Liberal Catholic Conspiracy Theory

[Iacobus]

And Al still with it redefined like that I don't see it happening for the same reasons. (I wrote my 1st post on why with Liberal as "wants to change the Church" on mind. Nothing in that prevents them from believeing in God though.)

[Aloysius]

wanting to change the Church is wrong.

if the Pope declared woman priests were allowed or that contraceptives were not evil I would assume Jesus was full of BS ([i]Matthew 16:18[/i]) and leave the Church.

We should be predisposed to believe that which appears to us to be black is white if the magisterium decides-yes. But it is Catholic Teaching undenyably no getting around it that women can't be ordained and contraceptives are evil. It's infallible covered under Jesus' promise to us of the Spirit of Truth leading us into all truth. If the Church went against it, I could not in goog conscience believe in Jesus Christ.

One who believes the Church should change does not fully believe in the True God, for the True God is a God who guides the Catholic Church into all truth. Of course they can believe in God, but the God that fits to their ideas. They look at the light, but wear special sunglasses so that the rays of truth that are uncomfortable to them don't affect their retinas.

Pax Amorque Christi

[qfnol31]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Jul 5 2004, 02:29 AM'] wanting to change the Church is wrong. [/quote]
I try to change what's going on with individuals in the Church.

if the Pope declared woman priests were allowed or that contraceptives were not evil I would assume Jesus was full of BS ([i]Matthew 16:18[/i]) and leave the Church.

I wouldn't. There have been heretical Popes before, none of whom really left a lasting effect on the Church. If the Pope is a heretic, so what. He's only one part of the Magesterium. (Now I love our current Pontiff and think he is an excellent man, and I have no intention of denying the authority to the Pope at all). As all men, he lives with a mortal body and will die. Even if all of the magesterium starting preaching a heresy, then I don't think that the Church would be lost. I thnk that Divine Providence will win through.


Now to the original discussion. I think that there are definately liberal movements in the Catholic Church today. Actually, I think there have been many throughout its history. Just look at the Protestant "Reformation." What was that if not liberal? There have been many liberal groups, but all have failed. So yes, I do believe there are such groups, however I do not believe said groups to be so much conspiracies more than based on the pride of man...

[cmotherofpirl]

I do believe its a conspiracy of sorts, and its basis are the women religious and the universities. The feminist nun types are linked together, go read some of their carp on the net. Or talk to an orthodox prof and ask him how easily he can get tenure in a "catholic" university.
These are the people running RCIA programs, teaching the catechists, and giving out "theology" degrees. I see more and more people who educated right out of the church by people who claim to teach CATHOLIC truths.
THen of course you see the satan-pleasing groups out there like Catholics for a free choice.

They are working together and it is a conspiracy.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Jul 5 2004, 05:13 AM'] I try to change what's going on with individuals in the Church.

if the Pope declared woman priests were allowed or that contraceptives were not evil I would assume Jesus was full of BS ([i]Matthew 16:18[/i]) and leave the Church.

I wouldn't. There have been heretical Popes before, none of whom really left a lasting effect on the Church. If the Pope is a heretic, so what. He's only one part of the Magesterium. (Now I love our current Pontiff and think he is an excellent man, and I have no intention of denying the authority to the Pope at all). As all men, he lives with a mortal body and will die. Even if all of the magesterium starting preaching a heresy, then I don't think that the Church would be lost. I thnk that Divine Providence will win through.


Now to the original discussion. I think that there are definately liberal movements in the Catholic Church today. Actually, I think there have been many throughout its history. Just look at the Protestant "Reformation." What was that if not liberal? There have been many liberal groups, but all have failed. So yes, I do believe there are such groups, however I do not believe said groups to be so much conspiracies more than based on the pride of man... [/quote]
No Pope has ever taught heresy.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='crusader1234' date='Jul 5 2004, 03:46 AM'] even if it was wrong for the reasons you stated, and they still did it, what would you say? [/quote]
It cannot happen, so there is nothing to say.

The answer that you are fishing for is a wrong answer no matter what because it will never happen, and cannot ever happen.

There is a God, and He keeps His promises.


[b]John 14:16 [/b][color=red]And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate [u][b]to be with you always[/b][/u], [/color]
[b]17 [/b][color=red][u][b]the Spirit of truth[/b][/u], which the world cannot accept, because it neither sees nor knows it. But you know it, because [b][u]it remains with you, and will be in you[/u][/b].[/color]
[b]18 [/b][color=red]I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you.[/color]
...
[b]26 [/b][color=red]The Advocate, the holy Spirit that the Father will send in my name--he [u][b]will teach you everything and remind you[/b][/u] of all that (I) told you.[/color]



God Bless,
ironmonk

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='crusader1234' date='Jul 5 2004, 01:16 AM']
What would you say if a Pope declared ex-Cathedra (with the full support of Cardinals and Bishops mind you) that contraceptives werent bad? I'm not saying they arent bad but whawt if there was an ex-Cathedra document saying they werent?[/quote]

This hypothetical question is irrelevant, because it is already an infallible, and thus irreformable doctrine [i]de fide tenenda[/i] of the Catholic faith, that contraception is by definition immoral. This unchangeable doctrine of the Catholic faith is based on the natural moral law, which clearly indicates that it is illicit to separate the unitive and procreative principles of the conjugal act. Therefore, no power on earth, not even the Sacred Magisterium can permit the use of contraceptives. As Pope Paul VI taught in [u]Humanae Vitae[/u], when he reaffirmed the universal tradition of the Church on this issue, the unitive and procreative principles of the conjugal act are inseparably bound together by the will of God, and no human being may contravene this reality, and to even attempt to do so is by definition a grave sin. Here is what Pope John Paul II has said on this topic: "By describing the contraceptive act as intrinsically illicit, Paul VI meant to teach that the moral norm is such that it did not admit exceptions. [i]No personal or social circumstances could ever, can now, or will ever, render such an act lawful in itself[/i]. The existence of particular norms regarding man's way of acting in the world, which are endowed with a binding force that excludes always and in whatever situation the possibility of exceptions, is a constant teaching of tradition and of the Church's Magisterium which cannot be called into question by the Catholic theologian." [Pope John Paul II, [u]Truth in the Magisterium[/u], (L'Osservatore Romano, 12 Nov. 1988]

Edited July 5, 2004 by Apotheoun

[Good Friday]

[quote]if the Pope declared woman priests were allowed or that contraceptives were not evil I would assume Jesus was full of BS (Matthew 16:18) and leave the Church.[/quote]
Exactly. Because of Jesus' promise that the Church would never defect from the Gospel, it is absolutely impossible for the Pope to make an [i]ex cathedra[/i] statement that contradicts already existent Church teaching. Doctrine develops, but it does not change. It can only grow, not change radically. So the fact that the priesthood is made up only of men, or that contraception is wrong, cannot ever become a doctrine that would be the total opposite of that.

If one believes that it could, then one simply does not believe Jesus' promise of indefectibility.

To weigh in on the issue of liberal vs. heterodox -- it's possible to be fiscally liberal while still being a social, ethical and moral conservative, so it would be more accurate to define social, ethical and moral liberals simply as heterodox Catholics, so that fiscal liberals (who aren't committing any sin) don't get confused about what's being said. It's also a much more effective way of showing what heterodox Catholics really are -- they're not just "liberal Catholics," as if that's acceptable, but heterodox Catholics who do not believe in the Truth.

On the conspiracy in the Church -- it exists. It began with the Freemasons and the Deists in their attempt to turn the world to a radically democratic and self-centered system of government, which succeeded first in the United States, then in France, and then it spread throughout the world like a cancer. Once radical democracy took hold in the world, people began thinking more about what [i]they[/i] wanted and less about what God wanted, and now we live in the All I Care About Is Me Society.

While the Freemasons and the Deists have basically lost power, their ideas live on. Groups like Call To Action, Catholics For a Free Choice, FutureChurch, and many groups outside the Church, continue the Me, Me, Me way of thinking. If it feels good, vote on it, and then it's fine. Above all, these groups seek to tear down any organization at all that is thinking about what someone else wants, any organization that is not self-centered. The least self-centered body in the world is the Catholic Church, which is totally focused on Jesus -- which is why it's under such heavy attack. Make no mistake, the groups mentioned above don't just want minor changes in the Church, they want to completely overhaul the Church and turn it into a church made in their image. Much like what's happened in the Episcopal Church.

Fortunately, Jesus has promised us that the Church won't defect. While that doesn't necessarily mean that [i]parts[/i] of the Church won't defect -- for instance, the Church in America could go into schism from the Catholic Church -- it does mean that the Church, meaning the Magisterium, the Pope and Rome, will not defect from the Truth.

[Guest JeffCR07]

Just to return to the topic at hand:

[quote]It has been postulated that many liturgical abuses have been promulgated by "[heterodox] catholics" who want women and married men in the priesthood, an increased role/authority for laity, advancement of the homosexual position, a decreased importance of the eucharist (reduction to a symbol of Christ's Body and Blood), etc.

Could it be that we have been slowly duped by taking Communion in the hand, female altar servers, "Eucharistic Ministers" giving Communion and Blessings, Communion at the back of the Church, Communion in less than precious containers, "Homilies" by laity, etc., etc., etc.? Or have all of these things just "happened" independently of each other?[/quote]

1.) Female alter servers and communion in the hand have been supported by the Holy Father and the vast majority of the Magisterium. To believe that they are illegitimate borderlines very much on heresy, for we are to believe not just in word and deed, but in a total, humble conversion of mind, that which is taught by the Church.

2.) Homilies cannot be given by the laity. It is intrinsic to the nature of a Homily that it is said by a priest. If the homily is being cut out of Mass and a "reflection" is being given by a layperson while there is still a priest present who could give a Homily, I believe this is a liturgical abuse (someone please check this, however).

3.) It is my understanding that any container can be made "precious" through the blessing of a priest or bishop. Again, someone please double check.

4.) A person trained as an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion can, in extreme cases that have been discussed in another thread, distribute the Blessed Sacrament. A blessing can only be given by a member of the clergy. If an EOMoHC is giving out blessings, please inform the person that this is a liturgical abuse. If the problem persists, please contact your parish priest or bishop.


I must also point out that I agree %100 percent with Ironmonk. Though I do not necessarily see a massive, organized conspiracy, I do acknowledge (living in the US, especially) a heavy trend towards heterodoxy. This trend will not last, nor will any power, whether of this world or without, prevail against the Church. The Spirit moves the Church and its members, we must remember that it may very well be you and I who are called to combat this trend and restore to the laity the proper respect and faith in the Magisterium.

- Your Brother in Christ, Jeff

[Aloysius]

1.) yeah you're right

2.) correct that is a liturgical abuse

3.) no, the Church has specifically said the containers MUST BE MADE OF PRECIOUS METAL. Glass and stuff is unacceptable.

4.) correct. also: they are to be EXTRAORDINARY so the ordinary use of them is also an abuse.

[Good Friday]

[quote]1.) Female alter servers and communion in the hand have been supported by the Holy Father and the vast majority of the Magisterium. To believe that they are illegitimate borderlines very much on heresy, for we are to believe not just in word and deed, but in a total, humble conversion of mind, that which is taught by the Church.[/quote]
This is a bit of an exaggeration, I think. Female altar servers and Communion in the hand have been [i]permitted[/i] by the Holy Father and the Bishops, but they have not been [i]supported[/i] by any means, and they are not in any way related to the Magisterium (which is the Church's Teaching Authority, which pertains only to doctrine, not discipline).

Because these things have only been [i]permitted[/i] by the Holy Father and the Bishops and not held up as the only acceptable norms nor highly esteemed, one can still (I think) question the prudence of receiving Communion in the hand or allowing female altar servers -- [i]without[/i] questioning whether or not those things are permitted, which they of course are.

But in [i]Redemptionis Sacramentum[/i], female altar service is barely mentioned, while male altar service is highly esteemed. This implies very strongly that Cardinal Arinze, with the approval of the Pope (all of the letters coming out of the Congregations have His Holiness' approval), favors male altar service. It has also always been the case that individual Bishops can opt not to allow female altar service (as is the case in the Diocese of Lincoln), and I'm fairly sure that individual priests are allowed to opt not to allow female altar servers in their parishes. So this is not an issue that is by any means closed -- it is [i]permitted[/i], but that doesn't mean we all have to agree with it, as there are some Bishops and priests, as well as laymen and laywomen, who do not (and the Church has never censured them, and has allowed Bishops and priests to opt not to allow altar girls).

As for receiving Communion in the hand, while that is definitely approved, so is receiving on the tongue. In fact, receiving on the tongue is still (as far as I know) the norm throughout most of the world. The United States is one of a few exceptions.

[qfnol31]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Jul 5 2004, 08:24 AM'] No Pope has ever taught heresy. [/quote]
Well, there were those that seemed to favor heresy, such as Honorius I.

But that's a fun discussion in itself.


But you're right cmom, what I meant is there have been Popes condemned as heretics before. I guess it was more a matter of taking up the hypothetical question than anything.

Edited July 5, 2004 by qfnol31

[BeenaBobba]

On an official level, no. And I say no because it'd be impossible to change the teachings of the Catholic Church. But there are many Catholics who'd like Catholic teaching to change to incorporate their (heretical) beliefs. The geniuses think that they can change the Church, but they seem to forget the fact that, like all other unfaithful movements to rock the Church in the past, their movements are likely to fade into the bowels of history. The Catholics of the future will look back at them in the ways we look back at the Arians.

God bless,

Jennifer

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Jul 5 2004, 04:29 AM'] if the Pope declared woman priests were allowed or that contraceptives were not evil I would assume Jesus was full of BS ([i]Matthew 16:18[/i]) and leave the Church. [/quote]
Me too, Al. I'd leave the Church if Catholic teaching was proved wrong. That's not going to happen, though, of course!

God bless,

Jen

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Jul 5 2004, 05:21 PM'] Well, there were those that seemed to favor heresy, such as Honorius I. [/quote]
Hi Zach,

Popes can be private heretics. What they can't do, however, is teach heresy [i]ex cathedra[/i]. No Roman Pontiff has done so in 2,000 years. That says something.

God bless,

Jennifer