tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post3904570257862779978..comments2024-03-27T11:27:31.790-05:00Comments on A Catholic Life: Six Components of Liberal Catholicism that Seek to Destroy the Church: Part 1Matthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07929374709032473716noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-36031862184247186552016-04-06T12:32:31.095-05:002016-04-06T12:32:31.095-05:00In regard to Galileo I would add that his "pr...In regard to Galileo I would add that his "proof" for heliocentricity - the earth's dual motion as it travels around the sun being the cause of the tides - was and remains incorrect. The competing and correct theory (concerning the tides) existed in his day. Neither theory could be scientifically proven/disproven since humanity lacked the means to do so.CoolBreezehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09121956131984681970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-32538906977823066252013-06-15T17:53:24.555-05:002013-06-15T17:53:24.555-05:00I am trying to locate a scanned copy of "The ...I am trying to locate a scanned copy of "The Components of Liberal Catholicism" by Fr. Fenton from the July 1958 issue of American Ecclesiastical Review. Do you have a copy that can be emailed?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-65302965093552080022013-03-03T10:23:04.511-06:002013-03-03T10:23:04.511-06:00Matthew, seriously. Spell Check, Please.Matthew, seriously. Spell Check, Please.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-45000402480637749722011-08-18T20:58:39.763-05:002011-08-18T20:58:39.763-05:00Nick, you bring up a lot of points. I'll try ...Nick, you bring up a lot of points. I'll try to address them systematically and generally at this time without getting into too much detail.<br /><br />When you say, "the Church HAS changed its teachings on things over centuries," what do you mean by "things"? Do you mean eternal doctrines of the Faith that are enduring and timeless? If so, the Church has never changed its teachings on matters of Faith and Doctrine that are defined. The Church has changed its view on areas like history or science but these are not matters that concern the Church's primary mission of salvation. Changing views on history does not change the Church. Changing views on history do not mean that the Church is not divine or unchanging. When we say that the Church is both unchanging and timeless, we mean that the Faith which it teaches is timeless and eternal and unchanging. As the scriptures state, Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.<br /><br />The Church does allow some of its teachings to develop (not evolve) over time. It's like an acorn that over time changes from an acorn into a tree. It does not evolve but it develops. In such a way, the teachings of the Church on marriage change in that they develop. There is no break. There is no evolution in the sense.<br /><br />It is false to say that saying that the Earth was flat was a "punishable, sinful offense." Galileo was punished because of disobedience in publishing materials which he promised to the Pope that he would not yet publish due to the enemies of the Church rising at that time. Publishing anything that might hurt the Church would only add fuel to the fire of the heretics.<br /><br />The claim that Galileo discovered the earth was round, when up to then it was thought to be flat, is ludicrous; centuries before Galileo, St. Thomas Aquinas casually mentioned that it can be scientifically proven that the earth is round (terra est rotunda) [S.T. I, Q. 1, Art. 1, reply obj. 2]. (For more about Galileo, you might start with the 1909 Catholic Encyclopedia article about him. Also, some years ago, the now-defunct Catholic Dossier magazine had an entire issue on the Galileo controversies--well worth reading, I believe, if you can find it.)<br /><br />Heliocentrism was advocated by Copernicus, a Catholic cleric, and that the Church never condemed him. In fact, the popes of the time were very interested in having the Copernican theory investigated further. Galileo was even commissioned by the pope, who was his friend (I forget which one), to write a volume about competing theories on the matter.<br /><br />The difference between Copernicus and Galileo was that Copernicus presented heliocentrism as purely theoretical because technology at the time did not allow him to make a case against the contemporary understanding of Scripture. Galileo, on the other hand, attempted to portray heliocentrism as absolute truth without any ability to prove it which was his ultimate undoing. <br /><br />You also say "the First Christians didn't have Bibles..." Of course they did not but they still believed the universal set of truths that the Church taught. Were the apostles taught all the truths of salvation by our Lord at once? No. Similarly, the Faith became more clear to the Early Church over time.<br /><br />"If the Holy Spirit moved the Church to change and reevaluate things" The Holy Ghost does not move the Church to change or "reevaluate." Again, doctrines develop not change. The Church is not a democracy that stops and takes a vote and reevaluates matters of doctrine and then comes up with a decision.<br /><br />"Jesus WAS change" This is heretical. Our Lord Jesus Christ is God. He is the 2nd Person of the Blessed Trinity. God can not change. Since Jesus is God, He can not change. To say that Jesus is change is heresy against the nature of God.Matthewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07929374709032473716noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-31397217190006856832011-08-18T13:04:32.241-05:002011-08-18T13:04:32.241-05:00I am not a "liberal" Catholic, but neith...I am not a "liberal" Catholic, but neither am I a carved in stone traditionalist. Clearly, the Church HAS changed its teachings on some things over centuries, and these are changes that you no doubt embrace. In the early Church for example, marriage wasn't treated as a Christian vocation, but as legalized fornication, and some of the Fathers railed against it. Couples, married in civil ceremonies, could request a Church blessing, but that was it. <br /><br />The earth is no longer believed to be flat,or at the center of creation, yet the Church once taught that it was, and to suggest otherwise was a punishable, sinful offense.<br /><br />Jesus and the first Christians didn't have Bibles, or many of the Church teachings that we now have, yet were they not the Church? If the Holy Spirit moved the Church to change and reevaluate things in the past, can it not be said to do so now? Must every prompting in this direction be viewed as coming from the Devil and not from God?<br /><br />Martin Luther once said that reason and intellect were enemies of faith which must be utterly crushed and destroyed. Some Orthodox monks believe this still. The western Church however exalted reason and intellect as the gifts from God that they are, and used them to magnify and explain faith, and to understand the human mind and the natural world around us. Doing so need not mean that we become whacko, left wing pseudo-Catholics, but neither must it mean that our living faith must be reduced to a rule book of things unchanging. Jesus WAS change, and the Church that came from Him was born of Spirit. The promptings of that Spirit are with us still, as He said, and it was by listening to those promptings that the Church evolved as it did.Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06847880071849758533noreply@blogger.com