exploring catholicism,but looking for liberal caths for another perspective

[wonderwoman]

I converted to christianity at 18 and have spiritually grown up in protestant circles even though i was raised a catholic. 20 yrs later, i am finding myself more and more drawn to catholicism and finding many wonderful gems i did not know were there.
I still have a lot to learn about cc teachings and i'm not sure that i ever will join, but there is a possibility.
There are some controvertial teachings that are keeping me from fully accepting or joining the church officially, but i am hoping to meet more liberal caths who can possibly share their perspectives and help me on my journey. See, i'm ok that other caths hold to some of these teachings, but what bothers me is that in order for me to join the church, i must to submit to the church teachings that i don't agree with.
These are the teachings that i most struggle with in accepting:
1. Dogmas of mary....particularly the idea of her as "co-redemptrix"
(i find most of the mary teachings deify her even though everyone keeps telling me that when they pray to her it's no different from asking prayer from a friend on earth etc. On paper it sounds ok, but what i see in practicality is deification of her which places her in a god-like status.)
2. The veneration of saints (same reasons as above)
3. Purgatory (i simply am not convinced that the biblical interpretations used to argue the existence of purgatory is correct. I also disagree with it because it contradicts the heart of the gospel which teaches that christ covers all your sins once and for all)
4. Birth control. If life begins at the moment of conception, i don't see how birth control is considered intrinsically evil. Again, i don't see any biblical evidence that condemns birth control. In addition to this, planning ovulation etc. to me is simply another form of birth control.

These are the 4 basic teachings that hinder me from joining the church officially. If i disagree with the teachings and believe these doctrines are incorrect, the church won't permit me to join.
I was wondering if there were other catholics out there who are more liberal in their views and could shed another perspective on the above doctrines i mentioned.

[JasonV]

Hi wonderwoman! Welcome to TLT!

I'm not a Roman Catholic, so for that "liberal" perspective, you'll have to wait until someone wanders by and peeks at your post.

I am, however, a "Liberal Catholic". Meaning I belong to a small denomination known as the Liberal Catholic Church.

While I may not be exactly who you were hoping would come along and reply, I'll give it a shot anyway. :)

See, i'm ok that other caths hold to some of these teachings, but what bothers me is that in order for me to join the church, i must to submit to the church teachings that i don't agree with.

Interestingly enough, in my denomination, we have some who accept these things, others who do not. It's all "optional" for us. But if I might inject my own private views here:

1. Dogmas of mary....particularly the idea of her as "co-redemptrix" (i find most of the mary teachings deify her even though everyone keeps telling me that when they pray to her it's no different from asking prayer from a friend on earth etc. On paper it sounds ok, but what i see in practicality is deification of her which places her in a god-like status.) For many Roman Catholics, Mary is actually worshiped, as opposed to the official sanction of veneration she should receive. This is mostly a failure of catechism on Rome's part more than anything. If people were given the proper instruction, this wouldn't be a concern I'd imagine.

2. The veneration of saints (same reasons as above) Same answer as above. :)

3. Purgatory (i simply am not convinced that the biblical interpretations used to argue the existence of purgatory is correct. I also disagree with it because it contradicts the heart of the gospel which teaches that christ covers all your sins once and for all) Jury is out on this one for me too. I'm certain that there is no strong Biblical basis for this teaching, but by the same token, I don't believe the Bible is the end all and be all of Christianity.

4. Birth control. If life begins at the moment of conception, i don't see how birth control is considered intrinsically evil. Again, i don't see any biblical evidence that condemns birth control. In addition to this, planning ovulation etc. to me is simply another form of birth control. I don't oppose birth control, and neither does my church. I think you would find many of us opposed to a late term abortion, but we leave these things to the discretion of the individual. Basically, it's between you and God (and I would recommend your Spiritual Father/Mother).

These are the 4 basic teachings that hinder me from joining the church officially. If i disagree with the teachings and believe these doctrines are incorrect, the church won't permit me to join.
I was wondering if there were other catholics out there who are more liberal in their views and could shed another perspective on the above doctrines i mentioned.Again, my perspective is that of a Catholic who is not under Rome. We may have to wait a few days for the liberal Roman views to present themselves, but hopefully I've help in some small way.

Pax!

Jason

[Teshi]

Liberal Catholic checking in.

1. Dogmas of mary....particularly the idea of her as "co-redemptrix"
(i find most of the mary teachings deify her even though everyone keeps telling me that when they pray to her it's no different from asking prayer from a friend on earth etc. On paper it sounds ok, but what i see in practicality is deification of her which places her in a god-like status.)
Maybe it just seems normal to me because I grew up with it, but it's always seemed to me that Mary is, when you think about it, just plain old totally neat. I mean, she gave birth to the incarnation of the Word, how big is that?

Plus, all "co-redemptrix" means is that she was a participant in bringing redemption to humanity...not that she is the active agent in saving people. I think it's a wonky translation myself...gives a false impression that she's considered equal to God or something.

I do think some Catholics way overdo some Mary stuff, but that it's not a required part of the faith to go all over-the-top with it.

2. The veneration of saints (same reasons as above)
It's not required to participate in the veneration of the saints, just to acknowledge that the "cloud of witnesses" is out there. Personally I don't do a lot of praying to the saints, not because I think it's wrong, but just because I don't really feel it. I don't have a problem with it, it just isn't my thing.

3. Purgatory (i simply am not convinced that the biblical interpretations used to argue the existence of purgatory is correct. I also disagree with it because it contradicts the heart of the gospel which teaches that christ covers all your sins once and for all)
I guess since I don't think of the afterlife as a place, it's not really an issue for me. The idea of souls being cleansed in preparation for eternal rest seems pretty rational (well, as rational as anything religious gets) to me. Whether that happens in a nanosecond or in 100 years doesn't seem particularly relevant in my view...I'm guessing time isn't a concern after death.

4. Birth control. If life begins at the moment of conception, i don't see how birth control is considered intrinsically evil. Again, i don't see any biblical evidence that condemns birth control. In addition to this, planning ovulation etc. to me is simply another form of birth control.
Yeah, to be honest, I think it's only a matter of time before the Church gets over the whole "no birth control" thing. I obey on the sexual stuff (more or less) because I've agreed to follow the edicts of the Church, but I don't see any strong theological or scriptural underpinning to a blanket rule against birth control. To my mind this is the sort of thing that's more aligned with gluttony - like, are you on the pill because you're all about the consequence-free booty, or are you on the pill because you don't want to damage your marriage by foregoing sex, but can't have a kid right now for whatever legitimate reason? It's situational. Eating the sandwich is good if you do it to nourish yourself but not good if you do it 'cos you've got no self-control, you know?

[JasonV]

wonderwoman,

Have we answered your questions? Anything further?

[fragmentsofdreams]

1. The practice of calling Mary the Co-Redemptrix is not Catholic dogma. Personally, I find it to be not useful even though technically sound. It is too easy to misunderstand.

2. Try to think of it as simply asking a friend to pray for you. If it still bothers you, don't practice this devotion for a while. Catholicism has a huge variety of personal devotions. Not every devotion is for everyone at every time.

3. Purgatory has a lot of speculation surrounding it that many treat as doctrine when it isn't. I suggest you read Purgatory. Basically, the doctrine boils down to that we will undergo some process of purification before fully entering into the presence of God and that the prayers of living can benefit those undergoing purification.

ETA - Here is the link that was supposed to show up
http://christianforums.com/t2646637-wiki-purgatory.html

[chestertonrules]

Hi wonderwoman! Welcome to TLT!

I'm not a Roman Catholic, so for that "liberal" perspective, you'll have to wait until someone wanders by and peeks at your post.

I am, however, a "Liberal Catholic". Meaning I belong to a small denomination known as the Liberal Catholic Church.

While I may not be exactly who you were hoping would come along and reply, I'll give it a shot anyway. :)



Interestingly enough, in my denomination, we have some who accept these things, others who do not. It's all "optional" for us. But if I might inject my own private views here:

For many Roman Catholics, Mary is actually worshiped, as opposed to the official sanction of veneration she should receive. This is mostly a failure of catechism on Rome's part more than anything. If people were given the proper instruction, this wouldn't be a concern I'd imagine.

Same answer as above. :)

Jury is out on this one for me too. I'm certain that there is no strong Biblical basis for this teaching, but by the same token, I don't believe the Bible is the end all and be all of Christianity.

I don't oppose birth control, and neither does my church. I think you would find many of us opposed to a late term abortion, but we leave these things to the discretion of the individual. Basically, it's between you and God (and I would recommend your Spiritual Father/Mother).

Again, my perspective is that of a Catholic who is not under Rome. We may have to wait a few days for the liberal Roman views to present themselves, but hopefully I've help in some small way.

Pax!

Jason
Regarding birth control.

The Church believes that God created us to commune with him. He gave us the gift of sex to create more companions for God and humans.


By blocking the natural sexual process, we are stating that our wills are more important than God's will.

That's my read, not official church doctrine.

[fragmentsofdreams]

This seems to be the only place where artificiality is considered morally relevant.

Ultimately, the morality of birth control methods boils down to whether they are consistent with love or not. It is God's will that we love.

[samiam]

3. Purgatory (i simply am not convinced that the biblical interpretations used to argue the existence of purgatory is correct. I also disagree with it because it contradicts the heart of the gospel which teaches that christ covers all your sins once and for all)


I think you are right here; Purgatory is something that has most of its basis outside of the word of Scripture.

Catholics do not believe in "Sola Scriptura"; the Holy Mother Church is about "Scripture and Tradition".

In terms of salvation, the NAB (New American Bible; the most recent Catholic translation of the Bible in to English) words John 3:16 like this:
For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him might not perish but might have eternal life.
One of the Churches seven sacraments is the sacrament of reconciliation; this Sacrament exists because we (or I, should I say) believe that sins we do after getting baptized are held against us.

The idea of "once saved, always saved" is a somewhat new concept in Christianity's 2000-year-old history.

Now, keep in mind I'm liberal. Really liberal. This means I respect your beliefs, no matter what they are. I think there is a lot of good things about "once saved, always saved", but then again I've seen Evangelical Christians use "once save, always saved" as an excuse to think they are better than non-Christians.

Keep in mind that most people in the parish where I became Catholic were convinced you have to do something really REALLY bad to lose your salvation, like kill someone.

The advantage of the traditional Catholic viewpoint, in my opinion, is that I am still accountable for my actions. This is also a fundamental Wiccan belief: The negative things I do that hurt other people have negative consequences for myself.


Birth control. If life begins at the moment of conception, i don't see how birth control is considered intrinsically evil. Again, i don't see any biblical evidence that condemns birth control. In addition to this, planning ovulation etc. to me is simply another form of birth control.


Indeed. Let me say this for the record: As a Catholic, I have no objection to people using the pill, the injection (an injected form of the pill that one receives one a month or so that women commonly use down here in Mexico), condoms, or any other form of birth control. Many rank and file Catholics agree with me; using birth control wasn't an issue at the parish where I became Catholic.

I feel that this is not a license to be a slave of my lusts: Matthew 19:1-12 makes it clear I should only have sex with one person my entire life.

[JasonV]

By blocking the natural sexual process, we are stating that our wills are more important than God's will.

God's will includes the occasional blocking of natural sexual processes: "Thou shalt not commit adultery".

[Caedmon]

God's will includes the occasional blocking of natural sexual processes: "Thou shalt not commit adultery".
I believe that what he's defining as the "natural sexual process" is not the temptation to engage in a sex act, but the act of copulation itself. Not committing adultery is abstaining from the sexual act as a whole; abstinence is a sexual non-act. Using artificial birth control is obstructing the already-initiated "natural sexual process"; the sex act has already been committed to and begun. And there is nothing "natural" (in respect to Natural Law) about the sin of adultery.

[JasonV]

I believe that what he's defining as the "natural sexual process" is not the temptation to engage in a sex act, but the act of copulation itself.

Ok.

Not committing adultery is abstaining from the sexual act as a whole; abstinence is a sexual non-act. Are you claiming that abstinence is natural?

Using artificial birth control is obstructing the already-initiated "natural sexual process"; the sex act has already been committed to and begun. Ok.

And there is nothing "natural" (in respect to Natural Law) about the sin of adultery. Are you claiming that monogamy is natural in humans? Do you have any data to support such a theory?

[Caedmon]

Ok.

Are you claiming that abstinence is natural?

Ok.

Are you claiming that monogamy is natural in humans? Do you have any data to support such a theory?
Well I guess that depends on what you mean by "natural." But anyway, I'm not here to debate, so I won't.

[JasonV]

Well I guess that depends on what you mean by "natural." But anyway, I'm not here to debate, so I won't.

By natural I mean of course biological instincts. I'm also not trying to pick a fight here. Just curious to see the reasoning behind your statements. Thanks for stoppin' by.