IS THERE SUCH A THING A CATHOLIC LIBERALISM? I DENY THAT THERE IS

PORTRAIT OF CARDINAL JOHN HENRY NEWMAN

Cardinal John Henry Newman is seen in a portrait in a church in Rome.  Cardinal Newman, who was one of the great intellectual minds of the Catholic Church in the 19th century. (CNS photo from Crosiers)

I rejoice to say, to one great mischief I have from the first opposed myself. For thirty, forty, fifty years I have resisted to the best of my powers the spirit of liberalism in religion. Never did Holy Church need champions against it more sorely than now, when, alas! it is an error overspreading, as a snare, the whole earth; and on this great occasion, when it is natural for one who is in my place to look out upon the world, and upon Holy Church as in it, and upon her future, it will not, I hope, be considered out of place, if I renew the protest against it which I have made so often.

Liberalism in religion is the doctrine that there is no positive truth in religion, but that one creed is as good as another, and this is the teaching which is gaining substance and force daily. It is inconsistent with any recognition of any religion, as true. It teaches that all are to be tolerated, for all are matters of opinion. Revealed religion is not a truth, but a sentiment and a taste; not an objective fact, not miraculous; and it is the right of each individual to make it say just what strikes his fancy. {65} Devotion is not necessarily founded on faith. Men may go to Protestant Churches and to Catholic, may get good from both and belong to neither. They may fraternise together in spiritual thoughts and feelings, without having any views at all of doctrine in common, or seeing the need of them. Since, then, religion is so personal a peculiarity and so private a possession, we must of necessity ignore it in the intercourse of man with man. If a man puts on a new religion every morning, what is that to you? It is as impertinent to think about a man’s religion as about his sources of income or his management of his family. Religion is in no sense the bond of society.

Hitherto the civil Power has been Christian. Even in countries separated from the Church, as in my own, the dictum was in force, when I was young, that: “Christianity was the law of the land”. Now, everywhere that goodly framework of society, which is the creation of Christianity, is throwing off Christianity. The dictum to which I have referred, with a hundred others which followed upon it, is gone, or is going everywhere; and, by the end of the century, unless {66} the Almighty interferes, it will be forgotten. Hitherto, it has been considered that religion alone, with its supernatural sanctions, was strong enough to secure submission of the masses of our population to law and order; now the Philosophers and Politicians are bent on satisfying this problem without the aid of Christianity. Instead of the Church’s authority and teaching, they would substitute first of all a universal and a thoroughly secular education, calculated to bring home to every individual that to be orderly, industrious, and sober, is his personal interest. Then, for great working principles to take the place of religion, for the use of the masses thus carefully educated, it provides—the broad fundamental ethical truths, of justice, benevolence, veracity, and the like; proved experience; and those natural laws which exist and act spontaneously in society, and in social matters, whether physical or psychological; for instance, in government, trade, finance, sanitary experiments, and the intercourse of nations. As to Religion, it is a private luxury, which a man may have if he will; but which of course he must pay for, and which he must not {67} obtrude upon others, or indulge in to their annoyance.

The general character of this great apostasia is one and the same everywhere; but in detail, and in character, it varies in different countries. For myself, I would rather speak of it in my own country, which I know. There, I think it threatens to have a formidable success; though it is not easy to see what will be its ultimate issue. At first sight it might be thought that Englishmen are too religious for a movement which, on the Continent, seems to be founded on infidelity; but the misfortune with us is, that, though it ends in infidelity as in other places, it does not necessarily arise out of infidelity. It must be recollected that the religious sects, which sprang up in England three centuries ago, and which are so powerful now, have ever been fiercely opposed to the Union of Church and State, and would advocate the un-Christianising of the monarchy and all that belongs to it, under the notion that such a catastrophe would make Christianity much more pure and much more powerful. Next the liberal principle is forced on us from the necessity of the case. Consider {68} what follows from the very fact of these many sects. They constitute the religion, it is supposed, of half the population; and, recollect, our mode of government is popular. Every dozen men taken at random whom you meet in the streets has a share in political power,—when you inquire into their forms of belief, perhaps they represent one or other of as many as seven religions; how can they possibly act together in municipal or in national matters, if each insists on the recognition of his own religious denomination? All action would be at a deadlock unless the subject of religion was ignored. We cannot help ourselves. And, thirdly, it must be borne in mind, that there is much in the liberalistic theory which is good and true; for example, not to say more, the precepts of justice, truthfulness, sobriety, self-command, benevolence, which, as I have already noted, are among its avowed principles, and the natural laws of society. It is not till we find that this array of principles is intended to supersede, to block out, religion, that we pronounce it to be evil. There never was a device of the Enemy so cleverly framed and {69} with such promise of success. And already it has answered to the expectations which have been formed of it. It is sweeping into its own ranks great numbers of able, earnest, virtuous men, elderly men of approved antecedents, young men with a career before them.

Such is the state of things in England, and it is well that it should be realised by all of us; but it must not be supposed for a moment that I am afraid of it. I lament it deeply, because I foresee that it may be the ruin of many souls; but I have no fear at all that it really can do aught of serious harm to the Word of God, to Holy Church, to our Almighty King, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, Faithful and True, or to His Vicar on earth. Christianity has been too often in what seemed deadly peril, that we should fear for it any new trial now. So far is certain; on the other hand, what is uncertain, and in these great contests commonly is uncertain, and what is commonly a great surprise, when it is witnessed, is the particular mode by which, in the event, Providence rescues and saves His elect inheritance. Sometimes our enemy is turned into a friend; sometimes he is despoiled of {70} that special virulence of evil which was so threatening; sometimes he falls to pieces of himself; sometimes he does just so much as is beneficial, and then is removed. Commonly the Church has nothing more to do than to go on in her own proper duties, in confidence and peace; to stand still and to see the salvation of God.

The Biglietto Speech, Rome, May 14, 1879

 CATHOLIC LIBERALISM

an sit, nego

Liberalism | Definition of Liberalism by Merriam-Webster

Definition of liberalism. 1 : the quality or state of being liberal. 2 a often capitalized : a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty with reference to the spiritual and ethical content of Christianity.

 IF WE COMBINE THE TWO WORDS “CATHOLIC” AND “LIBERALISM” WE CREATE A CHIMERA AN OXYMORON
chi·me·ra
kīˈmirə,kəˈmirə/
noun
 .
  1. a thing that is hoped or wished for but in fact is illusory or impossible to achieve.
    “the economic sovereignty you claim to defend is a chimera”
    synonyms: illusion, fantasy, delusion, dream, daydream, pipe dream, figment of the/one’s imagination, mirage

ox·y·mo·ron
ˌäksəˈmôrˌän/
noun
  1. a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction (e.g., faith unfaithful kept him falsely true ).

 

 

lib·er·al
ˈ
         adjective
  1. open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values.
    “they have more liberal views toward marriage and divorce than some people
     noun
  1. a person of liberal views.
 There is no doubt that some people are liberal, they hold liberal views. They can be said to Liberal Catholics.  But it cannot be said that they subscribe to a coherent social or political philosophy known as CATHOLIC LIBERALISM.

-ism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
-ism is a suffix in many English words, originally derived from the Ancient Greek suffix -ισμός (-ismós), and reaching English through the Latin-ismus, and the French-isme.[1] It is often used in philosophy to define specific ideologies, and, as such, at times it is used as a noun in its own right when referring to a broad range of ideologies in a general sense.[2] The suffix “-ism” is neutral[citation needed] and therefore bears no connotations associated with any of the many ideologies it identifies; such determinations can only be informed by public opinion regarding specific ideologies.

The concept of an -ism may resemble that of a grand narrative.[3]

The first recorded usage of the suffix ism as a separate word in its own right was in 1680. By the nineteenth century it was being used by Thomas Carlyle to signify a pre-packaged ideology. It was later used in this sense by such writers as Julian Huxley and George Bernard Shaw. In the United States of the mid-nineteenth century, the phrase “the isms” was used as a collective derogatory term to lump together the radical social reform movements of the day (such as slavery abolitionism, feminism, alcohol prohibitionism, Fourierism, pacifism, early socialism, etc.) and various spiritual or religious movements considered non-mainstream by the standards of the time (such as Transcendentalism, spiritualism or “spirit rapping”, Mormonism, the Oneida movement often accused of “free love”, etc.). Southerners often prided themselves on the American South being free from all of these pernicious “Isms” (except for alcohol temperance campaigning, which was compatible with a traditional Protestant focus on individual morality). So on September 5 and 9, 1856, the Examiner newspaper of Richmond, Virginia ran editorials on “Our Enemies, the Isms and their Purposes”, while in 1858 “Parson” Brownlow called for a “Missionary Society of the South, for the Conversion of the Freedom Shriekers, Spiritualists, Free-lovers, Fourierites, and Infidel Reformers of the North” (see The Freedom-of-thought Struggle in the Old South by Clement Eaton). In the present day, it appears in the title of a standard survey of political thought, Today’s Isms by William Ebenstein, first published in the 1950s, and now in its 11th edition.

Merriam-Webster Dictionary declared in December 2015, this word -ism to be the Word of the Year. A suffix is the Word of the Year because a small group of words that share this three-letter ending triggered both high volume and significant year-over-year increase in lookups at Merriam-Webster.com. Taken together, these seven words represent millions of individual dictionary lookups.[4]

Further reading

  • Today’s Isms: Socialism, Capitalism, Fascism, Communism, Libertarianism by Alan Ebenstein, William Ebenstein and Edwin Fogelman (11th ed, Pearson, 1999, ISBN978-0130257147)
  • Isms and Ologies: 453 Difficult Doctrines You’ve Always Pretended to Understand by Arthur Goldwag (Quercus, 2007, ISBN978-1847241764) ranges from Abolitionism to Zoroastrianism.
  • The Ism Book: A Field Guide to Philosophy by Peter Saint-Andre.
IS THERE SUCH THING AS CATHOLIC LIBERALISM?
I DENY THAT THERE IS !!!
IF IT DOES EXIST IT IS THE PHENOMENON KNOWN ASKASPERISM AND BERGOLIANISM THAT IS CURRENTLY DAMAGING THE INSTITUTIONAL CHURCH JUST A CARDINAL NEWMAN PREDICTED THAT IT WOULD, BUT IT IS NOT CATHOLIC LIBERALISM.
+Rene Henry Gracida

About abyssum

I am a retired Roman Catholic Bishop, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, Texas
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to IS THERE SUCH A THING A CATHOLIC LIBERALISM? I DENY THAT THERE IS

  1. Sheepdog094 says:

    Wonderful repost with your emphasis.

    Time to take back our Catholic Church. Take it back from the Cult live-in-a-bubble SSPX Marian Corp, Sedevacantists, etc. Father Shizou is a heretic? The ones who can even be violent. Only in legitimate self defense or defense of others should we raise up.

    With the exception of Cloistered religious orders who rightly do so, there are people who Isolate themselves. Time it back from the Modernists most especially. Francis Bergoglio is but a Pope. Or maybe the Anti-Pope/ Pope in Name only. May his Bishopric another take. Some ask why non official statements by Benedict were treated worthily but then Francis Unofficial statements are ignored. That is because he is not making the right statements. These people are just like the Pharisees. The Protestant sects need to return home. There is no “stay where you are”. Islam is a false religion, and a dangerous cult. The Jewish people need to be welcomed into our church. Many of them would come if we didn’t have modernist Masses.

    We need to address Eucharistic Minister problems. It cheapens the Mass and what it is all about. That is “liberal” Catholicism at it’s finest.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s