Lifesite News, Church Militant - what is their strategy in attacking the Pope?


#22

I agree. But that doesn’t change the fact that they don’t.

Very likely. It has been the pattern with other churches like the Episcopal Church, the Presbyterian Church USA, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in American, and several other smaller groups. The rad trads and ultra-conervatives have attempted to create a “church within the Church”, but it’s not getting the traction they expected, mainly because they alienated moderate conservatives. Ideological purity and separatism go hand in hand.

Good that you pointed out the matter of money. You are aware that some of them have ceased donating to the Church?


#23

The conservative/EWTN crowd, sure, but you’re fooling yourself if you think Lifesite News or ChurchMilitant wouldn’t have been blaring “the-sky-is-falling” headlines had they existed in 1986 to cover the gathering at Assisi. The same people have been in the Church for a while, and they’re not going anywhere. If anything, we are witnessing their numbers swell as members of the “EWTN crowd” (Raymond Arroyo, Phil Lawler, etc.) rejoin traditional Catholic ideological positions, even as they continue to attend the Novus Ordo and maintain non-traditional beliefs and practices.


#24

Exactly. Rad trads and ultra-conservatives are more attached to their conception of “tradition” than they are to the concept of the papacy or a untied institutional church. That is what makes separation so tempting for them.


#25

The Trads that are now “cool” with St. John Paul II would probably have been lighting up this forum in 1988 when Archbishop Lefebvre was excommunicated, if this was around back then. From the changing of Canon Law in 1983 to visiting a Synagogue—I can only imagine the call for heads on this forum (which of course did not exist) in the 1980s.


#26

Our Protestant friends have an entirely different culture about splitting from one body and creating new ones. Often protestant congregations will move out as complete entities when establishing a new denomination or joining a new one. A new Catholic Traditionalist sect would need property, need a priest for east location as well as be able to organize like minded lay people to fill the pews.

The logistics as well as recruiting and paying for priests to defect, it just seems like a lot taller order than just convincing a United Presbyterian Church’s members to vote to leave.


#27

If a homeless person has measles, giving them a lifetime coupon to Hometown Buffer would not good enough.

There are two different issues, and I think both should be resolved, instead of ignoring one or the other and patting ourselves in the back for being so “morally superior” or “socially woke”.

It’s puzzling to me how they (“conservative” and “liberal” issues) seem to be mutually exclusive in this day and age. There’s no logical reason for that to be the case.


#28

NO matter if they are news people or not they will have to answer to the same God we will have to answer to for ALL we think, say and do.


#29

It is a tall order, but that won’t stop a lot of them striking out to join other Churches (like the Orthodox, a la Dreher), already existing schismatic groups, of which there are several, or even establishing new groups (a la Mel Gibson’s father). Of course, a lot are dropping out due to natural demographic attrition.

You are ignoring secular politics. Michael Voris, for example, has started labeling Catholics as (good) pro-Trump Catholics and (bad) anti-trump Catholics, with the strong implication that the latter are not real Catholics.

Also, the line is not between conservatives and progressives anymore. The line runs through the conservative faction, with rad-trads and ultraconservatives on the right, moderate conservatives and progressives on the left, and the remaining conservatives being forced to pick sides.


#30

When where you a “rad trad” or “ultra-conservative?”

Mary, Virgin of virgins, pray that we may resist all temptation towards schism, heresy and apostasy!


#31

These labels are of the world, not of the Kingdom God intends for us.


#32

Never. i’ve always been firmly within the progressive camp.

Rad trads and ultra-conservatives seem to be thinking that schism is preferable than being together with what they consider heretics, under the leadership of a heretic pope. I’m not sure that they could resist that temptation for much longer. They have a strong need for ideological purity and conformity.


#33

Because they don’t want to be.


#34

Speaking with the Samaritan woman at the well was a huge break with tradition.


#35

Viva la Papa Francesco!


#36

They get a new pope, and they hope that it’s a pope more to their liking. Simple politics. Dirty, but simple politics.


#37

Perhaps you missed the Gospel last week. Let me refresh your memory:

“Washing feet on Maundy Thursday” is a human tradition. It’s not prescribed anywhere as a doctrinal precept. In fact, it’s a liturgical practice, which means that the Church (and in particular, the pope) has the authority to regulate it.

So, if the pope decided to modify that liturgical practice, it’s his prerogative to do so, and he does so completely licitly.

A “break with traditions” regarding washing feet… is a mighty poor (not to mention invalid) example of a lack of orthopraxy. :wink:


#38

Actually, I think that they have come to the conclusion that the next pope is going to be more like Pope Francis than like what they have in mind. Cardinal Marx’s chances are much better than Cardinal Sarah’s, for example.


#39

What exactly is a “progressive” Catholic? What are the goals and aspirations? What is the “progressive Catholic”'s stance on western civilizations developments on sexuality, marriage, abortion, and contraception, and do those goals match what has been always taught by the Church?

Or do “progressive Catholics” not think they’re important issues anymore and are just outdated social norms?


#40

Jesus broke with tradition. The Pope is not Jesus.


#41

I haven’t been to Church Militant in a while. Do you have a link to his article?

It wouldn’t be surprising that pro-Trump Catholics are “conservative Catholics” and anti-Trump Catholics are “progressive Catholics”. Broadly speaking, one side would oppose gay marriage and expansion of abortion, and one side would focus on social justice issues, and some might even perhaps be OK with the homosexual lobby.

Trump isn’t the issue, per se. He’s just a correlation factor.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.