am loyal to Her.

 

[GloriousOrder]

Let’s not all be smarmy and assume that, by “liberal”, the O.P. is referring to some petty social or foreign-policy initiative. I believe he is using the term as a euphemism for “heretic”. By this, the word signifies support for gay Catholic marriage, support for married priests, support for contraception, support for abortion, and a thousand other anti-Catholic things. Please don’t pretend you’re ignorant of what the word means.

 

[CB_Catholic]

Let’s not all be smarmy and assume that, by “liberal”, the O.P. is referring to some petty social or foreign-policy initiative. I believe he is using the term as a euphemism for “heretic”. By this, the word signifies support for gay Catholic marriage, support for married priests, support for contraception, support for abortion, and a thousand other anti-Catholic things. Please don’t pretend you’re ignorant of what the word means.

That is probably true, but on these forums “liberal” can mean anything from what you have stated to those who prefer CITH and allow female altar servers. For instance, a pet phrase is “liberal NO parish”. Upon further clarification that can mean a parish with female altar servers, CITH, the use of EMHC’s, and the Mass in the OF even though the priest is perfectly orthodox and the Mass is by the book and no Canon law is violated (a parish such as mine), to a parish where the priest is heterodox in his teaching and beliefs and the Mass is composed on the go. The OP really does need to define what he means by “liberal”.

That is why I consider the term rather useless. And BTW, support for married priests is not “anti-Catholic”. It is a discipline that can be changed or suspended, and it is common in the Eastern Catholic Churches for the priests to be married. We will be seeing more married priests in the near future from those Protestant ministers wishing to come into full communion with the Catholic Church and apply and are allowed to be ordained in the CC. To call it a “liberal” view only illustrates what I have said about the term being problematic.

 

[jtodisco]

And BTW, support for married priests is not “anti-Catholic”. It is a discipline that can be changed or suspended, and it is common in the Eastern Catholic Churches for the priests to be married. We will be seeing more married priests in the near future from those Protestant ministers wishing to come into full communion with the Catholic Church and apply and are allowed to be ordained in the CC. To call it a “liberal” view only illustrates what I have said about the term being problematic.

I would have quoted your entire post CB Catholic as I agreed with all of it, however I only quoted this part of your post since it seems that you’ve read my mind. This thought struck me as soon as I read GloriousOrder’s post.

 

[laszlo]

That is probably true, but on these forums “liberal” can mean anything from what you have stated to those who prefer CITH and allow female altar servers. For instance, a pet phrase is “liberal NO parish”. Upon further clarification that can mean a parish with female altar servers, CITH, the use of EMHC’s, and the Mass in the OF even though the priest is perfectly orthodox and the Mass is by the book and no Canon law is violated (a parish such as mine), to a parish where the priest is heterodox in his teaching and beliefs and the Mass is composed on the go. The OP really does need to define what he means by “liberal”.

That is why I consider the term rather useless. And BTW, support for married priests is not “anti-Catholic”. It is a discipline that can be changed or suspended, and it is common in the Eastern Catholic Churches for the priests to be married. We will be seeing more married priests in the near future from those Protestant ministers wishing to come into full communion with the Catholic Church and apply and are allowed to be ordained in the CC. To call it a “liberal” view only illustrates what I have said about the term being problematic.

Amen. As for the part of the question why are in the Church priest vhith view which is contrary to the teaching of the Church, the answer is:

Matt 13:29 And he said: No, lest perhaps gathering up the cockle, you root up the wheat also together with it. 30 Suffer both to grow until the harvest, and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers: Gather up first the cockle, and bind it into bundles to burn, but the wheat gather ye into my barn.

 

[TheMc]

Seriously? Everyone knows what the OP means. He means the priests that play it fast and loose with the rubrics of the Mass. He means the ones that give sermons with less substantiality than air, those priests who think birth control is ok if your conscience says you can, sometimes supports gay rights, often acts like the environmental is more important than abortion, etc, etc…

I believe the reason they are around is because there’s no other priests to take their place. Someone has to offer Mass, and even good bishops can’t handle every little thing, as much as they’d like to. And sometimes they just don’t know. But don’t loose hope. There is a younger generation of priests that are faithful to the church, and are authentic servants of the liturgy. I can see that anytime I look at our seminarians.

Silent Knight, is that what you are looking for?

 

[hilde_the_dog]

This is not a new issue or something that came up after 1962. This is as old as the Church. In today’s reading of the LOTH Office of the Reading St John in his Second letter verses 9-11:
"9
Anyone who is so “progressive” as not to remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God; whoever remains in the teaching has the Father and the Son.
10
If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him in your house or even greet him;
11
for whoever greets him shares in his evil works. "

So I would not fear liberals, rather “progressives”. St. John , other editors,put “progressive”
in quotes in the Bible not me.

 

[mdgspencer]

On the one hand, the bishops do sometimes act to deal with liberal priests in cases that do not become public knowledge. I know of cases of this in my own diocese which were never reported in the media.
I presume by liberal priests the opening poster means priests who, for example, let people know that gay sex is healthy and good, or who for example, use eucharistic prayers apparently composed by themselves. I have known priests who have done both of these things.
The fact that there are some priests of these sorts happily running parishes or who have positions in authority at Catholic schools must be due to the neglect of some bishops for their responsibility towards the people under them. Such priests do sometimes great harm to the people under them. There have been a few bishops well-known for this neglect (who of course I will not identify). However, I have been seeing with happiness that many of them have been retiring in recent years and are gone for good from power. I think that the Church in the West is slowly being renewed over the years and it is becoming apparent that such priests are the wave of the past. Younger priests now generally are more orthodox.

 

[Silent_Knight]

Let’s not all be smarmy and assume that, by “liberal”, the O.P. is referring to some petty social or foreign-policy initiative. I believe he is using the term as a euphemism for “heretic”. By this, the word signifies support for gay Catholic marriage, support for married priests, support for contraception, support for abortion, and a thousand other anti-Catholic things. Please don’t pretend you’re ignorant of what the word means.

Seriously? Everyone knows what the OP means. He means the priests that play it fast and loose with the rubrics of the Mass. He means the ones that give sermons with less substantiality than air, those priests who think birth control is ok if your conscience says you can, sometimes supports gay rights, often acts like the environmental is more important than abortion, etc, etc…

I believe the reason they are around is because there’s no other priests to take their place. Someone has to offer Mass, and even good bishops can’t handle every little thing, as much as they’d like to. And sometimes they just don’t know. But don’t loose hope. There is a younger generation of priests that are faithful to the church, and are authentic servants of the liturgy. I can see that anytime I look at our seminarians.

Silent Knight, is that what you are looking for?

Yes, exactly… you guys are the only ones who get it without trying to turn it into something else. I appreciate your responses… it’s definitely about heresy and I have a major problem with it!

I somehow knew I would get a response about “racism, sexism and war-mongering” (facepalm!) what a cruddy stereotype that is, obviously you are a liberal in every since of the word since that is such a typical slander of all conservatives, but you must remember I am talking about Priests… and with that job comes GREAT responsibility and I think liberals fail very much so in this regard, conservatives are not all perfect (who is) but they generally stick to tradition and respect God’s word, do they not… shouldn’t that be the point of being a Priest serving HIM not your OWN worldly desires?

 

[GloriousOrder]

Well, Silent Knight, what do you expect? That’s all I can say! Look at the flood of immoral and downright evil priests, bishops, and cardinals we’ve had in history. Merely hearing insubstantial and slightly-iffy homilies isn’t really all that bad compared to the Arian crisis, or the times of the Pornocracy! The Church will always be absolutely stuffed full of sinners, ourselves included. Some of us may try a little harder to master our sins, but there will always be a great refuge required for the lowest dregs of the spiritual world. Let’s just hope that the less-orthodox priests will start retiring and all the rapists who justify heresy will be packed off.