Atheists Step Up 'It's Time to Quit the Catholic Church' Campaign - Page 4

sw85 · #46 Mar 8, '12, 3:56 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich Olszewski

I agree. Extremism in either direction is incompatible with Catholicism.

I'm going a bit farther than mere condemnations of extremism (and I object to the dualistic understanding of pseudoconservatism and modern liberalism -- they are more alike than this conception gives on).

In order to be a faithful Catholic, you must deviate so much from liberalism that you are no longer recognizably liberal. Deviation from conservatism is also required, but the degree of correction is not so strong as to warrant a strict negation of what is lamentably termed "conservatism" nowadays. For instance, a "conservative" may reasonably exhibit concern for the poor and a desire to reorganize society so as to give them special preference. We call such people "blue-collar conservatives" or "populists." That's because economics are not especially criterial to conservatism. It is mainly a social philosophy, and it can be adapted to most any economic belief system. By contrast, you cannot call yourself a liberal (in the meaningful, modern sense of the word) if you subscribe to a brand of liberalism from which, for instance, sexual liberalism has been amputated. Most liberals will argue this themselves.

In other words, what is central and critical to liberalism is incompatible with what is central and critical to Catholicism. The same is not true of pseudoconservatism.

unafraid · #47 Mar 8, '12, 5:02 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by sw85

I'm going a bit farther than mere condemnations of extremism (and I object to the dualistic understanding of pseudoconservatism and modern liberalism -- they are more alike than this conception gives on).

In order to be a faithful Catholic, you must deviate so much from liberalism that you are no longer recognizably liberal. Deviation from conservatism is also required, but the degree of correction is not so strong as to warrant a strict negation of what is lamentably termed "conservatism" nowadays. For instance, a "conservative" may reasonably exhibit concern for the poor and a desire to reorganize society so as to give them special preference. We call such people "blue-collar conservatives" or "populists." That's because economics are not especially criterial to conservatism. It is mainly a social philosophy, and it can be adapted to most any economic belief system. By contrast, you cannot call yourself a liberal (in the meaningful, modern sense of the word) if you subscribe to a brand of liberalism from which, for instance, sexual liberalism has been amputated. Most liberals will argue this themselves.

In other words, what is central and critical to liberalism is incompatible with what is central and critical to Catholicism. The same is not true of pseudoconservatism.

This entire hypothetical debate illustrates the perilous high-wire-act of bridging the chasm between religion and politics. Unfortunately, we live in times that make that difficult crossing an inevitable moral imperative.

As for me, I'll trust the Magisterium to determine who can, and cannot, be considered a member of the Roman Catholic Church. The only thing I can speak to is the fact that the person sitting in the pew next to me at Mass on Sundays is most assuredly sitting beside a flawed sinner (myself) seeking mercy...regardless of my voting record.

Just Lurking · #48 Mar 9, '12, 6:09 am

So are people here really opposed to the atheists' efforts to get cafeteria Catholics to leave the Church? I thought that's what everyone here at CAF wanted as well.

unafraid · #49 Mar 9, '12, 6:44 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Lurking

So are people here really opposed to the atheists' efforts to get cafeteria Catholics to leave the Church? I thought that's what everyone here at CAF wanted as well.

You are mistaken. These Cafeteria Catholics are our sacramental brothers and sisters in the faith, therefore, our strong yearning, and prayers, are for them to return to the fold (family).

What everyone here on CAF wants is for healing and unity. Heretics and apostates choose to ostracize themselves, and even then, we pray for their reconversions. Some of our Church's greatest evangelists are lapsed Catholics who have seen the light, repented, ammended their lives, and come home to the "True Faith".

And, as for the efforts of the "New Atheists", we stand in opposition to any and all of them in toto, regardless of any other factors. Of that, you can be certain.

Cinette · #50 Mar 9, '12, 7:17 am

Have recently purchased the book "Rage Against God" - how atheism led me to faith - by Peter Hitchens - have not yet had time to read it. He is the brother of the late Christopher Hitchens. Should be a good read.

May God bless the Atheists and may the Holy Spirit lead them to faith.

Cinette

**Dale_M** · #51 Mar 9, '12, 8:46 am

According to a press release from the Catholic League, the offensive advertisement appears in today's New York Times
http://www.standardnewswire.com/news/486947076.html

The Freedom From Religion Foundation website states that the ad appears on page 10, front section. It also mentions that the New York Times required that the title of the ad be changed from ‘It’s Time to Quit the Catholic Church,’ to ‘It’s Time to Consider Quitting the Catholic Church.’

The website quotes their co-president, Dan Barker, who called the required change "disappointing" and that it was "a sign of the Catholic Church’s inordinate power to intimidate and muzzle criticism.”

I'm sure everyone here is aware of the tremendous influence the Catholic Church has with the New York Times.

Just Lurking · #52 Mar 9, '12, 10:13 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by unafraid

You are mistaken.

Thanks for the correction. I've been reading too many "The cafeteria is closed: No soup for you!" threads.

Swiss Guy · #53 Mar 9, '12, 3:49 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich Olszewski

I agree. Extremism in either direction is incompatible with Catholicism.

This.

sw85 · #54 Mar 10, '12, 6:57 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Lurking

So are people here really opposed to the atheists' efforts to get cafeteria Catholics to leave the Church? I thought that's what everyone here at CAF wanted as well.

That's kind of a loaded question and it doesn't lend itself to an easy answer. Obviously we would prefer they stay in the Church, but we want them to stay in the Church *as obedient Catholics.* They aren't doing themselves any favor by lying about what they believe, rebelling against the Church's magisterium, and desecrating the precious body and blood of Christ. Those of them who don't repent of their errors will probably suffer the worst fates of anyone, because their rebellion is more perfect than those who are more ignorant of the Church's teachings.

For myself, I would say I want them to be honest about what they believe and why they believe it (most aren't), and mold their life accordingly. After all, lying is a sin, too, so they're going to sin whether or not they remain active in the life of the Church. So yes, I think in the long run it will be better for everyone if cafeteria Catholics apostasized. Or, rather, formalized their heretofore only functional apostasy. But even this is a suboptimal choice. Clearly there need to be major changes to the way society is ordered in order not to produce these kinds of dilemmas in the first place.

Tigg · #55 Mar 10, '12, 8:49 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Lurking

So are people here really opposed to the atheists' efforts to get cafeteria Catholics to leave the Church? I thought that's what everyone here at CAF wanted as well.

The dissidents have sent a clear message that they remain in the church only to affect change. They are not content to leave us and Church doctrine alone, and altho we pray incessantly for their conversion, we also pray that God will silence HIS enemies.

Lochias · #56 Mar 10, '12, 11:44 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dale_M

According to a press release from the Catholic League, the offensive advertisement appears in today's New York Times
http://www.standardnewswire.com/news/486947076.html

The Freedom From Religion Foundation website states that the ad appears on page 10, front section. It also mentions that the New York Times required that the title of the ad be changed from ‘It’s Time to Quit the Catholic Church,’ to ‘It’s Time to Consider Quitting the Catholic Church.’

The website quotes their co-president, Dan Barker, who called the required change "disappointing" and that it was "a sign of the Catholic Church’s inordinate power to intimidate and muzzle criticism.”

I'm sure everyone here is aware of the tremendous influence the Catholic Church has with the New York Times.

Indeed. Heck, I can't get enough of their foundation's name..."Freedom From Religion." What exactly is it that they're trying to be "free" from? Are there priests and nuns with guns to their heads as we speak? Do they avoid walking the streets at night for fear of the Catholic Church?

90Domer · #57 Mar 10, '12, 11:15 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickybr38

And they dare to say atheism is not a religion?

Really? From this angle they don't look any different from any other religious fanatic - except the god they worship is themselves.

Rebelecka · #58 Mar 11, '12, 8:11 am

Getting my info from newadvent.com
http://www.creativeminorityreport.co...ic-church.html

Perhaps those who are "nominal" (in name only is the common deffinition) Catholics should leave the church if they do not believe the Church's teachings. Maybe there would only be a remmanet left--hasn't this happened throughout the ages to both Jews and Christians?
Why are you aiding and abetting a church that has repeatedly and publicly announced a crusade to ban contraception, abortion and sterilization, If you do not agree with church teaching are you really a Catholic?
and to deny the right of all women everywhere, Catholic or not, to decide whether and when to become mothers? None of the women I know have any trouble getting these things....Catholic or not
Is it an offense against Jehovah Witnesses that health care coverage will include blood transfusions? They are allowed to refuse blood transfusions, just as practicing Catholics will not use contraception, abortion & sterilization
Be aware that this HHS mandate is to require that contraception, abortifacients and sterilizations is required to be offered via insurance even by Catholic Insurance companies and by all catholic agencies that are not part of worship and/or owned by the Church proper (such as Cathoic Charities, EWTN, catholic universities, catholic hospitals, etc.).
A wonderful priest I once knew (decesed, may God receive and bless him) said, "Be Catholic or begone!" (he was a bit crusty!)

Credo ergo sum · #59 Mar 11, '12, 8:24 am

Can't they use this 53.000 dollars to support the poor and needy?

**JharekCarnelian** · #60 Mar 11, '12, 11:40 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hokomai

This is offensive. Unbelief takes many forms. Self-love is not a characteristic of all or most unbelievers. neither are most of us fanatics. Please do not generalise about us.

Ahem, cough, cough...

Hokomai Said:-

Quote:

Yes, Catholic pro-lifers, there are people who disagree with you. Expressing outrage that anyone should do so,and using names like "priestess" and "Ministrix" to belittle your opponent does nothing to persuade any of your opponents