Posted on 10/24/2010 8:40:45 AM PDT by Albion Wilde
Pressure is on to change the Roman Catholic Church in America, but it's not coming from the usual liberal suspects. A new breed of theological conservatives has taken to blogs and YouTube to say the church isn't Catholic enough.
Enraged by dissent that they believe has gone unchecked for decades, and unafraid to say so in the starkest language, these activists are naming names and unsettling the church...
If, by that, you mean SSPX, SSPV, etc ...
No. Never. Not in a million years.
If you mean FSSP, CRSJC, etc ... that certainly qualifies as "parishes, orders ... that are genuinely Catholic".
You will find a great deal of "vitriol" directed at the spurious "spirit of Vatican II". You will find vitriol directed at the many violations of Catholic tradition, Tradition, doctrine and dogma which some folks committed in the name of the "spirit of Vatican II" and in violation of the Council itself.
Perhaps you would have to be Catholic to understand the difference, although I think otherwise. I think willingness to listen to the Catholics, in honesty and charity, would suffice.
You’ve got a cadré of these “bloggers” on FR who are not exactly demonstrative of any willingness to listen to anyone but themselves, not listening in honesty and not in charity, certainly not to “the likes of me.” I extend that courtesy in kind.
You’ve got apostates and agnostics putting forth rote recitations of purported church history while believing none of it spiritually, being treated as allies and experts by these “bloggers.”
It’s gotten ugly, here at least. Destroying any common cause you may have with conservative Christians outside your church is counterproductive in the extreme, and that’s exactly what’s happening.
The problem this morning is my spelling. It must be Sunday or sumpin.
Approx. 50% of Catholic priests do not agree with Human Vitae (RC teaching on birth control). Catholic Parish Priests and Birth Control: A Comparative Study of Opinion in Colombia, the United States, and the Netherlands, by Gail A. Shea, Thomas K. Burch, Gustavo Perez, Miriam Ordonez, Joseph Van Kemanade, Jan Hutjes and Andre E. Hellegers © 1971 Population Council.
30% of Roman Catholic priests described themselves as Liberal, 28% as Conservative, and 37% as Moderate in their Religious ideology. ^8.5Los Angeles Times (extensive) nationwide survey (2002). Arthur Jones, 2002 National Catholic Reporter. Gale Group. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_2_39/ai_94129129/pg_2
53 percent responded that they thought it always was a sin for unmarried people to have sexual relations, : 32 percent that is often was, and 9 percent seldom/never. ^8.5
71 percent responded that it always was wrong for a woman to get an abortion, 19 percent that it often was, and 4 percent seldom/never. ^8.5
28 percent judged that is always was sin for married couples to use artificial birth control, 25 percent often, 40 percent never. ^8.5
49 percent affirmed that it was always a sin to engage in homosexual behavior, often, 25 percent; and never, 19 percent. ^8.5
To take one's own life if suffering from a debilitating disease: always, 59 percent; often, 18 percent; never, 17 percent. ^8.5
15 percent of the current clergy listed themselves as "gay or on the homosexual side." Among younger priests 23 percent did so. ^8.5
44 percent of the priests said "definitely" a homosexual subculture'--defined as a `definite group of persons that has its own friendships, social gatherings and vocabulary'--exists in their diocese or religious order. ^8.5
Tell it to the "protestants" on that thread with fourteen thousand posts (and counting). Tell it to the "protestants" who snark and sneer at Pope Benedict, or any other Catholic clergyman, even when said Catholic is saying things that the "protestants" actually agree with. "Purported church history"??? I see a whole lot of that from "protestants" ...
As for you ...
You've got a cadre of protestant "bloggers" on FR who regularly demonstrate a willingness to listen only to themselves, to warp and misrepresent the statements of others, and (if that fails) to fabricate offensive beliefs and impute said beliefs to others.
DON'T prattle to me about the poor oppressed, put-upon protestant. Ten years ago, I signed on to this forum seeing Protestant Christians as brothers in Christ. The behaviour of some self-so-called "Christians" of a protestant variety on this forum makes it very difficult for me to see protestantism in general as anything other than demonic trash. Again, take a look at the protestants on the fourteen thousand post thread. Any contempt those foul folk receive, they have invited.
It may well be wrong to hold them in contempt rather than pray for their repentance and conversion to Christ, but it's an understandable wrong. Have you ever rebuked your co-religionists for their excesses, or do you reserve your rebukes for Catholics?
MA and other states show a casual connection between religion (and money and education) and moral views , and you might find this chart interesting: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Statistical_Correlations.html
Most who leave the Catholic church do so for reasons of spiritual life.
I’ve only spoken for myself, ArrogantBustard. I do note that you knew exactly what I was referencing.
I’d actually found the conservative resurgence within your church to be an encouraging development. Then, the wild-eyed ultra-whatevers turned up and spent more time attacking fellow conservative Christians than in attempting to correct their own situation.
You do as you please, I’m done with it. I asked your cohorts to reconsider their approach, noted that it was destructive. “The likes of me” have no value to you, however.
Carry on.
As an evangelical I see misrepresentations and arrogant attitudes on both sides, and while rebukes have their place, reasoned and objective analysis with souls who seek the same are not often found, but can be. Threads with multitude posters also easily degenerate in a lower level, while when you have posters contending that their church is the one true church, based upon its claim to be so, and others opposing, which it often seems to be the order, it should be expected that lengthy threads follows.
What does any of that have to do with the thread topic? Surely your comment would not be an attempt at a thread hijack?
Surely not.
That thread, like so many others, was a sewer from page one, and it's character as such had nothing to do with any agnostic.
I’d actually found the conservative resurgence within your church to be an encouraging development.
Wonderful ... some folks see us as the worst thing since Ghengis Khan.
Again, I have not participated in FR RF, but to me the “epitome of dissent” is something more than simple forum commentary/complaints.
If it is be effective, dissent and corresponding action needs to foster in local parishes, communities and on up.
No disagreement that men are not perfect, but a catholic, or any christian, body that reflects nothing more than the broader secular society is not really a “church body” as most understand that term. In other words, what’s the point?
Not sure what you mean about “deluding oneself in the mainstream”, but I do know that every movement must start somewhere. If there is no movement, or if the movement discussed in the article does not grow, christian churches/parishes are doomed to fail and simply fold into the larger secular “mainstream” society.
Kind of like how today is and has been “World Mission Sunday” in the Catholic church, BUT is now seemingly being co-opted as “United Nations Day” and “Global Oneness Day”. Hmmmmm....
The beat goes on...
The topic is about modern day Catholic reformers, while the responses (inevitably) have touched on the Prot. vs. RC debate, and my stats evidence that the reformers have a lot of work to do, but also touches on the introduced issue.
Some men with hammers look at everything as a nail.
LOL! My wife and children were putting pro-life voting guides on the cars in the local baptist mega-church this morning.
One of the pastors came out and threw them off their property. Good thing I wasn’t with them.
What would you have done to the mega church pastor?
I donated office space for over five years to one of his peers locally, a baptist minister than ran a crisis pregnancy counseling center out of the second floor of my medical office. A member of his church council sits on the board of that crisis pregnancy center. I cannot comprehend the moral cowardice this pastor displayed this morning.
We have two “mega churches” locally, the one already mentioned, which is independent baptist, and a large independent pentecostal church.
I met with the pastor of the pentecostal mega church years ago, and begged him to personally get involved in promoting pro-life work. I asked him if he would at least send a bus to the March For Life. He said he already had two going.
I responded, “You have two buses going to the March For Life?!? That’s terrific!”
He responded, “No, but I think there are two women who attend my church that go on the March.”
I asked him to organize a bus and preach on pro-life issues. I volunteered to speak on the topic. (I had gone to Haiti on a mission trip with him and his church, and he knew me well.)
He steadfastly refused. He said it would upset the charism and mission of his particlar church.
How can you claim to be filled with the Holy Spirit yet refuse to get involved in pro-life work? How can you be a fundamental (i.e., baptist) minister, and throw Christian pro-lifers off your property for handing out pro-life voters guides? (I stopped being impressed with evangelical and born again Christians years ago, though there are notable saintly exceptions. Their behavior in general on the FR RF didn’t help.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.