Misunderstanding about the Catholic Church

Archbishop Sheen once said:  
"Many people hate the Catholic Church and her teachings, 
but I do not believe I could find five people who really hate her and her teachings for what they really are.  
They hate what they think are the Church and her teachings."

Conservative?

Interviewer: What do you think about the election of the new Pope?

Me (Fr Carlos Martins): I am just delighted and grateful to God that the Church once again has a man to fulfill the Office of Peter. I look forward to the opportunity to receive his ministry and to grow in my love of him.

Interviewer: What do you think about his being so conservative?

Me: I think he is a pope of the Catholic Church.

Interviewer: Can you explain that?

Me: I think he has proven himself as a priest, teacher, and governor, and because of that his peers, the Cardinals, have elected him to oversee them and the entire Church.

Interviewer: But do you think that he will take the Church in a new direction, like many people have been calling for?

Me: Like what?

Interviewer: Well, people that think the Catholic Church should accept contraception, accept that gay people can marry, and become more liberal in its outlook?

Me: No, Pope Francis will not change the Church’s stance on those issues.

Interviewer: Why?

Me: Because that question is equivalent to asking me whether I think Jesus Christ is a liar. Jesus is not a liar, but the Truth itself (John 14:6). Jesus Christ never wrote a word. But he did found a Church. This is clear in Matthew 16:18 and 1 Timothy 3:15. He also guaranteed that the Church would be free of error in its teaching when He promised He would send it the Holy Spirit: “When the Spirit of truth comes he will guide you to all truth.” (John 16:13) Thus, if the Church, founded by the Truth Himself, is led by the Spirit of Truth, then the “business” of the Church is to be a teacher of the truth. To believe that the Church is free to change the truth—to make people feel good, to get with the times, to be inclusive of democratic opinion, etc.—is to make Jesus into a liar.

Interviewer: But is there no room for disagreement, for other opinions?

Me: Not in those matters where the Church has already declared the truth. For the Church to stop its proclamation of what it knows to be true is to ask it to cease being what it is. It would be the equivalent of asking Ford to stop selling Fords and to sell Chryslers instead. Or to ask McDonald’s to start selling Whoppers in place of its Big Macs. It is not going to happen, because in doing so, the entity in question would cease to be the very thing that it is. If Ford starts selling Chryslers, you might as well order Ford’s coffin. For the Church to operate with any other motive than to be God’s mouthpiece of truth, then it is not the Church of Jesus Christ.

Interviewer: [long silence … I could tell he followed my argument but the answer went in a direction he did not anticipate and now did not know what to ask.]

Me: Look, name for me an institution or corporation, other than the Catholic Church, that has existed for 2000 years and has never changed its mission statement, its manner of governance, or its brand, and yet has thrived over its opponents? Or, to place it in corporate lingo, name for me an institution that has maintained a sustained competitive advantage over every one of its opponents for 20 centuries?

Interviewer: [Provided no answer]

Me: I can’t either. Then I think that the function and formula of the Catholic Church is a winner, don’t you? Why would we change it?

Interviewer: [No answer and now wearing a grin]

Me: The issue of belief in the Holy Eucharist, or lack thereof, among Christians, illustrates this well. For 1,500 years every single Christian church in the world believed in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. Not just symbolically, but substantially. Literally. Now this was a most fundamental belief—in fact, the most fundamental—about what it meant to be Church. When the Protestant and Anglican revolt happened 500 years ago that ceased being a belief for those groups. Now in that change we are not talking about changing the wearing of a particular color during a liturgical season, but something intrinsic to the very identity of the Church: the Body and Blood of the Lord Himself, which in the 6th chapter of John’s Gospel, Christ states one needs to eat and drink of, in order to possess salvation. To make that change, like the Protestants and Anglicans did, cannot be done without their simultaneously making a statement about Jesus Christ: that He is a liar who, contrary to what He promised, allowed the Church to believe and operate in error for its first 1,500 years.

I was thanked for the interview and the journalist left. It was never published.

-- http://www.courageouspriest.com/jesus-liar?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+courageouspriest%2FqTKF+%28Courageous+Priest%29

THE DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE

Is there to be no development of religion in the Church of Christ? Certainly, there is to be development and on the largest scale.

Who can be so grudging to men, so full of hate for God, as to try to prevent it? But it must truly be development of the faith, not alteration of the faith. Development means that each thing expands to be itself, while alteration means that a thing is changed from one thing into another.

The understanding, knowledge and wisdom of one and all, of individuals as well as of the whole Church, ought then to make great and vigorous progress with the passing of the ages and the centuries, but only along its own line of development, that is, with the same doctrine, the same meaning and the same import.

The religion of souls should follow the law of development of bodies. Though bodies develop and unfold their component parts with the passing of the years, they always remain what they were. There is a great difference between the flower of childhood and the maturity of age, but those who become old are the very same people who were once young. Though the condition and appearance of one and the same individual may change, it is one and the same nature, one and the same person.

The tiny members of unweaned children and the grown members of young men are still the same members. Men have the same number of limbs as children. Whatever develops at a later age was already present in seminal form; there is nothing new in old age that was not already latent in childhood.

There is no doubt, then, that the legitimate and correct rule of development, the established and wonderful order of growth, is this: in older people the fullness of years always brings to completion those members and forms that the wisdom of the Creator fashioned beforehand in their earlier years.

If, however, the human form were to turn into some shape that did not belong to its own nature, or even if something were added to the sum of its members or subtracted from it, the whole body would necessarily perish or become grotesque or at least be enfeebled. In the same way, the doctrine of the Christian religion should properly follow these laws of development, that is, by becoming firmer over the years, more ample in the course of time, more exalted as it advances in age.

In ancient times our ancestors sowed the good seed in the harvest field of the Church. It would be very wrong and unfitting if we, their descendants, were to reap, not the genuine wheat of truth but the intrusive growth of error.

On the contrary, what is right and fitting is this: there should be no inconsistency between first and last, but we should reap true doctrine from the growth of true teaching, so that when, in the course of time, those first sowings yield an increase it may flourish and be tended in our day also.

--St Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium

The development of doctrine

Is there to be no development of religion in the Church of Christ? Certainly, there is to be development and on the largest scale.

Who can be so grudging to men, so full of hate for God, as to try to prevent it? But it must truly be development of the faith, not alteration of the faith. Development means that each thing expands to be itself, while alteration means that a thing is changed from one thing into another.

The understanding, knowledge and wisdom of one and all, of individuals as well as of the whole Church, ought then to make great and vigorous progress with the passing of the ages and the centuries, but only along its own line of development, that is, with the same doctrine, the same meaning and the same import.

The religion of souls should follow the law of development of bodies. Though bodies develop and unfold their component parts with the passing of the years, they always remain what they were. There is a great difference between the flower of childhood and the maturity of age, but those who become old are the very same people who were once young. Though the condition and appearance of one and the same individual may change, it is one and the same nature, one and the same person.

The tiny members of unweaned children and the grown members of young men are still the same members. Men have the same number of limbs as children. Whatever develops at a later age was already present in seminal form; there is nothing new in old age that was not already latent in childhood.

There is no doubt, then, that the legitimate and correct rule of development, the established and wonderful order of growth, is this: in older people the fullness of years always brings to completion those members and forms that the wisdom of the Creator fashioned beforehand in their earlier years.

If, however, the human form were to turn into some shape that did not belong to its own nature, or even if something were added to the sum of its members or subtracted from it, the whole body would necessarily perish or become grotesque or at least be enfeebled. In the same way, the doctrine of the Christian religion should properly follow these laws of development, that is, by becoming firmer over the years, more ample in the course of time, more exalted as it advances in age.

In ancient times our ancestors sowed the good seed in the harvest field of the Church. It would be very wrong and unfitting if we, their descendants, were to reap, not the genuine wheat of truth but the intrusive growth of error.

On the contrary, what is right and fitting is this: there should be no inconsistency between first and last, but we should reap true doctrine from the growth of true teaching, so that when, in the course of time, those first sowings yield an increase it may flourish and be tended in our day also.

(St Vincent of Lerins, Notebook One)

Teachers and administrators, whether in universities or schools, have the duty and privilege to ensure that students receive instruction in Catholic doctrine and practice. This requires that public witness to the way of Christ, as found in the Gospel and upheld by the Church's Magisterium, shapes all aspects of an institution's life, both inside and outside the classroom. Divergence from this vision weakens Catholic identity and, far from advancing freedom, inevitably leads to confusion, whether moral, intellectual or spiritual.

(Benedict XVI, Address to Catholic Educators, Catholic University of America, 17 April 2008)

The fidelity and courage with which the Church in this country will respond to the challenges raised by an increasingly secular and materialistic culture will depend in large part upon your own fidelity in handing on the treasure of our Catholic faith. Young people need to be helped to discern the path that leads to true freedom: the path of a sincere and generous imitation of Christ, the path of commitment to justice and peace. Much progress has been made in developing solid programs of catechesis, yet so much more remains to be done in forming the hearts and minds of the young in knowledge and love of the Lord. The challenges confronting us require a comprehensive and sound instruction in the truths of the faith. But they also call for cultivating a mindset, an intellectual "culture", which is genuinely Catholic, confident in the profound harmony of faith and reason, and prepared to bring the richness of faith’s vision to bear on the urgent issues which affect the future of American society.

(Benedict XVI, Homily, Washington Nationals Stadium, 17 April 2008)