Some time ago, Msgr Charles Pope, always well spoken, wrote in the National Catholic Reporter of 8 errors of the modern age that have crept into the Church. It is not a list for Roman Catholics only. We can find enough evidence that Lutherans suffer from the same errors.
It is a list worth sharing (I have shortened the original post but
you can read it all here):
8 Modern Errors Every Catholic Should Know and Avoid
These are only eight. I am just getting started. I hope you will add
to the list and define carefully what you identify. But for now,
consider this eightfold list of modern errors that are common even in
the Church.
1. Mercy without reference to repentance – For too
many today, “mercy” has come to mean, “God is fine with what I am
doing.” But true mercy does not overlook sin, it presupposes it, sees it
as a serious problem, and offers a way out of sin. God’s mercy is his
way of extending a hand to draw us out of the mire of sin.
One of the chief errors today is the proclamation of mercy
without reference to repentance. Sadly, this is common, even in the
Church. It is far too common to hear sermons on mercy with no reference
This error of mercy without reference to repentance is
widespread in the Church today and leads to the sin of presumption, a
sin against hope.
2. Staurophobia – The term staurophobia comes from Greek roots and refers to a fear of the Cross (
stauros = cross +
phobia
= fear). Within the Church this error emerges from reticence by
Catholics to frankly discuss the demands of discipleship. It reveals a
strong hesitation to insist that even hard things are often the best the
proper thing to do.
Many Catholics, including priests and bishops, are downright fearful
when pointing to the demands of the cross. When the world protests and
says, “Are you saying that those with same-sex attraction cannot get
married or be sexually intimate but must live a kind of celibacy?!” The
honest answer is, “Yes, that is what we are saying.” But since that
answer is hard and rooted in the Cross, many Catholics are dreadfully
afraid of a straight-forward, honest answer. The same is true for other
difficult moral situations such as Euthanasia (in spite of suffering, we
are still not free to take our life or that of another), abortion
(despite difficulties and even in cases of rape and incest we are still
not free to kill a child in the womb), and divorce and remarriage (in
spite of unfortunate developments in a marriage, this does not mean that
one is free to leave one marriage to enter another).
Staurophobia also makes many hesitant to issue correction within the
Church and in families. There is almost a cringing fear of insisting on
any demands or requirements or of even issuing the mildest of
punishments or corrective measures. Things like this might upset people
and that is one of the worst outcomes for a staurophobic who fears any
sort of suffering, for themselves or others. They fail to see a
redemptive quality in insisting on the demands of the cross.
3. Universalism – Universalism is the belief that
most, if not all people are going to be saved in the end. This is
directly contrary to our Lord’s own words wherein he sadly attests that
“many” are on the road that leads to destruction and “few” are on the
narrow and difficult road that leads to salvation (See
Matthew 7:14,
Luke 13:23-30).
Dozens of parables and other warnings also come from our Lord in this
regard and the straight-forward teaching of the Lord makes it clear that
we must soberly accept that many, and not a few are going to be lost
unless we, by God’s grace urgently summon them to Christ and to
authentic discipleship.
4. Deformed Dialogue – The term “dialogue” has come
to mean an almost endless conversation. As such it lacks a clear goal to
convince the other. It usually just means “talk.” In our culture merely
talking is given a lot of credit.
While talking is not bad per se, it can substitute mere action for a
true goal. In the New
Testament is it used more often in the context of giving testimony and
of trying to convince others the Gospel (e.g. Acts 17:2, 17 and 18:4). But, as noted, in our times dialogue can actually stall conversion
and given the impression that all sides have valid stances and that
merely “understanding” the position of the other is praise-worthy.
Understanding may have value, but mostly is of value to lay a foundation
for conversion to the truth of the Gospel.
Dialogue
is a tool, not a goal, it is a method, not a destination. And as a
method, dialogue (in its original meaning) is a vigorous, dynamic and
joyful setting forth of the Gospel, not a chatty and (seemingly) endless
conversation.
5. Equating Love with Kindness – Kindness is an
aspect of love. But so is rebuke; so is punishment; as is praise. Yet
today many, even in the Church, think of love only as kindness,
affirmation, approval, encouragement, and other positive attributes. But
true love is, at times, willing to punish, to insist on change, and to
rebuke error.
Yet the modern age, equating love with mere kindness says, “If you
really love me you will affirm, even celebrate, what I do.” In this sort
of climate, when Church teaching does not conform with modern notions
of sexuality, for example, the Church is accused of “hate” simply
because we do not “affirm” what people demand we affirm. Identity
politics (where people hinge their whole identity and dignity on a
narrow range of behaviors or attributes) intensifies the perception of a
personal affront.
But instead of standing our ground and insisting that setting love
and truth in opposition is a false dichotomy, most Catholics cave and
many also come to believe that love can be reduced to mere kindness.
Many of them take up the view of the world that the Church is unkind and
therefore mean or even hateful. Never mind that Jesus said things that
were, by this standard, unkind, and that he often spoke quite frankly
about sin (beyond mere social justice and pharisaical attitudes to
include things such as sexual sin, adultery, divorce, unbelief and so
forth). No, forget all that, because God is love, and love is kindness
and kindness is always pleasant and affirming. Therefore they conclude
that Jesus couldn’t really have said many of the things attributed to
him. This error reduces Jesus to a harmless hippie and misconstrues love
by equating it with mere kindness and unconditional affirmation.
6. Misconstruing the nature of tolerance – Most
people today equate tolerance with approval. Therefore, when many demand
or ask for “tolerance” what they really demand is approval.
But tolerance is from the Latin
tolerare: to put up with,
countenance, or suffer. As such it refers to the conditional endurance
of, or at least non-interference with beliefs, actions, or practices
that one considers to be wrong. One might tolerate them to some degree
to prevent, for example, severe enforcements or draconian penalties,
unnecessary intrusion into privacy, etc. But if the
objection component is missing, we are not speaking of “toleration” but of “indifference” or “affirmation.”
It does not properly reverence
God’s moral vision. Instead of joyfully and zealously announcing the
truth as revealed by God, many adopt a false tolerance that is
indifferent to truth or even affirms error. And then, to top it off they
congratulate themselves for the “moral superiority” of their tolerance.
In fact, it is more likely sloth that is at work. Sloth in this case is
an aversion to undertake the arduous task of speaking the truth to a
doubting scoffing world.
Catholics also need to sober up a bit and realize that when many
today demand tolerance from us, they have no intention of extending it
to us. Many of the same interest groups that demand tolerance are
working to erode religious liberty and are increasingly unwilling to
tolerate religious views in the public square. Our consistent caving to
demands for false tolerance have only help to usher in a great darkness
and pressure to conform to or approve of serious sin.
7. Anthropocentrism – This term refers to the modern
tendency to have man at the center and not God. It has been a long
tendency in the world ever since the Renaissance. Sadly, though it has
deeply infected the Church in recent decades.
This is especially evident in the Liturgy, not intrinsically, but as
practically and widely celebrated. Our architecture, songs and gestures,
incessant announcements, and congratulatory rituals are
self-referential and inwardly focused. The liturgy, as commonly
celebrated seems more about us than God. It is never good, especially in the Church, to consign God to the
margins. This marginalization of God is evident not only in the liturgy,
but in parish life which is often top-heavy with activism rooted in the
corporal works of mercy, but little attention to the spiritual works of
mercy. Social organizations predominate, but it hard to find interest
in Bible Study and other spiritual works devoted to
God.
Announcing God through vigorous evangelization work is also rare and the parish seems more a clubhouse than a lighthouse. Human beings are important, Christian humanism is a virtue, but
anthropocentrism is a common modern error rooted in excess. The worship
of God and the spread of his kingdom is too little in evidence in many
parishes. Parents too seem more focused on the temporal wellbeing of
children, on their academic standing and so forth, but less concerned
overall with the spiritual knowledge or wellbeing of them. God must be central if man is to be truly elevated.
8. Role reversal – Jesus said that the Holy Spirit whom he would send to us would convict the world (see
John 16:8). And thus, the proper relationship of a Catholic to the world is to have the world on trial. St. Paul says,
Test all things. Hold fast to what is good. Abstain from every form of evil. (1 Thess 5:21-22). So, again, the world is to be on trial based on the light of the Gospel.
But too often Catholics have things reversed and put the Word of God
and the teachings of the Church on trial, judging them by the
perspective of the world. We should judge all things by the light of
God. And yet it is common to hear Catholics scoff at teachings that
challenge worldly thinking or offend against worldly priorities. Many
Catholics have tucked their faith under their political views,
worldviews, preferences and thoughts. If the faith conflicts with any of
these worldly categories, guess which usually gives way.
Jesus says,
If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this
adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them
when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels. (Mk 8:38). But many
are ashamed of the Lord’s teachings that do not conform to worldly and popular notions.
All of this amounts to a tragic role reversal wherein the world and
its notions overrule the gospel. It should be the world that is
convicted by the Holy Spirit. Instead we put very God himself in the
role of defendant. It should not be so.
Do not be deceived: God will
not be mocked. Whatever a man sows, he will reap in return. The one who
sows to please his flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; but the
one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal
life. (Gal 6:7-8)
_810_500_55_s_c1.jpg)
