I recently have accidentally, and very angrily, stumbled upon a group known as the “Inclusive Catholics”. They are apparently an independent “catholic” church, DEFINITELY not in communion with rome. look below:
We proclaim the faith of the Nicene Creed.
We celebrate the seven sacraments.
We ordain men and women, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and heterosexual Christians as bishops, priests, and deacons.
We celebrate the marriages of both same-sex and opposite-sex couples. Deeply Prayerful
Prayer is a central part of the daily lives of our clergy, religious, and laity.
There is great diversity in the liturgical life of the Independent Catholic Christian Church.
The people of the Independent Catholic Christian Church share a strong common life, even as we are widely dispersed.
Now, I would love to hear some reactions to this. Also, have any of you had any contact with them? I’m curious about their “Mass”.
1Ti 4:1 Now the Spirit manifestly saith that in the last times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error and doctrines of devils,
1Ti 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy and having their conscience seared,
I may not agree with it, but I am going to be cautious about condemning it.
It certainly is not Catholic, but from the brief synopsis of the OP, there is not enough information to condemn it as heresy.
I’m not in agreement with the other poster who seems to view “faith” as synomous with Catholicism. I would argue that when scripture discusses attacks on the faith, it is addressing non-adherence to the basic premises of trinitarian Christianity, and not the Holy Catholic Church.
While we may never see the day (nor perhaps never want to see the day) that this group would be welcomed into communion with the mother Church, the Church decided long ago that one can reach salvation without subscribing cart blanche to the infrastructure of the Catholic Church. All Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists, et.al., are not kept from the hope of salvation because they are not Catholic.
So, in a worst case scenario, we have yet another non-Catholic group of believers, who still may very much be part of the Body of Christ.
It is very sad indeed, when any Catholic, or Christian of a denomination is “radically inclusive”. We are all called to be radically loving, but not to accept what is not of the Lord. They need our prayers.
That’s only true if they fall under Invincible Ignorance. If they’ve heard the Truth of Catholicism and denied it then they are denying Christ. There is no salvation outside the Church does not mean anyone who believes in Christ, it means the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. The only exceptions to this are people whom do not know the Truth of Catholicism. If “any” Church would have worked Christ would have left a book behind Him instead of a Church. Just my opinion.
From the Vatican Website (New American BIble)
John said to him, “Teacher, we saw someone driving out demons in your name, and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow us.”
Jesus replied, "Do not prevent him. There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name who can at the same time speak ill of me.
For whoever is not against us is for us.
*[38-41] Jesus warns against jealousy and intolerance toward others, such as exorcists who do not follow us. The saying in ⇒ Mark 9:40 is a broad principle of the divine tolerance. Even the smallest courtesies shown to those who teach in Jesus’ name do not go unrewarded.
My personal thoughts are, while the OP shows disagreement with the Mother Church, they may not be speaking ill of Jesus (Mark 9:39).
This is an interesting question that I’ve been trying to get an answer for. Liberals are all for diversity, but they want the churches all to teach the same things? Doesn’t sound very diverse to me.
I have asked my liberal Catholic friends why they don’t just go to a religion that fits their convictions, after all, the Catholic Church teaches that you have an obligation to search for the truth elsewhere if you no longer believe it represents the truth. I have even told them that their working for change in the Church eliminates my choice while what they want is ready made just down the street. I have posted this here also. Have never gotten a real answer. :nope:
“The time is sure to come when people will not accept sound teaching, but their ears will be itching for anything new, and they will collect themselves a whole series of teachers according to their own tastes; and then they will shut their ears to the truth and will turn to myths.” – 2 Timothy, 4:3-4
I am not inclined to be so gracious as to refrain from calling this community (NOT a church) heretical based on the information provided by the OP. That is precisely what it is. Just read who they will openly and gladly ordain. Here’s a quote from the CCC on heresy, apostasy and the like:
The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines these three sins against the faith in this way:
2089 Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it.*
"Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same;*
apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith;*
schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him." Code of Canon Law c.751)
When scripture discusses attacks on the “faith” one must remember that scripture comes from the Holy Catholic Church. Scripture pre-dates the Protestant reformation by centuries. There was only one Faith. So yes, in scripture, “Faith” is absolutely synonymous with Catholicism. All truth “found” by any other Christian church is a Catholic Truth because that’s where it originated; the Catholic Church is THE source.
Any group is by canon law prohibited from claiming or representing itself as being Catholic without proper Ecclesiastical approval lest they lead souls astray. This is a serious matter; it is more than just a name. Catholicism means something. How dare anyone presume to pervert it by wrongful association.
According to law, no apostolic endeavor or association shall bear the name “Catholic” without the express permission of competent ecclesiastical authority (Canons 216, 300, 803§3, 808). While this norm is not always known or followed, it is meant to protect the faithful against misrepresentation by groups that do not promote the true Faith. Any association bearing the term “Catholic” in its name should have proof of consent by competent ecclesiastical authority.
The Church Fathers went to great lengths to defend the Faith against heretics. They recognized the danger to souls if and when they are led away from the true flock by wolves in sheep’s clothing. Under today’s pervasive ideology of absolute tolerance and compromise, the Church wouldn’t have lasted a decade back in the early days.
Excuse me if this all seems too blunt, but it is what it is. I hold that there is a point when charitability or being “nice” becomes a grave matter in matters of the Faith.
Exactly. Catholicism is an all or nothing proposition. Either it is the Truth or it is not. Every individual must make that decision themselves. The “cafeteria catholics” could join an ecclesiastic community that embodies their beliefs, as the previous poster said. If one doesn’t like the Faith - all of it that is - one is free to protest as a protest(ant).
Credo in Sanctam Catholicam et Apostolicam Ecclesiam.
So liberal minded Catholics can both tar and feather the SSPX - the commentary is certainly not all “support and praise” - and at the same time use them as a premise to support liberal dissent from the ONE Holy Catholic Church. I guess one actually can have their cake and eat it too…
IMHO, at least the SSPX is not a buffet-style “write your own catechism” kind of Community and practices the traditional teachings of the Church (not to mention the fact that they are negotiating a possible reunion with Rome, which affords them a bit more credibility than the group outlined in the OP). True enough, dissent is dissent, but I’m not so sure we are comparing apples to apples in this case.