Why do many of us (myself included) seperate Catholics into these 2 often opposed groups? Whatever happened to being in stride with the Church where the Church is? As Catholics I believe we are neither to take a Liberal or Conservative stance, but a Catholic stand. Another thing, does Orthodoxy equate to being conservative, or does it mean being faithful to the Church as it is and how the Pope wants it. Sometimes I have even heard that being with the Pope is conservatrive. As Catholics aren't we called to live the truths and teachings of the church... isn't that simply being Catholic? If one is Catholic truely, what are we to consider those brethern of ours who are not totally pro Pope or don't agree with some catholic teachings, or want to eliminate Vatican II. Mabe this question has been answered before, but I am personally sick of people just trying to do their own thing and are not simply trying to build the Body of Christ as it was envisioned by Christ in His Church.

Joe

-- Joseph Carl Biltz (jcbiltz@canoemail.com), December 10, 2002

Answers

Joe,

Your comments are well received and valid.

THe problem is the state of our society. Traditionally conservative and liberial views have created a commpasionate balance for which our society lives. The morals and teaching of Christ is the basis our founding fathers used when the US Constitution was written.

Today a radical element of the liberial political party in the US has taken the democratic party to such a far left position that there are outright attacks on the church itself. Our most recent election in November reflected the mainstream liberial and consevative views by voting out the majority of democratics in our US legislative body.

This is a good start for changing the current policies in place. Political correctness seem to be the number one priority while the basis of our society, the family and moral standards has been minimized.

Tolorance for both liberial and conservatives views is important for all Catholics, however extreams on either end tends to destroys the natural balance.

-- Michael A (mg_comm@hotmail.com), December 10, 2002.

Whatever else we tolerate, we must vote for people who will try to overturn abortion. Without life, what good are all the other things that politicians promise?

-- ed Richards (loztra@yahoo.com), December 10, 2002.

Joe,

I would go one step further: The compass of the Church stretches from the far right to the far left. Most debates seem to polarize in one direction or another. But I personally think the middle ground is the place to be and that is exactly where most Catholics sit. Unfortunately some people label others left or right when in actual fact the person in question is a middle of the road. I believe in the golden mean and balance.

Your intolerance of "people wanting to do their own thing" demonstrates that you really are a person who likes the legionary do's and don't list type of scenario. I'm all in favor of debate and discussion, personally I side with the Church on most issues but I do disagree on some, however when it comes to matters of doctrine and faith I am 100% faithful. However this does not mean that I can't disagree with certain behaviors within the Church, our Church.

Just because the Pope or some Cardinals may like something doesn't enshrine it as a doctrine of faith for the rest of us.

I would also like to point out that whether you like it or not those whom you can't stand are also part of the Mystical Body of Christ, most of whom are trying to do the best they can, just like you and me. There is room for everyone in the Mystical Body of Christ, I don't think Christ wanted a whole load of yes me, nor did He want a simple list of do's and don'ts, remember the Jews of His time, they were always arguing about the letter of the law versus the spirit. So too today far to many of us get caught up in the letter of the law when in actual fact we should be focusing on the spirit of the law.

-- james Xwing (James_xwing@hotmail.com), December 11, 2002.

The use of the words liberal and conservative is simply a divide and conquer strategy.

The word "conservative" isn't of itself related to the truth, but it appears to be enough that Catholics who are "orthodox" readily take the bait and use the word when they find themselves being opposed. Never mind as to what is being "conserved", whether it is the truth or "the old ways"... the "old ways" do not necessarily have an intrinsic relation to the truth other than people's nostalgia. Nostalgia is not truth.

This way over time, the words "liberal" and "conservative", since they are not in themselves attached to the truth, can have their meanings morphed and people can be lead away from orthodoxy. The enemy uses this as a means to systematically pry people away from the truth, like a big theological crowbar. Orthodoxy has a meaning more intrinsically related to "the truth", and so it is a bit harder for someone to promote "heterodoxy" by name without being dismissed.

People are under the mistaken impression that matters of the state are separated from matters of the Church, but the aims of the state are supposed to be subject to and in line with the aims of The Faith. The enemy knows this, and attempts to have the same divide and conquer strategies and words used similiarly in both matters of Church and state. So liberal and conservative are used in both church and state similiarly by the enemy.

At any rate, the two polarized terms have absolutely no business being attached to our Faith, as we either keep the Faith whole and undefiled or we don't. Anything else is a tool of the enemy to divide and conquer us. "Say yes if you mean yes, and no if you mean no; anything else is from the evil one" (or thereabouts).

-- Emerald (emerald1@cox.net), December 11, 2002.

This is a Conservative Catholic forum. One must be deferintial to this fact. And the Liberal/Left side of the Catholic church has been held under water until the bubbles stopped comming up. And this forum cheered that(see earlier post on this subject by me), as it was likely to do by its nature.

I miss the Liberal/Left side, and think we are poorer without that.

I also agree somewhat that the message is outside of the traditional Right/Left stuff. But the Left has had a stroke, and I am not sure if anyone noticed.

Sean

-- Sean Cleary (seanearlyaug@juno.com), December 15, 2002.

See why those who would follow Christ should be Liberals Like Christ. Explore http://LiberalsLikeChrist.org/Christlike .

-- Ray Dubuque (Ray@LiberalsLikeChrist.org), December 16, 2002.

Liberal, You are going to get _so_ stomped in this forum, and according to its rules, you can not even reply back. Good luck and glad that there are some Christian Liberals to balance the Body of Christ. Sean

-- Sean Cleary (seanearlyaug@juno.com), December 17, 2002.

Sean, please identify yourself as a non-Catholic.
You are misguided to think that Christianity needs the kind of "Christian Liberals" that Ray Dubuque is pushing. His obnoxious site doesn't stop at the virtuous actions that can be called "liberal." His site also supports abortion and other crimes and sins.
I don't think that even you, Sean, would support some of the things Ray has to offer.
JFG

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), December 18, 2002.

At my web site http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/RCscandal , I ask why anyone would prefer the teaching of the "Vicar of Christ" over the teaching of Christ himself. It's sad, but many people do.

-- Ray Dubuque (Ray@LiberalsLikeChrist.Org), April 07, 2003.

Hi Joe, Hi James, gentlemen...

james, you mentioned an aversion to "dos and don'ts". I don't take it you are refering to say, the 10 commandments, the 6 laws of the Church, or particular moral (i.e. sexual) norms are you?

I mean, in my experience virtually everyone who claims or self- identifies themselves as "liberal Catholics" are "liberal" because of some disagreement over sexual mores rather than some dispute about theology or missionary techniques.

As I noted elsewhere, the Church seems to be divided into 3 groups, not two: Discontinuants (liberals and traditionalists, both of whom claim Vatican II was a break from the past) and Continuants (those like the Pope, who hold that Vatican II was not a break from the past).

Obviously within the Continuants there'll naturally be differences of charism - monks, diocesan, orders, congregations, anchorites, consecrated, 3rd order, movements, personal prelatures, etc. No one has to look alike or do the same thing to believe the same thing. (And don't try being snide about the LC for not being "catholic" - because we all had a uniform and common mission...that's just stupid. Within particular groups certain conformity is part of the catholicity).

So I'd be really (no seriously, REALLY) interested on your take on all this - especially what "dos and don't" you dispute with.

Since both of you guys were in the seminary with me, and presumably also read your Vatican II books during novitiate and later on, to say nothing of the big encyclicals like Dominus Jesus and Veritatis Splendor, I'm sure we can have an enlightened conversation.

Peace.

-- Joe (Joestong@yahoo.com), April 07, 2003.

A "Vice-President" is supposed to step in and serve as "acting president" if and ONLY IF the President dies or is permanently or temporarily incapacitated. The title "Vicar of Christ" is another way of saying the same thing about Christ.

Has Christ died or been incapacitated? Not exactly. But have you seen or heard him lately? For all intents and purposes, the "Vicars of Christ" have been "acting presidents" of the Church at lest since the Emperor Constantine wanted the bishop of Rome to have the kind of control over all the churches of his empire that he himself had over r all the lands of his empire.

If you can imagine that it was Christ's idea to subject his enemies, let alone his FOLLOWERS to the MANY heretics, rapists, murderers and anti-Christ types who have been elected by equially depraved "Cardinals" to be "Christ's representative" on earth, then you are woefully ignorant of your own history and are condemned to repeat its mistakes. And it is time to enlighten and educate yourself by reading http://www.LiberalsLikeChrist.Org/PopesvsChrist .

-- Rev. Ray Dubuque (Ray@LiberalsLikeChrist.Org), September 28, 2003.

We are genuine Catholics here, "Rev. Ray" -- so we aren't interested in your dissident pablum.
By the way, which mortal sin is it that you want to be allowed to commit with inpunity? [Rhetorical question. No answer needed.]
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), September 28, 2003.