The Term Liberal Catholic

[Davidnic]

There has been some discussion of this term.

As I said in the poll thread... I do agree that I find dividing Catholicism into labels is odd. But it was not staff who did it, it was members who requested it.

This subforum is here as a liberal Catholic subforum. That was not a term chosen by staff it was a term chosen by the Catholics who made it. When it was brought back it was brought back along those lines. We did not name it, the Catholics who created it named it. It exists because it allows discussion on a wider level of theology that the Church, generally, does not officially support. Examples: Women priests, homosexual activity is alright, development of Dogma beyond the accepted teaching of the Church...ect.

As far as Liberal Catholic theology...Hang Kung, Sr. Joan Chittister and many others are examples of those who express theologies along the lines of what this subforum explores.

This forum, no matter what else people use it for, was set up to explore and discuss the edges of that style of theology while remaining in union with the Church.

This is why it exists.

I am not a liberal Catholic theologically. But it is the best name for what this forum provides a safe haven for. It exists to provide a place to discuss, in union with the Church, those edges.

 

[Godlovesmetwo]

I'd like to ask David or Tall Guy whether they consider the following writers as "Liberal Catholics".

Thomas Merton
Thomas Keating
Richard Rohr
Henri Nouwen
Ronald Rolheiser

So if I were to agree with most of what any of these wrote, I would be classed as "Liberal Catholic." ?

 

[Fish and Bread]

I support the current name of the forum for many of the reasons Davidnic outlined, some of which I feel are very important, particularly the safe haven aspect, which is something I feel very strongly about- that liberal Catholics deserve to have a safe haven where they can explore their theology and spirituality and uplift each other without having to defend it against harsh criticism and debate from people who do not share our spiritual outlook (While granting that our theological outlook is relatively broad).

However, I do want to add one additional reason that I feel that the name is important, which is that it is self-selecting to some degree. The type of folks who have created the atmosphere that some people don't like elsewhere would not generally associate themselves with the term "Liberal" under any circumstances (With perhaps one or two exceptions). The type of people who are not themselves liberal but would be good at fellowshipping here and be a bonus to our community are not so put off by the term as not to show up, though. Thus, we get the best of the moderates and conservatives as fellowship posters while getting liberals as full members, which is the best of both worlds- giving us the type of spiritual and collegial fellowship type community that many people of all theological persuasions can enjoy while still being a safe haven for Liberal Catholics on the controversial subjects.

As soon as you take the name "Liberal" out of the forum title, people will come out of the ether and say "I am a Catholic and the new modifier on the name is something I think I fit with, even though I am very conservative and want to burn 'heretics' at the stake and have identical views to Cardinal Burke except where I am even more conservative" and then start arguing with liberals on every thread that explores the true meaning of the spirit of Vatican II and how the Church can evolve to be more loving and inclusive. Then they'll tell the liberals that we don't belong here because we aren't real Catholics. I've seen that movie before. They have their own conservative forum to do that, and there is OBOB as in theory neutral ground but which enforces a conservative interpretation of some theology, so maybe they have two forums. This is the only one we liberals have, which is not limiting participation only to liberals per say, but is supposed to be a safe haven so others post in fellowship and don't hammer us on issues where we disagree.

If it just turns into The Lord's Table- Catholic, I would not be interested in posting here, because I wouldn't want to participate in watching this turn into a copy of forums that don't meet my spiritual needs and where I can't express myself in a safe space.

The only name change I could really stomach is substituting "Progressive" for "Liberal", if it was made clear in the statement of purpose that they mostly meant the same thing with a slightly different emphasis. Anything further than that inevitably means the forum will go in a direction that is not what I am looking for. Of course, what other people are looking for may vary, but I feel like, at least in terms of theological spread, there are other options for those who really find us beyond the pale liberal. Actually, in the grand scheme of things, this forum is functionally moderate, it's just liberal by CF standards. No one has said "Theism as an Expression of God is Outdated" or anything yet. We're just talking about stuff like women priests sometimes (And not even most of the time).

 

[Martinius]

The fact that original members of this forum decided on the description doesn't mean that it is appropriate for the current membership or content. The problem I have is with connotations that many people give the term "liberal". I readily admit to being a liberal Catholic, but also view myself as a Vatican II Catholic, a progressive Catholic, a Gospel-first Catholic, an open minded Catholic, contemporary Catholic, a John XXIII and Francis I Catholic, etc.

The purpose of this forum and its parameters are there for all to read, but how many people coming here do that? Or do they make assumptions based on the name and description? We know that several current members originally expressed surprise at what they found here, that it wasn't as radical as they thought it might be. Of course, some may wish this forum to be more radical.

In my opinion, I see this forum as very middle-of-the-road, basically what I expect my Church to be, and a lot like my last two parishes have been. So to me, this is THE Catholic forum. I see the other two forums as being the forum for Catholics who wish to go back to the first half of the 20th century or the Council of Trent, respectively. While I see myself as a centrist Catholic, following the teachings of the Church as promulgated and interpreted during and since Vatican II, some people on the other forums would consider me very liberal, a Protestant, and even a heretic. So maybe "liberal" isn't so bad.

 

[Davidnic]

I'd like to ask David or Tall Guy whether they consider the following writers as "Liberal Catholics".

Thomas Merton
Thomas Keating
Richard Rohr
Henri Nouwen
Ronald Rolheiser

So if I were to agree with most of what any of these wrote, I would be classed as "Liberal Catholic." ?

Well a lot of that thought is monastic or related to monastic thought. Merton is loved by many who are not liberal in theology.

Rhor..yes that would be liberal Catholic theology.

 

[tadoflamb]

Now that I know what Liberal Theology is, it's completely over my head and I suspect if we left this forum to the handful of people who can talk about Liberal Theology intelligently, it would suffer the same fate when it opened the first time. Much of the content on this board would fit well with any mainstream Catholic forum, so why are we here? Obviously TLT is providing something for us conservative, progressive, traditional Catholics that we can't find anywhere else.

 

[tadoflamb]

Fr. Rohr is interesting to listen to, but there's definitely a point where I hop off his bus.

 

[anjelica]

Well as I said to my priest today:"I don't know who I am any more!" All I know is that I like it here and do not fel afraid of expressing myself here or starting threads here. Theological or otherwise.

Yes, I can and would discuss luberal theology and all those theologians who fit into such a category according to some, but also I find a deep spiritualuty in here, and much goodwill, which I like.

 

[Davidnic]

The thing is no matter what people are using TLT for it exists as a safe haven for that version of theology. And other things can exist here but the main reason it exists is a safe haven for liberal Christian theology expressed in a Catholic voice.

I fellowship here just as I will in any Catholic Forum in Union with Rome. And I respectfully engage with my brothers and sisters who do follow a more liberal form of theology.

 

[anjelica]

Are we here just todiscuss theology then?

 

[victorinus]

most catholics are liberal -
they vote democratic and don't think it is a sin

 

[Martinius]

Now that I know what Liberal Theology is, it's completely over my head and I suspect if we left this forum to the handful of people who can talk about Liberal Theology intelligently, it would suffer the same fate when it opened the first time. Much of the content on this board would fit well with any mainstream Catholic forum, so why are we here? Obviously TLT is providing something for us conservative, progressive, traditional Catholics that we can't find anywhere else.

That is the point I was making above. This forum is really for mainstream Catholics, and is inhabited by people who cover a fairly wide spectrum of Catholic thought. I don't see this forum as being strictly theological in content, although discussion of theology and doctrine occurs. This is the "catholic" Catholic forum. Conservative? Fine. Progressive? Yes. Traditional? Why not. Liberal? Of course.

The point here is to not exclude anyone who may have different views than others, just because we don't agree with what they say. I dislike very much that everything must be so polarized. So far, since its revival, this forum has not become polarized, and in fact has progressed in the opposite direction. We hear that from many members, some of whom were excoriated by people on other forums but feel quite welcome here.

 

[anjelica]

What he said!

 

[Godlovesmetwo]

Well a lot of that thought is monastic or related to monastic thought. Merton is loved by many who are not liberal in theology.
Rhor..yes that would be liberal Catholic theology.

Already getting out of my depth here. So monastic thought is another variable in the equation. Luther was a monk. Aquinas a monk. their thoughts are monastic?
I remember Merton saying he was not a Thomist. Ok, I think I've reached the limit of my theological knowledge.

 

[Davidnic]

Now that I know what Liberal Theology is, it's completely over my head and I suspect if we left this forum to the handful of people who can talk about Liberal Theology intelligently, it would suffer the same fate when it opened the first time. Much of the content on this board would fit well with any mainstream Catholic forum, so why are we here? Obviously TLT is providing something for us conservative, progressive, traditional Catholics that we can't find anywhere else.

I think most people are here for the fellowship that has grown. And that is more about what the people have brought than about what the Forum is here for.

But over time it will likely move toward its purpose. It was approved because of that purpose so we cannot change that. And the name is the best reflection of that purpose that we have.

What the active members here will have to do is find a balance between the fellowship with those not endorsing liberal theology and those engaging in discussions that fall under the Safe Haven.

Because just from watching over a long period of time of how forums grow; those latter conversations will increase.

 

[Godlovesmetwo]

Then there's lube-ral catholic. Ones who need to come here now and then for a service, after thousands of miles on the secular road.

 

[anjelica]

Well I can discuss luberal theology with the best of you, but I would not want it to be only for that.

 

[Davidnic]

Are we here just todiscuss theology then?

No there can be Fellowship but that Fellowship cannot be rewriting the purpose of the Safe Haven. That is why I made this thread to discuss why the term liberal is on this forum. It is there for a reason and that is because it is the best word to describe the theology that is protected here.

 

[Martinius]

most catholics are liberal -
they vote democratic and don't think it is a sin

One could easily say the same about voting for Republican or any other party's candidates. The sad truth is that few candidates truly profess or follow Christian teaching completely. If one based their electoral decisions on whether candidates for every office truly live by Gospel values there would be no point in going to the polls.

The first sentence of your post is an opinion, not based on facts. You should research Catholic voting patterns before making invalid assumptions.

 

[anjelica]

I do not understand your last stat ement David. I guess I will not fit here then, after all.