How to Be a Loyal Catholic Today? By Being Loyal to the Bishop of Rome by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J. Not too many years ago this would have been a strange title for a lecture, “How to Be a Loyal Catholic Today.” The reason is obvious. Catholics were Catholics. They were not Protestants, or Mormons, or Jehovah's Witnesses. But much has happened in the last thirty or so years. Nowadays there are so many people who call themselves Catholic but really are not. There are books published and periodicals; there are conferences given, and symposiums held; there are religious programs and celebrations sponsored, and all professedly Catholic. But so many of these are Catholic only in name and not in reality. In plain English, a revolution has taken place. The revolution is a revolution in doctrine and morality. But the heart of the revolution is a widespread rejection of the papacy. What good is it for Pope John Paul II to write in his encyclical The Splendor of Truth that a flood of errors in our day distorts or denies the most fundamental premises of Christianity? Unless Catholics believe that Pope John Paul II is the Vicar of Christ, why should anyone believe him? The errors prevalent in the modern world undermine every single truth on which sane doctrine and sound morality are based. What are the roots of these erroneous ideas? The first root is to detach human freedom from its essential and necessary relationship to Truth. The second root is the denial that there is any visible authority on earth that is divinely authorized to teach the truth. We Catholics believe that this visible authority is the Bishop of Rome. We return to our title for this conference, “How to be a Loyal Catholic Today?” The answer is obvious. “By being loyal to the Bishop of Rome.” To be a loyal Catholic we must know the truth taught by the Holy Father, live this truth, and suffer for this truth. The truth, of course, is the teaching of Jesus Christ. After all, that is what loyalty means. Loyalty means fidelity to the truth. Except that the truth to which we are to be faithful is no mere abstraction. The truth we believe is the living God who became man and appointed Peter and his successors as His spokesmen for the truth. To know the truth is to believe what the Incarnate God told us about Himself, about ourselves and about our purpose for existence. Christ could not have been more plain. We are human beings who live here on earth for a short time in order to prepare ourselves for a heavenly eternity. Nothing in this world has any value except as a means of leading us to our heavenly destiny. We are to use our free wills to choose what Christ told us we must do and avoid at any cost what He forbade. On Mt. Sinai, God gave the chosen people the Ten Commandments through Moses the prophet. But when God became man, He personally taught his followers that the Ten Commandments were to be elevated as He explained them. The fifth, sixth, and seventh chapters of Saint Matthew's Gospel are a compendium of what Jesus called the New Law. Know the Truth It is one thing, however, for Christ to have revealed the moral truths of Christianity. It is something else for us to know them. To know this truth we must submit our minds to the divine mind of the Son of God who became the Son of Mary. We must submit our minds to the mind of the Vicar of Christ whom Christ told, after His resurrection, to “feed my lambs …feed my sheep.” Our children are the lambs and we are the sheep whom the Bishop of Rome has been appointed by Jesus Christ to feed us with the truth that God became man to teach us. In His Sermon on the Mount, Christ told married people they are to be two in one flesh, that Christian marriage cannot be dissolved by any human power. Over the centuries since the Savior died on the cross, there have been many breaks with the Catholic Church. In the thirteenth century whole nations broke with the Roman Catholic Church, to become what we now call orthodox Christians. In the sixteenth century millions of once professed Catholics again broke with the Holy See. They formed what now amount to over four thousand Protestant denominations throughout the world. From the dawn of Christianity to the present day, there have been hundreds of millions who have separated themselves from the Catholic Church. On examination, we find that every major break with Catholic unity has been over the Papal insistence on the indissolvability of Christian, consummated marriage. The lowest official figure for the number of abortions of innocent unborn children every year is now over seventy million. Who is the only authority in this world that still defends the right of unborn children to be born? Who alone defends the rights of the aged to remain alive and not be put to death? Who is it? It is the Bishop of Rome. Never before in human history has the need for Papal authority been, I don't say important, nor do I even say indispensable. Obedience to the teaching of the Bishop of Rome has become the norm of moral sanity. Every human being is a believer. My favorite definition of man is not that of Aristotle who defined man as a rational animal. I prefer to define man as a believing animal. But what a difference between believing what you like and believing you are to do what you strongly dislike. All of this is locked up in what is the first condition for being a loyal Catholic. A loyal Catholic submits his mind in accepting everything that Christ teaches through the Bishop of Rome. We must surrender our proud intellects to accept what we do not comprehend. And believe that we have a free will for one purpose: to submit our freedom to the divine will. And how is Christ teaching us today? He is teaching us through the Bishop of Rome, on whom He promised to build His Church against which the gates of Hell would not prevail. more to follow.....
Live The Truth There is no substitute for knowing the truth that Christ told us to believe. But knowing this truth by faith is not enough. To be a Catholic it is not enough merely to believe what the Church teaches. We must also put into practice what we believe. To be a loyal Catholic means especially living what we believe. One pope after another over the centuries has insisted that Catholics understand what they believe. But this understanding must correspond with what the Bishops of Rome tell us is the truth of our faith. In approving the Catechism of the Catholic Church in 1992, Pope John Paul II declared he was doing so “by virtue of my Apostolic Authority.” He further declared, it “is a statement of the Church's faith and of Catholic doctrine, attested or illumined by Sacred Scripture, the Apostolic Tradition and the Church's Magisterium. I declare it to be a sure norm for teaching the faith and thus a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion. May it serve the renewal to which the Holy Spirit ceaselessly calls the Church of God, the Body of Christ, on her pilgrimage to the undiminished light of the Kingdom!” Thus, the Bishops of Rome since Peter's time have insisted not only that we know what is revealed truth but that we understand it. Speaking to you, I would say from the depths of my heart, learn what the latest Catechism of the Catholic Church really teaches. The only absolute assurance you have that you are learning what Christ wants us to learn is by following this Catechism and those explanations of its contents which correspond to the teaching of Pope John Paul II. Suffer for the Truth We are now in a position to answer the hardest question on “How to be a loyal Catholic today.” To be a loyal Catholic means to pay dearly for one's faith in Jesus Christ. It is impossible to exaggerate; shall I use the word “expensive”? It is not just to call oneself a Catholic or be considered a Catholic but to be a loyal Catholic. As we said in the beginning of this conference, we are now living in a world that is literally trying to destroy each human being as a person. Our faith teaches us that every human being is a person who has a free will, which is to be submitted to the will of God. What is the world teaching in our day? It is telling everyone from infancy that “Your own free will is the only real norm for morality. What you want to do is right, and everyone must respect your rights.” Those who challenge this new paganism are faced with a difficult option. Either they conform to this philosophy or they are faced with the prospect of martyrdom. To the best of my knowledge, never in the history of the Church, has any pope spoken and written more clearly about the need for martyrdom than has Pope John Paul II. The reason is obvious. He has no illusions about what it means to be a loyal Catholic on the eve of the third millenium. He quotes from Sacred Scripture to show that Jesus Christ was the primary witness for proclaiming the truth. Christ was followed by Saint Stephen and the apostles and by now twenty centuries of men, women, and children who have laid down their lives rather than deny or compromise Christ's teaching on mortal sin. The Holy Father asks how martyrdom is a witness to both God's holiness and man's personal dignity. He answers: martyrdom witnesses to God's holiness by testifying to the grace that God gives the martyr. He also testifies to man's personal dignity because our highest act of virtue is to suffer martyrdom rather than disobey a divine moral law. The Vicar of Christ finally asks whether there is such a thing as a living martyrdom. He answers without qualification; yes we are living martyrs when we accept the opposition of this world for the sake of eternal rewards. For the last time, therefore, we ask how are we to be loyal Catholics? We answer: to be a loyal Catholic today we must love the Cross - because we love the God who became man in order to die on His Cross out of love for us. Either we are ready to embrace the Cross out of love for Jesus Christ, or we are Catholic only in name. Who are the living martyrs today? They are those who hear in the Bishop of Rome the voice of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is on earth in two ways. He is on earth physically present in the Holy Eucharist, the same Jesus who died on Calvary and rose from the dead on Easter Sunday. But Jesus Christ is also on earth in the Bishop of Rome. He is on earth teaching us through His Vicar what He wants us to believe and follow. Anyone who thinks that this is either pious rhetoric or mere poetry is living in a dream world. Thank God, you and I know better.
Kelly Bowring is well off the rails, he is leading people astray also in our community (he lives about 10 miles from me and home schools his kids with people from my parish that I know well, please pray for him!). In case anyone hasn't seen this today from Spirit Daily, it is quite true and we all need to do this. The evil one is trying his best to get us confused, we need to find quiet time (which can be so hard to do!) and in that quiet time, God will show us the Truth: http://www.spiritdaily.com/intheschool.htm The Spirit of God is a spirit of peace, and He speaks and acts in peace and gentleness. Underscore his words: the motions of God are delicate touches; they don't make noise; and they can penetrate our spiritual consciousness only if we have within us a sort of calm "zone," and tranquility. So says a priest named Jacques Philippe, in a new book of note: In the School of the Holy Spirit. In other words: don't cause yourself trouble. Don't let agitation inside make it difficult to hear His still, small Voice (I Kings 19:12). How to reach the calm zone? It is a gradual process, this priest points out. We have to work at it. We have to desire it. We have to orient toward it. We have to keep at it, in all situations. We have to pray for it. And we have to achieve the ability to block out troublesome thoughts (which so often come from the enemy -- or should we say: the Agitator). If we don't seek peace of mind actively, "in all circumstances," we lose direct contact with the Lord. In spite of everything, make this effort. (An effort it is!) But what results. In short, we have to practice peace of mind, and the heart follows. We have to hold it as a goal. When we don't we react to situations in a human, agitated, hasty way, we maintain inner tranquility. Fighting fire with fire causes a mess (note the scorching, note the soot), as well as interior consternation. "It isn't easy," writes the priest, "but by practicing hope in God, abandonment, humility, and the acceptance of our inner poverty through an unshakeable truth in God's Mercy, we will reach peace little by little." Don't you hate that feeling of losing that? Of disturbance? Of anxiety? Yet, it happens every day all day, even at night. The devil's playground (or battlefield) is the mind. As John of the Cross said, "Take care to preserve your heart in peace; let no happening of this world upset it." When you have peace, you have faith. Watch God answer wondrously! Stop being a perfectionist. Perfection does not exist on earth. Struggle does (and joy in those struggles!). A harm it is, notes Father Philippe, to upset ourselves and lose the "impulses" of the Holy Spirit. He comes as the dove of peace. "Maintaining peace is linked to the practice of silence," he says in his potent little book (we'll make it available shortly). "This silence is not an empty silence: it is peace, attentiveness to God's Presence, and attentiveness to others, waiting in hope and trust in God." When someone accuses or insults you, unfairly, be as silent as you can; wait on God to instruct you. Be a person of few words. When He does instruct you, the timing and words will be potent. One word will have more of an effect than dozens formulated out of fear, worry, frustration, or revenge (anger). Never talk through those emotions! You will be speaking out of weakness. You will be speaking the devil's syntax. Silence is the opposite of dissipation. It builds up. It strengthens. It creates the capacity -- the room -- for God to operate within you. And when He is with you, as we all know, no one can be against.
Fatima, thanks for providing this essay. We must not confuse one very important point though. Every word the Pope utters is not bound in heaven. Do we agree here? Ex-cathedra pronouncements are bound in heaven as they are themselves revealed by heaven through the Holy Spirit. Here is an example I'd like to give, these are the words of Pope Francis "......They are lukewarm. They are neither light nor dark. And God does not love these. In Revelation, the Lord says to these Christians of gray areas: 'No, you are neither hot nor cold. If only you were hot or cold. But because you are lukewarm – always in the gray areas- I will vomit you out of my mouth'. The Lord has strong words for these Christians of gray areas." Notice the underlined words, "And God does not love these." Does Pope Francis have the authority to name lukewarm Christians as UNLOVED by God. Is this even possible? No. Does God now honor this statement by the pope and unlove theses Christians?
little me, Well, I would argue that it is either a mistranslation or he misspoke. I am sure that he meant that God does not love this lukewarm way of life. Surely, a Pope could not say that God does not love certain people. You are certainly right, though, that Popes can make errors. It is probably not a good practice to hyperanalyze every word the Pope speaks and every action he takes.
Imagine if Pope Benedict XVI had said this?!? A British blogger had some very pointed remarks about this: Is the Demonisation Process Underway? Did you hear the one about the Bishop who told a congregation that God doesn't love everyone? A fascinating theological exegesis emerges from a recent Pope Francis homily on light, dark and grey Christians and that is that God does not love everyone. There are light Christians, dark Christians and the grey Christians and'God does not love these'. This is a controversial thing to say, for any Christian. Does God love the lukewarm, grey, mediocre Christian? Can God's love be earned? Who is worthy of God's love? Does God love the 'good Christian', let us say the Franciscan ideal, but loathe, or not love the 'bad or lukewarm Christian'. Aside from the conclusion that I have drawn, that a Catholic Church that capitulates to the prevailing pagan culture of the West is a lukewarm, grey Church that has nothing much to say to anyone anymore about anything, I do wonder whether a process of demonisation is under way. Perhaps it has been underway for a year and a half and I hadn't understood it. Recently we have heard more about Pagan Christians. "They" or "them" is a nearly daily refrain of the Pope followed by a swift, sharp criticism towards someone, some 'kind' of Christian. Do we only find out who they are when they have been demoted or moved elsewhere? Are papal homilies really opportunities for Francis to elaborate on the Lectionary reading of the day or are they an opportunity for him to take aim at his theological or ideological opponents and issue a public denunciation? How far does the demonisation of, in Francis's opinion, 'the pharisees', the 'pagan Christians', the 'grey and lukewarm' Christians, the 'enemies of the Cross of Christ' in the Catholic Church extend? Of course, for more denunciations you can read the not-often-updated-because-I can't-keep-up with-the-insults Pope Francis Little Book of Insults. Of course, we should all search our consciences for those times that we sin against Christ and by our sinfulness and selfishness fail to live up to the name of Christian. Yet, I cannot help feeling that there is a particular kind of Catholic (If you are Jewish, Muslim, Evangelical, Protestant, Hindu, atheist or consider yourself a genuine Pagan, don't worry, Francis gives you a pass...) Francis has in mind, and its not necessarily the people I would usually associate with those who, for example, hate Christ and His Church. I have always thought that despite the many, terrible sins that I have committed, the sins I commit and the vices I unfortunately have, despite mylukewarmness in so many ways, my lack of charity and zeal for souls, my indifference to others, that God loves me still. And I have not just considered this a truth to apply to myself, but indeed to all I know, be they Catholic, of other denominations or complete atheists and/or pagans. And if for a moment (and of course, I do actually have those moments) I truly considered that God does not love X, Y or Z, or 'that type' of person, I would, I have always thought, cease to be a Christian. I might think it, but I would be wise not to state it because only God knows who he loves and who might be so set against Him that He rejects. God's wrath is upon those who reject Jesus Christ, the Gospels and Epistles tell us. God's wrath awaits those who refuse to repent from mortal sin, but that God loves every human being is, I think, the very reason why we are called to love every human being. God loves all people because He made them for Himself, whether they accept Him or not whether we love Him or not. I cannot say that God loves all that this person does, just as God does not like - may loathe - all I do and indeed, do not do. I cannot say God loves all this person says, thinks and believes and acts, but I can say that God loves everyone and patiently waits for us all to repent and embrace the Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ. So when the Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Catholic Church says of certain Christians, that 'God does not love these', that is a serious thing to say indeed and one that needs surely some kind of clarification. The idea that Francis might say that God has withdrawn Himself entirely from people who Pope Francis, or Jorge Bergoglio, the man, takes exception to is to say, 'I know who God loves and who God loathes', thereby sharing in God's own thoughts. It is also to say that God loves the man Jorge Bergoglio very much but detests certain Christians. Who could these people be? Who does God not love? It would appear that the separation of the sheep and goats in in progress, in the mind of Pope Francis but it it not necessarily Our Lord doing the judging. No, it is he who said, "Who am I to judge?" Does His Holiness, if this is so, ever think that it is possible he could bewrong? Abortion is a sin crying out to Heaven for vengeance, all kind of murder also. So is sodomy, but it is not faithful Catholics who stand around saying... ...and God waits patiently for their repentance and, we must believe, loves those who commit these acts. The logic of Pope Francis, however, if God does not love 'some', 'certain people', might lead you to conclude that he doesn't. Why? Because to say that God loves some but not others is to entertain a bizarre kind of Christian relativism that could easily even lead someone to ask whether the Pope is a Christian. In order to ask the question, of course, that person would have to be some kind of fundamentalist and believe - shock - that God loves everyone - even the ones Pope Francis doesn't like. And Pope Francis of course! A lot of men have accused Christians and Saints and even thought they were pleasing God by doing so. In fact those who sought the execution of Our Saviour thought, I believe, that God did not love Him. My heart tells me that Pope Francis's homilies are about religion. My mind says, 'Politics'.
Just wanted to share what a difference a dedicated prayer place has made for me in the last year. Out of the blue, my husband said, "Let's re-do your office." He had no idea I had been longing to turn it into a little chapel (an unwitting co-conspirator with the Holy Spirit!). He painted it, I cleared everything out, then put up all my holy pictures, made a little altar, and cleared my desk of everything but the Bible. I found a huge frame at the resale store, and printed off pictures/icons of 40+ of my favorite Saints and lined them up in rows inside the frame. When I enter, I take off my shoes because it is holy ground. When I take guests in to see it, they definately get the "vibe". People who are far from God can't even enter. Everyone else just says, "Wow!" then comments about what a peaceful place it is. The Eastern Church, I believe, teaches that the image of a Saint invokes their presence. I believe this - I can feel the presence of my Holy friends there. The most wonderful thing is that slipping into prayer in that space is like slipping into a pool of water. Most days I slip in there many times, and always come out more peaceful and trusting in God. If you don't have the luxury of a whole room, any corner will do. Many evangelical protestants rave about their "Prayer closet". As long as it is a place where you can claim some privacy and space for holy objects, I think it would serve very well.
Yes, I'm sure Pope Francis would have said that particular phrase differently in a written homily but his Santa Maria homilies are so rewarding. Here is his latest, to a congregation of children: It was a very special celebration in the Santa Marta Chapel Friday, with the pews filled with children from a local Roman parish. After an initial awkwardness, the children overcame their shyness to engage in a lively question and answer session with the Holy Father. Looking out over them he said that it was like “looking at a promise, looking at the world to come”. Then Pope Francis asked the question: “what will we leave our future?”. "Do we teach them what we heard in the First Reading: to walk in love and truth? Or do we teach them with words, and then allow our lives to go in another direction? But it is our responsibility to look out for these children! A Christian has to take care of children, little ones and pass on the faith, pass on what he lives, what is in his heart. We cannot ignore the little plants that grow". Pope Francis said that everything depends on our having the right attitude towards children. “What is my attitude?” he asked, “is it the attitude of brother, father, mother, sister, that helps them to grow or is it a detached [distant], "they grow up, I have my own life ...?". "We all have a responsibility to give our very best and the very best that we have is our faith: give it to them, but give it by example! Words are pointless….in today’s world [obsessed with] images, where everyone has these cell phones words are pointless ... Example! Example! What should I give them?”. At this point of his homily, Pope Francis began asking the children why they were at Mass, giving rise to a spontaneous conversation. It took some time before one child took courage and admitted: ‘To see you…” to which Pope Francis replied "I also like to see you all". He then began questioning the children as to who had already received First Holy Communion, Confirmation, while pointing out to all of them that it is the Sacrament of Baptism that "opens the door to Christian life" and immediately after which “the journey of a lifetime begins”. The same journey described by the passage from the letter of St. John read out in the First Reading: "Walking in truth and love". Later in that journey, he said, other Sacraments arrive such as marriage. But Pope Francis repeated, "it is important to know how to live this journey, to know how to live it like Jesus": "In these Sacraments – let me ask you a question - is prayer a sacrament? ... Out loud now! ... No! That’s right it is not! Prayer is not a sacrament, but we must pray. Do you know that you need to pray? Good, good ... Yes! Pray to the Lord, pray to Jesus, pray to Our Lady, to help us in this journey of truth and love. Do you understand? You have come to see me, who said that? You. But also to see Jesus. Right? Or do we just leave Jesus out? (the children respond, 'No!'). Now, Jesus is on the altar. And we will see Him, all of us! Jesus! Right now we have to ask Jesus to teach us to walk in truth and love. Will we all say it together? (all together) 'Walking in truth and love’".
A quote from your blogger: "How far does the demonisation of, in Francis's opinion, 'the pharisees', the 'pagan Christians', the 'grey and lukewarm' Christians, the 'enemies of the Cross of Christ' in the Catholic Church extend? Of course, for more denunciations you can read the not-often-updated-because-I can't-keep-up with-the-insults Pope Francis Little Book of Insults. " I wonder if the pharisees collected "Jesus of Nazareth's Little Book of Insults?" I've often thought that the lukewarm and pharisees are so blind they can't see where they stand. But I have to re-think that. Based on the uproar in the blogasphere, at least people with these tendencies have enough light to be greatly offended when their tribe is called out. Any of us who are keeping score on the Holy Father with our own little version of the "Little Book of Insults" can not reasonably expect Jesus to be pleased with our efforts. This isn't "mission drift," it's an abandonment of what we are called to do.
On the contrary. This pope continuously praises, and is praised by, those in and of the world. He continuously commands us not to be negative, not to criticize, not to judge. But then he continuously engages in this very bahavior he has condemned, in his continual diatribes against orthodox Catholics. That is hypocritical at best and there is nothing wrong with pointing it out.
I'm not sure he is diatribing against orthodox Catholics per se, but somehow he has the impression that (at least some) orthodox Catholics have a fortress mentality and are not interested in evangelizing but only condemning. I am sure it is true, for at least some, but I wonder what the situation is like in Argentina that makes him focus so strongly on this. He is not that widely traveled at all compared to other recent Popes, and comes from a relatively isolated region of the world, so looking at the situation of the Church in Argentina and South America in general might throw some light on the situation?
I've spoken with Catholics who are from South America and who have fairly detailed knowledge of the situation in Argentina. Many of the Traditionalists in Argentina were in Cardinal Bergoglio's opinion, too closely aligned with government factions to which Cardinal Bergoglio was personally opposed. Therefore he developed an animosity towards Traditionalists in general. Furthermore he steadfastly refused to permit the offering of the Traditional Latin Mass in his diocese that was required by Pope Benedict XVI in Summorum Pontificum in 2007, again presumably due to his bias against Traditionalists in general. The Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate (FFI) staffed a parish just a couple hundred yards from the boundary of his diocese and after Summorum Pontificum started offering the Traditional Latin Mass there. This reportedly incensed Cardinal Bergoglio and as soon as he was made Pope the vicious persecution of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate started. Coincidence? Maybe. Cardinal Burke was a strong supporter of the FFI, even officiating at their Ordinations, and when he built the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe in La Crosse he brought in the FFI to staff it. As soon as Cardinal Bergoglio became pope he started removing Cardinal Burke from his positions in the Vatican, first the Congregation of Bishops and Congregation for the Causes of Saints and now the Apostolic Signatura. Coincidences? Maybe. But it's hard not to see it as a vindictive iron fist within the velvet glove of this pontificate.
Uh Oh! This ought to get a lot of knickers in a twist: Pope Invites 'Godmother of Punk' to Perform at Christmas Concert http://www.Newsmax.com/Newsfront/Pope-Francis-Patti-Smith/2014/11/14/id/607387/#ixzz3J45Hw68w A couple of her tracks: or Sounds like this "banquet's" invitation list is going out to the highways and byways as mentioned in scripture!
Brian, I do love the FFI - I live only a few hours from the Shrine in LaCrosse and take pleasure in attending Mass there with those priests. I did not know about the history of Pope Francis with the FFI, though. I seriously hope that it is not true that he was incensed by the FFI setting up just outside of his diocese. After all, outside of his diocese is outside of his diocese. I also hope it is not true that he refused to obey Summorum Pontificum. Thanks for the info, though!
Catholicism is not conservatism nor is it liberalism. The problem is that the Church has been 'politicised' by these labels. Two wings have emerged a 'liberal wing' and a 'conservative wing' with people identifying themselves by these labels. I do not see myself as either a liberal Catholic nor as a conservative Catholic. I just don't like these 'political' labels. I belong to the one Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
I wanted to share this brief post as for me it was very timely. I've been bothered by this thread and some of the conversations. Unlike some posters have written, it was not because I disagree with the other perspective, but more toward the tone. But, that's neither here nor there. I had been praying on whether to stay here or move on. And then came this post. I mostly have focused on how I have been responding and feeling toward what I FEEL is less than charitable posts. I felt it was bringing me to the hear occasion of sin in creating very uncharitable thoughts in my mind. And so I think this article was timely and with a good message. To be "heroic" or virtuous in a Christian sense sometimes requires patience and silence. So, I think this thread will give me that. opportunity. "Mostly, though, what we need is patience – patience with ourselves, first of all, and an acknowledgement that salvation is a journey that begins with baptism, but winds away from that point God knows how long. Yes, God knows, and we can bank on his giving us just enough time to make it. Patience extends as well to others, along with a camaraderie that is reflected in generosity and magnanimity, especially toward ones fellow believers. We Christians are all stumbling forward in our attempts to appropriate grace, aspire to sainthood, and live out what we affirm. The least we can do is shrug off the bumps and shoves that we give each other along the way." http://catholicexchange.com/manifesto-saints
The proper "labels" are orthodox and heterodox. Fortunately there are many manifestations of Faithful Catholicism within the orthodox Catholic realm - Traditional, charismatic, Byzantine, Maronite, Marian, the list goes on and on and is as diverse as the many gifts and fruits of the Holy Sprit.
Mincing words doesn't change the outcome. Pretty much the same thing in results. What is worse....an expression that God does not "love" (and I'd like to see the Italian term used which can and must include all qualities of love: affection or endearment/ability to demonstrate affection/considerate feelings et al) the lukewarm or that He literally would "vomit them out of His mouth". Also Truth/God demands that such as those/lukewarm actually limit a response of love from God themselves by their own decision to rather ignore Him....just as the father of the prodigal could not demonstrate his love in action to the prodigal until he literally returned to the Father's domain. He could not realize the father's love in a state that did not include Him or simply ignored Him and His expressed values/desires.
