It is currently Tue Nov 12, 2019 6:39 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
 "Liberalism is a Sin" question. 
Author Message

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 2:18 am
Posts: 56
New post "Liberalism is a Sin" question.
Before I ask this I just want people to understand that I regard this work as masterful. I have just been wondering about this particular section.

Here's an except from chapter 17.

Quote:
Relations of pure friendship, pleasure or affection, which we enter into as mere matters of taste or inclination, should be eschewed and, if once contracted, ought to be voluntarily broken off. Such relations are certain danger to our faith. Our Lord says that he who loves danger shall perish in it. It is difficult to sever such connections? What if it is; we must burst the bonds that place us in peril. Reflect for a moment. If your Liberal companion, with whom you are constantly associating, were subject to some contagious disease, would you then court him? If your relations with him compromised your reputation, would you continue them? If he were to asperse your family would you cling to him still? Well, the honor of God and your own spiritual safety is at stake in this matter; (96) what human prudence would counsel you to do for your worldly interest and human honor, surely that much at least your spiritual interests require from you. There is but one condition upon which intimacy with a Liberal is justifiable at all, and that is, for the purpose of converting him; for this two dispositions are necessary: your Liberal friend's willingness and your capacity to lead him to the light. Even here danger is not lacking. One must be very sure of his ground before he attempts the task.



In chapter 17 Dr. Don Felix Sarda Y Salvany is discussing the different types of relations one could have with a liberal. Of course necessary relations and genuinely useful relations are distinguish from relations of pure affection.

I'm just wondering if Sarda Y Salvany is completely correct on what he says about relations of pure affection. His first two analogies are what puzzle me the most.

Quote:
Reflect for a moment. If your Liberal companion, with whom you are constantly associating, were subject to some contagious disease, would you then court him?


Well I suppose this could depend on the particular circumstance. If a man had to insure his health, like a father who must support his family, in order to live up to his responsibilites that is one thing. The father in that case would be irresponsible if he put himself in the situation where he might get sick. But if a single person or a cleric did not withdrawl themselves from the danger of illness this would actually be a true act of charity.

Quote:
If your relations with him compromised your reputation, would you continue them?

One would not want to associate with pagans if that would give the appearance that they were condoning their evil, yet Christ did eat with prostitutes and tax collectors. Christ of course was doing this for the express purpose of convension. Dr. Sarda Y Salvany mentions that, associating with them for their conversion, as the only reason we should have these types of relations with liberals.

I guess I wonder if reputation should really be what one is concerned with. Not wanting to scandalize others might be a different thing than wanting to protect your reputation. While not wanting to give scandel is about protecting other people, protecting your reputation could be interiorly inspired by pride couldn't it?

Quote:
If he were to asperse your family would you cling to him still?


But then he says this. This is a very good point! I would not associate with someone who was going around spreading lies about my family. So how can I then associate with those who go around spreading lies about my Lord?


Actually after writting this I think I totally agree him. I suppose it's just really a hard thing to follow these days. I'd say the only people I know who are not liberals are Traditional Catholics. I cannot honestly say that my only intention for associating with these others is conversion.

These non-Catholic friends of mine do not influence my faith. (Or perhaps they do and I do not notice it.) They do not talk about sinful things constantly or anything like that. They are just non-catholics. I do not think I am in danger by associating with them.

At the same time, they know I am Catholic but do not want to hear about it. I would love nothing more than to see them convert to the Catholic faith. And actually one of my closest friends did convert from non-practicing Lutheranism to traditional Catholicism after I talked to him for quite a while about it.

I cannot say though that my associations with them are completely about trying to convert them all the time.

Must I limit my associations with these people to only times when I am expressly trying to convert them. How covert could one be about this? If I was not friends with my formerly non-practicing Lutheran friend for a long time without ever really talking about Catholicism, I suppose he wouldn't have converted to Catholicism. Yet I of course had never set out to convert him. It is simply becuase we were actually friends that he ended up getting interested in knowing about my religion.

What about associating with Novus Ordo Catholics. Must I only do this with the intention of converting them? What if I start to enjoy their company when not speaking with them about matters of the faith?

It's a really hard thing to cut off all relationships of pure affection with liberals these days. But if I am morally required to do so then I suppose I must.


Wed Jun 07, 2006 10:58 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 8:21 am
Posts: 176
New post 
Brogan,

The chief reason why Christian morality requires us to minimise unnecessary contact with persons of unsound doctrine or morals (see for instance 2 Thessalonians 3:6) is because men tend to be influenced by those they frequent and the influence of bad men corrupting good is in general more powerful than the influence of good men amending the bad.

It would be hypocritical and pharisaical to avoid men because we think we are better than they. But it is mere common sense and taught on almost every page of Holy Scripture to avoid bad influences and not imagine ourselves immune to them. That applies to friendship, reading and just about everything.

John


Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:47 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:34 pm
Posts: 89
Location: Griffin, GA
New post 
This is a most appropriate question, since traditional Catholics are a small minority for most of us. This has started me thinking about the home bound elderly lady we visit. She likes to sing hymns (protestant) We sing with her. She doesn't know what Catholicism is. I gave her a Rosary(and a phanplet on how to pray the rosary) and a crucifix. She has a crucifix in her living room and 2 pictures of Jesus. We have not tried to convert her. I mentioned this to my husband yesterday, and he looked at me like I had just arrived from mars! I said,"If we really care about her, we should try to convert her to Catholicism."

_________________
"Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom."


Wed Jun 07, 2006 3:57 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 3:38 pm
Posts: 483
New post 
Linda wrote:
This is a most appropriate question, since traditional Catholics are a small minority for most of us.


I think sometimes, how Catholics can forget this fact, that in this world of about 6 billion people, traditional Catholics in my view number less than 1 million, and I think that is even a generous number. It is a sad thing to live in our times, as we can look back to the great days of Pope Pius XII, where Churches were filled to capacity, and Catholicism was everywhere, converts were coming to the Church in droves, etc., and now look at us, reduced to a tiny remnant, about .00016 percent of the world's population.

To make matters worse, there is a tendancy among many of the remnant Catholics to further divide us, and break our unity even further.

This is why I think what John Lane's points on the Una Cum issue are so important. Catholics must not divide themselves, we need to work together, in unity to both pray and work towards having a pope once again, as the pope is our principle of unity for uniting Catholics in the Faith. I hope for the day when the SSPX, CMRI, SSPV, along with some of the other Catholic organizations, and independent priests, can form one united front, and together meet to figure out a plan towards the restoration of the Church.


Wed Jun 07, 2006 4:58 pm
Profile

Joined: Sat May 20, 2006 8:21 am
Posts: 176
New post 
Dear Mike,

I'm all for peace and charity amid disagreement, but I have to say that I do not believe that this crisis is humanly soluble, no matter how many trad groups can be united around a conference table.

Our help is in the name of the Lord; who hath made heaven and earth.

John


Wed Jun 07, 2006 6:59 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 3:38 pm
Posts: 483
New post 
Dear John,

Yes, I agree with you 100%. I often think about how in the early days of traditionalism, there was a unity among all of the varying priests who rejected the conciliar church. Then over time, as the SSPX grew, and the splits took place, etc., the early unity started breaking apart. Now look at it today, and I am not placing blame here, but I think some people have lost perspective of our situation.

I also want to say, that I do not believe unity should be put before the truth, we need to work together, but also each group should try to help the other come to the truth. This forum is doing that, and I hope that some SSPX priests, or perhaps bishops will join this board, even under assumed names, to get these issues ironed out. Let the arguments be scrutinized, so that we can advance closer to the restoration, and error can be dispelled.

As you pointed out, God will solve this crisis in His Church. I pray for the day when it will happen, and that the Church Militant can act more effectively in the service of God towards the restoration, by studying and learning the truth to the best of our ability.

Yours in JMJ,

Mike


Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:43 am
Profile

Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 1:41 pm
Posts: 84
Location: USA
New post 
"As you pointed out, God will solve this crisis in His Church. I pray for the day when it will happen, and that the Church Militant can act more effectively in the service of God towards the restoration, by studying and learning the truth to the best of our ability"

I agree with this Mike. Personally I have accepted sedevacantism almost out of self-defense. It was necessary to accept it or lose the faith. I did not create this tragic situation, nor is it my obligation to fix it. God has allowed it and indeed, He will fix it. In the interrum I have children and a soul to save now! I have not the luxury to wait for a vaild Pope or council to come to the rescue, therefore I am charged with keeping the faith, making judgments that I should not have to make about issues that my competence cannot match. So on issues such as the una cum I am forced to fall on my own understanding, while there is no authority to correct and guide me. Heaven help us!

Tommy


Thu Jun 08, 2006 1:01 am
Profile E-mail
New post 
If friendship with a liberal, or non Catholic is simply due to affection, it is true that it must be avoided. This can be especially urgent with children. They believe every thing very easily. The contact can only be pleasing to God if there is that effort to convert. I've found that the non-Catholics and antiCatholics just seem to despise me, anyway. And friends I have loved from the past just seem to avoid the holy water, the Scapular and medals. Not to mention the anger some NOs have for traditionalists....it sounds harsh, but it is so important to avoid the seduction of "affection."


Thu Jun 08, 2006 3:36 am

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 7:37 pm
Posts: 18
Location: New York New York
New post 
Linda wrote:
This is a most appropriate question, since traditional Catholics are a small minority for most of us. This has started me thinking about the home bound elderly lady we visit. She likes to sing hymns (protestant) We sing with her. She doesn't know what Catholicism is. I gave her a Rosary(and a phanplet on how to pray the rosary) and a crucifix. She has a crucifix in her living room and 2 pictures of Jesus. We have not tried to convert her. I mentioned this to my husband yesterday, and he looked at me like I had just arrived from mars! I said,"If we really care about her, we should try to convert her to Catholicism."


Well I can sympathize with the "look" from your husband, as I've gotten those anytime I make reference to the vacant Chair. :cry:

I think it's a very good thing you did to give her a Rosary! Maybe you could suggest that you pray it together some time? Since she likes to sing hymns, bring over a CD of some good Catholic hymns (may I suggest the Daughters of Mary recordings, especially "I Need Thee" and "A Traditional Christmas"). They come with lyrics so she could learn the words. How wonderful it would be for you to convert her! You can be performing both a spiritual and a corporal work of mercy by visiting this woman. God bless you.

_________________
The expense is reckoned, the Enterprise is begun. It is of God, it cannot be withstood--so the Faith was planted, so must it be restored


Fri Jun 09, 2006 1:18 am
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.