Why do you object to the idea of “conservative vs liberal” Catholicism. I thought in real life there were arguments within your church between the liberal and conservative minded.
I’m not going to deny that there are disagreements on certain issues. A lot of it takes place in healthy discussion (which is good), but perhaps most of it manifests itself in mutual antagonism (which is obviously harmful). First of all, there are two separate types of debates that need to be distinguished:
- The debate between those who fully accept the teachings of the Church, but disagree on certain issues that are either morally or theologically ambiguous or neutral;
- The debate between those who are orthodox Catholics and those who discard (either intentionally or through ignorance) various teachings of the Church and are therefore heretical.
The second is what comes to mind when I think of “conservative” and “liberal” Catholics. The reality is that those who are most conservative and liberal aren’t truly Catholic because they reject certain teachings of the Church. Those in the middle who are faithful to the Church could also be divided into a conservative-to-liberal spectrum, but it is not helpful to do that because it polarizes issues and shifts the focus onto our differences rather than our common ground, which leads to further division in the Church, as people start to “take sides.”
The question also arises, “What do ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ even mean?” If conservatives are obsessed with tradition and liberals with ecumenism and love, then that makes no sense, because both were important to the early Church, meaning that leaning one way is not newer or more liberal than the other. It’s just convenient to use those terms because they coincide with the political spectrum. And since the Church is a religious foundation with a spiritual mission, not a political one, it is harmful to think of it in terms of politics.
The Church has a single, unified body of doctrine, with some room for personal interpretation in some areas. For this reason, speaking of it as if it were divided into two different camps with competing doctrine is harmful to the Faith, as it tends to polarize Catholics and pit them against each other instead of us all being united in our faith.
But if they are actually divided into two different camps, would it be wrong to depict it that?
I don’t think it’s accurate to say that it’s divided into two different camps. I certainly don’t get that impression when I go to Church or talk with Catholics of varying opinions and political leanings. There is a broad range of opinion within the Church, and outside of it (including those who are nominally Catholic, but have heretical beliefs), just as there is in politics, but unlike politics, there are no “parties” to identify with, there is only God. And God is neither conservative nor liberal, and thus neither are practising Catholics (in terms of religion, not politics, I mean).
There should be no “liberal” or “conservative” or “moderate” or whatever Catholics, we should simply be Catholic. If we start breaking off into factions, or talk about the Church as if it was made up of different political parties, we are violating the prayer Jesus prayed at the Last Supper, “that they may be one” (John 15 or something like that).
After a little research, I think you refer to ST. John 17:11
“And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.” (KJV)
There you go, thanks. I’m glad to see I got the quote right, if not the chapter. 😄
“Liberal” or “conservative” in this context usually refers to political views, which should only be secondary to religious ones. The truth is that the middle ground is the best road to take. If you’re too conservative, chances are you don’t have the same concern for the poor or social outcasts that you should and that you favour doctrine over charity. If you’re too liberal, chances are that you are less appreciative of the Church’s traditions as well as being willing to accept some degree of moral relativism, thinking of doctrine as less important than being “nice.”
Neither of those is healthy, since we are called to love and we are also called to uphold the truth. These are both of equal importance. Leaning one way or the other is usually what gets someone pegged as conservative/traditionalist or libera/modernist, which detracts from our main goal and vocation of living Christlike lives.
Hopefully that makes sense, and I’m happy to ramble on some more if you want me to expand on anything. 😉
But isn’t there some division in church in regards to the changes made by Vatican II?
Yes, there is some. There are even those who reject Vatican II, or call it “evil,” or consider it less valid than previous Church tradition. There are others who misinterpret it and think it is an excuse to abandon all things traditional.
The reality is that most of these people are at odds with Church teaching. They do a lot of harm to the Church, often with good intentions, because they misrepresent it. There’s a lot of misunderstanding over Vatican II, which is the source of a lot of division, and in most cases, the conflict is between people who do not truly adhere to the Church’s teachings and thus, rather than being called conservative or liberal Catholics, it’s more accurate to identify them as misguided Catholics, or even non-Catholics in some cases.
Among those who are faithful to Catholic teaching, there is some disagreement over how much tradition should be retained, but in these cases, it isn’t usually strong enough to be called division.