How can one be a "Liberal Catholic"?

[Turkleton]

Me being the person I am I assume that proclaimed liberals would be in support of the legality of abortion, homosexual marriage, contraceptive medicine and embryonic stem cell research.

But does the Catholic Church not condemn many of these things?

How is it possible to be a "liberal Catholic"?

 

[Korah]

Me being the person I am I assume that proclaimed liberals would be in support of the legality of abortion, homosexual marriage, contraceptive medicine and embryonic stem cell research.
But does the Catholic Church not condemn many of these things?
How is it possible to be a "liberal Catholic"?

How is it possible to have such gross presuppositions? Have you no conception of what the word "liberal" means historically? Have you no conception that Liberal Catholic was a major movement of great men of the 19th Century that is nothing like the secularism you apparently assume it is now? Probably this thread should be deleted as against our rules.
korah

 

[Turkleton]

I've looked through these forums and many liberal Catholics are in support of the issues I named. I am asking a fair question to those people.

 

[Korah]

I've looked through these forums and many liberal Catholics are in support of the issues I named. I am asking a fair question to those people.

Maybe so, but in my post #38 to the thread 'What does "Liberal Catholic" mean?' (the current concluding post) I presented the fact that a thread had been removed from this forum after I pointed out that it violated the premise of this forum, as your thread may as well. I argued that 13th Century Scholasticism of Natural Law has never been dogmatized (certainly not in its political implications), and Catholics are free to vote their consciences in spite of your insistence on suppressing them. Birth control has never been dogmatized. There never even was a universal Catholic catechism until 1983, and no ecumenical council has occurred since then to ratify it.
Korah

 

[Turkleton]

Regardless, my question still remains valid. How can a Catholic knowingly support something the Church condemns (dogma or not) and still believe that the Catholic Church is the "The pillar and foundation of truth" (Timothy 3:15) which Christ instated himself?

 

[Korah]

Regardless, my question still remains valid. How can a Catholic knowingly support something the Church condemns (dogma or not) and still believe that the Catholic Church is the "The pillar and foundation of truth" (Timothy 3:15) which Christ instated himself?

Which dogmatic declaration is that from? No matter, for me the Catholic Truth is as Jesus promised in the worship of Him in the Mass.
I won't waste further effort in a post that may get deleted along with the whole thread.
I'm not allowed to debate in OBOB. You're not allowed to debate here. Read the guidelines for "The Lord's Table--Liberal Catholics". You're a flamer.
Korah

 

[Turkleton]

Way to approach my question in such a kind manner. I have a question and I am looking for an answer. I want the perspective of a Liberal Catholic to say "well this is where I'm coming from". Shall I ask in the conservative forum next time?

 

[Korah]

Way to approach my question in such a kind manner. I have a question and I am looking for an answer. I want the perspective of a Liberal Catholic to say "well this is where I'm coming from". Shall I ask in the conservative forum next time?

Gee, and here I thought you were looking for a fight! Silly me!
Maybe you could have started with an open-ended question that didn't look like a statement of dogmatic rigidity.
Maybe something like,
"Among people who call themselves Liberal Catholics, I've noticed some take positions directly contrary to the CCC and other authoritative RC documents. How far can the bounds of liberalism be stretched without being insincere word-smithing? Obviously I'm not talking about the right to vote Democratic or take the U. S. Constitution's position against making RC the de facto State Church by imposing our moral standards about abortion upon the political systems protecting federalism and individual rights, but what about direct antipathy to everything I accept that RC teaches?"
Or maybe the title got me off track? Maybe it could have been instead, 'How can one take certain extreme positions and still call oneself "Liberal Catholic" instead of "former Catholic" '?

 

[Turkleton]

Gee, and here I thought you were looking for a fight! Silly me!
Maybe you could have started with an open-ended question that didn't look like a statement of dogmatic rigidity.
Maybe something like,
"Among people who call themselves Liberal Catholics, I've noticed some take positions directly contrary to the CCC and other authoritative RC documents. How far can the bounds of liberalism be stretched without being insincere word-smithing? Obviously I'm not talking about the right to vote Democratic or take the U. S. Constitution's position against making RC the de facto State Church by imposing our moral standards about abortion upon the political systems protecting federalism and individual rights, but what about direct antipathy to everything I accept that RC teaches?"
Or maybe the title got me off track? Maybe it could have been instead, 'How can one take certain extreme positions and still call oneself "Liberal Catholic" instead of "former Catholic" '?

I recommend you stop assuming the worst in a question and give one the benefit of the doubt. Instead of ignoring the question because it either does not apply to you or you don't feel like giving an answer you chose to insinuate that I am here trying to "pick a fight". Perhaps next time I should ask a question in a less frank manner that would avoid potentially offending someone. The mature way to have answered this question in your case would be and kind explanation of your meaning of "liberal Catholic" and briefly telling me in a kind manner that this post was in the incorrect forum and It belongs elsewhere. Instead, you called my hypothesis "gross", called me a "flamer" and implied that I was attempting to have a fight with my fellow Catholic Christians. I am sorry that I may have offended you but your implications about me and the intentions of my post needed to be clarified.

 

[Korah]

As I explained, I don't want to waste another long, thorough response that may be taken down when the OP is determined to violate forum rules.
I would think you could see my response in my suggested polite form of the question. I have no business replying for those more extreme than I am.

 

[Michael96]

Regardless, my question still remains valid. How can a Catholic knowingly support something the Church condemns (dogma or not) and still believe that the Catholic Church is the "The pillar and foundation of truth" (Timothy 3:15) which Christ instated himself?

I guess that depends a little on whether you believe you can choose what you believe. I can't say I agree with the Church on everything - I read, I listen, I think - and I come to the best conclusion that I can (without thinking I must definitely be right) after trying to understand different points of view.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Regardless, my question still remains valid. How can a Catholic knowingly support something the Church condemns (dogma or not) and still believe that the Catholic Church is the "The pillar and foundation of truth" (Timothy 3:15) which Christ instated himself?

Our understanding of Christ's teachings is necessarily incomplete (in that humans are finite beings) and developing (through the Holy Spirit).

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Me being the person I am I assume that proclaimed liberals would be in support of the legality of abortion, homosexual marriage, contraceptive medicine and embryonic stem cell research.

But does the Catholic Church not condemn many of these things?

How is it possible to be a "liberal Catholic"?

I do not believe that procreation is a necessary component of sexual activity.

I do not know when life begins. I regret that many in the Church seem to think that life self-evidently starts at conception because this appears to leave them ill-equipped to answer the questions of those who do not find it self-evident. I do find mid- to late-term abortions morally repulsive because the fetus is clearly taking human form and the biological issues that make the status of zygotes confusing no longer apply.

 

[Pondero]

How is it possible to have such gross presuppositions? Have you no conception of what the word "liberal" means historically? Have you no conception that Liberal Catholic was a major movement of great men of the 19th Century that is nothing like the secularism you apparently assume it is now? Probably this thread should be deleted as against our rules.
korah

Until after Vatican II there was no theological conception of "liberal" or "conservative" applied to Catholics. They were, and still are, political terms.

Liberal and conservative terms have no place in the Catholic Church. It started when Humanae Vitae was issued on July 25, 1968 by Pope Paul VI. Its teaching on birth control was not expected and came as a shock to our bishops in Canada. They disagreed with it, or many of them did, at the Winnipeg Conference. Today, they are still grappling with the implications of their decision not to support the magisterium.

 

[Pondero]

It was wrong of our Canadian bishops in Winnipeg to act the way they did. Since then there has been some statement or other by at least some of the bishops to support Humanae Vitae and all that is in it. Still, the damage is done, we have had abortion on demand since 1969 and artificial contraception is an accepted way of life.
It will be some time before the Catholic Church in Canada gets back to its traditional position on these matters.

 

[Nayrb]

My own personal answer:

I'm often called a "Liberal Catholic" by other Catholics. I don't mind the title, but I just go with mere "Catholic". I'm indeed pro-life, anti-embryonic stem cell research, but pro-gay rights.

How do I justify these positions? Well each position is different with different justifications. The one thing they all have in common is an appeal to history: The Church in the past has gotten things wrong. The church has a few times changed her non-infallible teachings. With this pattern in mind, I cannot in good faith blindly follow what the hierarchy of the church teach. I indeed follow the vast majority of what the Catholic Church teaches today, and I always give the Magisterium the benefit of the doubt, but when I study, pray earnestly, and am informed by my conscience that a particular teaching just is not right, I'm obligated to dissent.

 

[Cura Animarum]

I'm new to these forums but I'm also not afraid to 'jump in with both feet' and I do enjoy lively, respectful discussion.

I consider myself more liberal than conservative depending on the issue at hand, but most definitely Catholic. I have to admit that I've often asked my own self "how can that be?" and I also admit to circumstances where extremists from either side of the coin have made me feel as though there is no place at the table for me, no matter which side I wanted to dish my plate up on.

For myself the "How can you...?" question (which does suggest someone whose mind is made up in advance rather than a genuine desire to understand) is easy enough to answer...I can be a liberal minded Catholic mostly because none of the issues you bring up are things I disagree with; "legality of abortion, homosexual marriage, contraceptive medicine and embryonic stem cell research".

I think what makes me lean more liberal is not so much the fact that I hold these things to be true, as is the reason why. I do not hold them as True simply because the Church has told me I must. I stopped using the "Because I said so" line with my kids when they were in their teens and I would hope God desires a deeper relationship than that with me...in fact Jesus assures me that God does!

No, I have taken the time to really understand the issues, to examine all sides and really grasp what fundamental Truths lie at their heart. I would never be content with a "because I said so" Church, or faith, or loving relationship and I know my Lord and God is not either.

There is one more thing, I believe, that makes me fall more under the 'liberal' umbrella rather than 'conservative'. I do not agree with closing the table of the Lord, where the human family is called universally to gather as One Bread, One Body in a relationship based on mutual love as opposed to mutual condemnation, to those who are in the process of examining their own stance on those issues and the host of others that we humans struggle with in our lives. As a wise lion once said in one of my favorite books "I am telling you your story, not hers."

It seems to me that this is what marks most 'liberal' Catholics I know, they tend to be far more concerned with their story, than with the story Christ is whispering in the ears of their brothers and sisters.

 

[Miss Susie]

Hello, I'm new here, and I would indeed fall under the category of "Liberal Catholic" because of the fact that most of my political views are of the liberal nature for example, I am pro - choice, simply because I think that nobody should be told what to do with their body, after all, this is supposed to be a "free" country, although the loss of a life saddens me, I think it is one's own choice by means of what is best for them considering their situation, whatever it may be. I don't think it should be used as a method of birth control, meaning if someone were to get pregnant, have an abortion, then get pregnant again, and have yet another procedure done, I think that would just be plain ridiculous.
Also, I support stem cell research considering that it can help find a cure for certain illnesses and diseases.
And finally, yes gay rights, because to be honest, gay people aren't affecting my life, I'm not gay, so why should I care if they get married? It's their choice not mine and does not affect my life in any way. I do not like the idea of them being married, considering that when I think of marrige I think of a man and a woman, not two members of the same sex. However, I am not going to lose sleep over it if gay people are ever allowed to get married.
Last of all, I will say this, in my opinion, the church should have no place in politics and politics should have no place in the church. That is why I feel the way I do about these issues. I don't think about the church when I think about political issues such as these. And I don't think about politics in church.

 

[Cura Animarum]

And here is where being more liberally minded, feels to me to be much closer to the ideal presented by Christ. I pretty much disagree with your entire comment. To me it is self-evident that Christ intended this faith to be a part of every single aspect of human life. I can't imagine cordoning off one aspect of my life, my thoughts, my ideas or my values and saying...."you can have most of me Lord, but I'm keeping this stuff for myself."

And yet, we are, you and I, of the same body. One perhaps not in mind, and certainly carrying around with us our own particular brokenness and misunderstandings of the Word and our faith, yet we are bound by our shared life in the Spirit, and in the Body and Blood of Christ which we share each week (maybe even each day?).

In the same way that there were divisions and jealousies and grave misunderstandings at the Last Super, and even quite significantly as the Church grew after the Ascension (l0ok at Peter and Paul, or Paul and Barnabus, or Paul and just about everyone else ;o) ), there remain sometimes the same obstacles to faith and we've even managed to invent creative new ones, that only the sacrificial Body and Blood of our Lord and God can overcome.

So though we may disagree, I believe that what makes us more liberally minded Catholics is not so much our politics, as it is our acceptance in love and faith, of each other's blessedness and brokenness and our determination to carry on this pilgrim's way to the kingdom hand in hand.

 

[Turkleton]

Hello, I'm new here, and I would indeed fall under the category of "Liberal Catholic" because of the fact that most of my political views are of the liberal nature for example, I am pro - choice, simply because I think that nobody should be told what to do with their body, after all, this is supposed to be a "free" country, although the loss of a life saddens me, I think it is one's own choice by means of what is best for them considering their situation, whatever it may be. I don't think it should be used as a method of birth control, meaning if someone were to get pregnant, have an abortion, then get pregnant again, and have yet another procedure done, I think that would just be plain ridiculous.
Also, I support stem cell research considering that it can help find a cure for certain illnesses and diseases.
And finally, yes gay rights, because to be honest, gay people aren't affecting my life, I'm not gay, so why should I care if they get married? It's their choice not mine and does not affect my life in any way. I do not like the idea of them being married, considering that when I think of marrige I think of a man and a woman, not two members of the same sex. However, I am not going to lose sleep over it if gay people are ever allowed to get married.
Last of all, I will say this, in my opinion, the church should have no place in politics and politics should have no place in the church. That is why I feel the way I do about these issues. I don't think about the church when I think about political issues such as these. And I don't think about politics in church.

I see where you are coming from but the same question still keeps popping up...

So many verses to use but this one seems to do my point justice

1 Timothy 3:15 - the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth

How can the Church that Christ instituted be wrong? Shouldn't all of it's teachings be applied in all areas?

[URL="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=33&chapter=33&verse=9&version=31&context=verse"]Ezekiel 33:9

- But if you do warn the wicked man to turn from his ways and he does not do so, he will die for his sin, but you will have saved yourself.

[/URL]

[URL="http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=33&chapter=33&verse=9&version=31&context=verse"]Ezekiel 33:9

- But if you do warn the wicked man to turn from his ways and he does not do so, he will die for his sin, but you will have saved yourself.

[/URL]

It's our responsibility to call others out for their sin. We can't just disagree and just say it doesn't apply to us.