Liberalism as It Is in This Country

[MC Just]

Liberalism, whereas essentially one and the same everywhere, presents various faces in different countries. In its essence, it is the denial of the supernatural in whole or 1.n part, but that denial takes a local coloring from place or circumstances.

The traditions, customs, prejudices, and idiosyncrasies of a people reflect it at various angles. It is protean [variable] in its presentations throughout the world, and to the casual observer, who falls to probe below the appearances of things, it may not seem to manifest itself at all; whereas, in reality, it exists in its subtlest and therefore most dangerous form.

In America it would scarcely seem to exist at all, so ingrained is it in our social conditions, so natural is it to the prevailing modes of thought, so congenital is it with the dominant religious notions about us-and thus providing so congenial a habitat to the Protestant sects. Indeed it is the very constituent of the pseudo-religious and pseudo-moral atmosphere we daily breathe. We can hope to escape its taint only by copious and frequent draughts of orthodox doctrine, by the strictest intellectual vigilance, fortified by supernatural grace. Its aspect in this country is peculiar and fraught with especial danger to those negligent either in faith or morals. Its chief manifestation in the United States is in the form of what is popularly called NON-SECTARIANISM. It is a current fallacy, laid down as a fundamental truth that one religion is as good as another, that everyone has the right to believe what be pleases, that differences in creed are after all but differences in forms of expression, that everyone may select his own creed or sect according to his taste-or even altogether repudiate religious beliefs-and finally, that religion is a thing entirely apart from civic and social life. All this of course is SECULARISM in its various degrees-the denial of the supernatural.

In practice, this principle ingratiates itself into social and civic life, directly or indirectly working out to the prejudice of religion and morality: Civil marriage and divorce, mixed marriages and the consequent degeneration of family life, business standards and morality in general pitched on a low key, a vicious literature, a materialistic journalism catering to lax thinking and lax living, religion publicly mocked, scoffed, denied or held indifferently; all these things are coldly regarded as a matter of course, a necessary expedience, things to be condoned and applauded, all on the ground that they are the fruit of liberty. But the most virulent effect crops out in the prevailing educational theory. Here Liberalism manifests itself in its most direful and fullest effects, for it denies to religion the very sphere where it has the strongest right and the fullest reason to use its widest and most lasting influence, viz., upon the minds of children.

Secularism, with the instinct of a foe, has here most positively and triumphantly asserted its claim and, under the disguise of strict impartiality and even patriotism, has banished religion from the schoolroom.

That Catholics should not feel the effects of this relaxing atmosphere is scarcely to be expected.

With the air so strongly impregnated with poison, it would be difficult indeed to keep the blood healthy. In not a few instances, they have fallen victims to the plague, and if not always out-and-out corrupted, they become not a little tainted.

Hence we find amongst, if not a large, at least no small number, an easy disposition to compromise or minimize their faith in points of doctrine or practice. THE NATURAL TENDENCY IN HUMAN NATURE TO ESCAPE FRICTION AND AVOID ANTAGONISM IS UNHAPPILY IN MOST INSTANCES A READY FACTOR IN THE DIRECTION OF CONCESSION.

To apologize, excuse, extenuate, soften, explain away this or that point of faith, practice or discipline easily follows from a habit of thought contracted from perpetual contact with Liberalists, with whom everything takes precedence over faith and supernaturalism. This is especially true where Liberalism eschews aggressive action and with a cunning, either satanic or worldly wise, bases its treacherous tolerance upon a supposed generosity of mind or breadth of view. When the supernatural is vaguely identified with the superstitious, faith with credulity, firmness with fanaticism, the uncompromising with the intolerant, consistency with narrowness (for such is the current attitude of secularism around us), in these adjuncts it requires courage, fortitude and the consolation of the assured possession of truth to resist the insidious pressure of a false public opinion. Unless supernaturally fortified and enlightened, human nature under this moral oppression soon gives way to "human respect."

Such are our Liberal surroundings in this country. We cannot escape them. But we are in duty bound to resist their fatal contagion with all the powers of our soul. If we hope to preserve our faith intact, to keep it pure and bright in our souls, to save ourselves from the malign influence

of a deadly heresy which is daily leading thousands to perdition, we must be guarded and vigilant in its presence. Amidst a host of swarming foes, our armor should be without flaw from greave to helmet, our weapons well-tempered, keen, and burnished, not only to ward off the hostile blow, but ready to deal home a telling stroke wherever the enemy's weakness exposes him.

It is because we live in the midst of such perplexities, where the ways are devious and where snares are laid for our every footstep, in order to entrap us unawares, that we require to be on our guard in a twofold way: first, by means of a life lived in the state of grace, second, by means of an enlightened reason, which may shine out over our path as a guide to ourselves and a beacon to others.

In a special manner is this a need in our country, where Liberalism pretends to be the champion and guardian of natural reason, laying its snares to entrap the unwary and the ignorant. Not in violence but in a treacherous friendliness on the part of Liberalism does the danger lie. A well-instructed Catholic-who thoroughly comprehends the rational grounds of his faith and understands the character of Liberal tactics under our national conditions-can alone successfully cope with the enemy face-to-face. Ultramontanism is the only conquering legion in this sort of warfare. It is for the vanguard of the army to surprise the enemy at his own ambuscade, to mine against his mine and to expose him before he has burrowed under our own camp. Ultramontanism is Catholicity intact and armed cap-a-pie [from head to foot]. It is Catholicity consistent in all its parts, the logical concatenation of Catholic principles to their fullest

conclusions in doctrine and practice. Hence the fierce and unholy opposition with which it is constantly assailed. The foe well knows that to rout the vanguard is to demoralize the entire army; hence their rage and fury against the invincible phalanx which always stands fully armed, sleeplessly vigilant and eternally uncompromising.

In this country, above all others, do Catholics need to be Watchful, constant and unshaken in their falth, for the disease of Liberalism is virulently endemic. Its assault is perpetual, its weapons invisible, save to the enlightened eye of a resolute and undaunted faith. In Europe, at least on the Continent, Liberalism is violent, aggressive, openly breathing its hatred and opposition. There the war is open; here it is concealed. There the battlefield is the public arena in civic and political life; here the contest is within the social, business and even domestic circle. There it is declared foe against declared foe; here it is friend against friend, even brother against brother, and all the more dangerous in results because friendly, social or domestic relations endure without injury amidst the struggle and are dangerous to the Catholic because these various ties are so many embarrassments to his free action, so many bonds of affection or interest to enchain him. Therefore must be be all vigilant; therefore should his courage be great, his attitude firm and his stand bold, for whereas his circumstances make him friendly to his foe, he must wage a deadly battle for his faith. His task is doubly difficult; he must conquer an enemy who appears his dearest friend.

Edited May 17, 2005 by MC Just

[MC Just]

bump

[MC Just]

bump... Hmmm no one seems to ever respond to my posts on this subject.

[KizlarAgha]

Conservatism is a sin as well.

I find that the American political spectrum doesn't lend oneself to being Catholic. You can be Catholic or you can be a liberal or conservative. But a Liberal Catholic isn't really Catholic at all - they're liberals first and foremost. And a conservative Catholic is likewise conservative politically before he is Catholic.

My simple rules of politics: I hold to be true what the Vatican holds to be true and I oppose what the Vatican opposes. On issues that are unclear I err on the side of compassion.

[Socrates]

[quote name='MC Just' date='May 16 2005, 09:30 PM'] bump... Hmmm no one seems to ever respond to my posts on this subject. [/quote]
Who is the article from? And what do you want to say about it?

[philothea]

Nice.

I got very close to accepting the kind of Liberalism you describe. All the influential people in the field I work in are militantly liberal. They're also clever, charming, and persuasive. It's hard for me to argue with someone about their core beliefs when they're smarter than me, and they can make-or-break my career.

I've pretty much abandoned hope of ever getting paid for what I do. It's not worth it to have to be in that environment.

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='philothea' date='May 16 2005, 09:35 PM'] Nice.

I got very close to accepting the kind of Liberalism you describe. All the influential people in the field I work in are militantly liberal. They're also clever, charming, and persuasive. It's hard for me to argue with someone about their core beliefs when they're smarter than me, and they can make-or-break my career.

I've pretty much abandoned hope of ever getting paid for what I do. It's not worth it to have to be in that environment. [/quote]
What do you do? I'm a college student planning on becoming a professor - now there's a liberal environment for you lol. Very secular as well...

[MC Just]

[quote name='Socrates' date='May 16 2005, 09:34 PM'] Who is the article from? And what do you want to say about it? [/quote]
[url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/theology/libsin.HTM"]http://www.ewtn.com/library/theology/libsin.HTM[/url]

[Socrates]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 16 2005, 09:33 PM'] Conservatism is a sin as well.

I find that the American political spectrum doesn't lend oneself to being Catholic. You can be Catholic or you can be a liberal or conservative. But a Liberal Catholic isn't really Catholic at all - they're liberals first and foremost. And a conservative Catholic is likewise conservative politically before he is Catholic.

My simple rules of politics: I hold to be true what the Vatican holds to be true and I oppose what the Vatican opposes. On issues that are unclear I err on the side of compassion. [/quote]
And how is conservatism a sin?
I'm a conservative and I don't consider being a conservative sinful.
Where does the Church condemn "conservatism"?

(And the ariticle, I think is condemning "liberalism" more in the sense of "secular humanism" than of lefty politics. The problem with words like "liberal" and "conservative" is that they are vague anmd ill-defined.)

[philothea]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 16 2005, 09:36 PM'] What do you do? I'm a college student planning on becoming a professor - now there's a liberal environment for you lol. Very secular as well... [/quote]
I write science fiction and fantasy, mostly novels.

Not that my career is totally doomed or anything, I'm just not comfortable socializing with the editors and other writers anymore, and networking is fairly important.

And yeah, a college faculty environment would be rough, I bet. What field?

[Socrates]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 16 2005, 09:33 PM'] And a conservative Catholic is likewise conservative politically before he is Catholic.
[/quote]
It is obvious you do not know many conservative Catholics.

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='Socrates' date='May 16 2005, 09:48 PM'] It is obvious you do not know many conservative Catholics. [/quote]
I know a bunch. Most people would label me that way. I just don't self-identify like that.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 16 2005, 11:33 PM'] Conservatism is a sin as well.

I find that the American political spectrum doesn't lend oneself to being Catholic. You can be Catholic or you can be a liberal or conservative. But a Liberal Catholic isn't really Catholic at all - they're liberals first and foremost. And a conservative Catholic is likewise conservative politically before he is Catholic.

My simple rules of politics: I hold to be true what the Vatican holds to be true and I oppose what the Vatican opposes. On issues that are unclear I err on the side of compassion. [/quote]
I must disagree.

As far as politics is conserned in America, conservativism is closest to Catholicism.

By American standards, every Cardinal of the Catholic Church is conservative.


There are lies propagated by the liberals claiming that conservatives want to take money from the poor and not help the poor... which is a total bold face lie.

All we have to do is look at "Faithful Citizenship"

Found at the US Bishops Website:
[url="http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/bishopStatement.html"]http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/b...pStatement.html[/url]


And we see that everything listed is the US conservative agenda.

The only choice for a Catholic is the right choice. We constantly hear of 'right' and 'left' but it is about right and wrong. If one believes that nothing is wrong, which is relativism, then they are on the left, which of course is the wrong place to be. To be on the right is to believe in God and know that there is right and wrong and that society must have boundries that should not be acceptable to break.


God Bless,
ironmonk

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='ironmonk' date='May 16 2005, 09:52 PM'] I must disagree.

As far as politics is conserned in America, conservativism is closest to Catholicism.

By American standards, every Cardinal of the Catholic Church is conservative.


There are lies propagated by the liberals claiming that conservatives want to take money from the poor and not help the poor... which is a total bold face lie.

All we have to do is look at "Faithful Citizenship"

Found at the US Bishops Website:
[url="http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/bishopStatement.html"]http://www.usccb.org/faithfulcitizenship/b...pStatement.html[/url]


And we see that everything listed is the US conservative agenda.

The only choice for a Catholic is the right choice. We constantly hear of 'right' and 'left' but it is about right and wrong. If one believes that nothing is wrong, which is relativism, then they are on the left, which of course is the wrong place to be. To be on the right is to believe in God and know that there is right and wrong and that society must have boundries that should not be acceptable to break.


God Bless,
ironmonk [/quote]
I don't think conservatives hurt the poor - I think they help more than the liberals. While liberals are protesting the fact that people are poor, conservatives are at their churches' soup kitchens.

I just choose to identify as Catholic and let that dictate my policies, rather than having to be hemmed in by one party or another.

[Socrates]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 16 2005, 09:55 PM'] I don't think conservatives hurt the poor - I think they help more than the liberals.  While liberals are protesting the fact that people are poor, conservatives are at their churches' soup kitchens.

I just choose to identify as Catholic and let that dictate my policies, rather than having to be hemmed in by one party or another. [/quote]
Totally agree with you there.

And (unlike many in the media) I don't consider conservatism synonomous with the Republican Party.
(THough I certainly don't see much good coming out of the Democratic Party!)

Edited May 17, 2005 by Socrates