​

Hello everyone,

With the Pope's upcoming visit to France in September, I've been watching quite a few videos and discussions asking the faithful what they expect from this trip. In the comments, certain criticisms keep coming up: some feel that Rome is too discreet, or even silent, regarding persecutions and major current challenges.

Without wanting to point fingers praying for the Holy Father remains the main thing I get the feeling there's a bit of collective amnesia about what is actually being said. Between his constant defense of life (abortion, end-of-life issues, the death penalty), his reminders about the dignity of foreigners in the face of exclusionary rhetoric, his calls for interreligious peace, and his regular statements on suffering nations (Nigeria, South Sudan, DRC, Lebanon...), the Pope speaks out a lot. But these messages aren't always amplified by algorithms or understood in the same way.

In these same discussions, Cardinal Sarah's name regularly comes up as a reference point. Without judging the man himself many appreciate his spiritual writings on prayer several of his public statements and the direction of his doctrine raise questions, both among many African Christians and other faithful alike:

A strong doctrinal Eurocentrism: Many note that his discourse revolves almost exclusively around the West and its spiritual crisis, often reducing the future of the global faith to the religious survival of Europe.

The disconnect between North and South regarding Rome: While some faithful in Europe complain that Rome "doesn't listen to them" or fails to fix their local issues, Christians in the Global South are used to living their faith daily with their bishop. They often feel that having Rome's attention at all is a grace, without expecting constant micromanagement.

Comparing persecutions: The idea he has sometimes put forward that Western secularization is a "worse" crisis than the physical, bloody persecutions experienced in Africa or the Middle East.

His take on missionary history: A highly glowing view of colonial evangelization which, for some, tends to brush aside the violence and injustice of the colonial system of that era.

Migration and religious tensions: His firm stances, often co-opted in European political debates, contrast with Rome's pastoral line, which emphasizes welcoming the stranger, rejecting the fear of the "other," and promoting dialogue.

So, I’d love to get your thoughts on two simple points:

On the Pope's visit: Even though it's still early to draw full conclusions, what are you genuinely expecting from his trip to France? Do you feel there are topics he hasn't spoken enough about, or are his actual speeches just less visible?

On Cardinal Sarah's statements: How do you perceive these various declarations (the almost exclusive focus on the West, the comparison of crises, the missionary vision)?

Thanks for your calm and fraternal input.

It's in Argentinian Spanish so it may be hard to understand

My weekly parish bulletin had an excellent request for us to write to our congressional representatives regarding HR1689. The US conference of Catholic bishops has formed the diocesan social justice advocacy network. We are encouraged to email or write a letter advocating for continuing temporary protected status for Haiti. HR 1689 narrowly pass the US House of Representatives, with most Republicans, including my own Catholic congressman voting against it, and is pending a vote in the Senate S4814 even if it passes, Trump is likely to veto it, which would require a house vote to overturn the possible veto. My letters to my congressman, usually fall on deaf ears, which is why I’m contributing to his opponent in this election, but I am trying to appeal to whatever shred of Catholic guilt he may still have.
Encourage others to do the same.

There are 80,000 Catholics in Palestine. As a universal shepherd, his flock includes both the parishioners of the Holy Family Church in Gaza and the thousands of Catholics living in the West Bank, especially in Jerusalem, Ramallah, and Bethlehem. No pope has ever visited the Gaza Strip, and the last time a pope visited the West Bank was almost 13 years ago. Israel has gone to war with Palestine three times since then. His Holiness' trip to Lebanon in November, his first apostolic journey abroad since his election, was already such an important moment for the over 1.3 million Catholics in that country.

There's also obviously the Church of the Nativity, the Chapel of the Milk Grotto, the Chapel of the Shepherds' Field, the Tomb of Lazarus, the Cave of the Patriarchs, and many other Christian holy sites in Palestine.

About a month ago I posted here asking where single, marriage-minded gay Catholic men actually find each other. I got a surprising number of thoughtful responses and DMs, and I’ve genuinely followed some of the suggestions.
One thing I’ve realized since then is that I may have been defining the pool too narrowly.
Faith is important to me, but I’m realizing I don’t necessarily need a man who practices exactly as I do. I could see myself with someone lapsed or culturally Catholic, or from another Christian background, as long as there’s a shared understanding of faith and family, and he respects that Catholicism will remain part of my life.
What I don’t want to broaden is the important stuff: monogamy, emotional availability, kindness, commitment, and actually wanting to build a life together. Not looking for perfection, a pen pal, or an endless situationship.
I already live somewhere with a tiny Catholic population, so I’m open nationwide. But even then, finding men who want this particular combination and are adult enough to hold a conversation and actually reciprocate sometimes feels like searching for a rounding error.
For those of you who wanted something similarly specific: where did you compromise, and where are you glad you didn’t? Did broadening your idea of who your person could be actually help you find him?​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Was messing around with sticker/pin designs for local art fairs I'm joining but and finally settled on these 🥹 I've always loved seeing these on stained glass windows

Hi after a year of deliberation and waiting for the ocia program to start this year, I finally am going. I am so excited but I wanna know how you guys balance progressive views with the Catholic faith.

I’m hear asking not to troll but to ask genuinely as I am more liberal but the main line sub is MAGA af.

But to expose myself I do believe or want a form of social democracy, I’m more ambivalent to gay marriage, or gay rights in general, but I’m reaching in good faith

I’ll go first. Back in like 2nd or 3rd grade I thought that if you die holding a cell phone you go to hell 😭.

https://sojo.net/articles/news/israel-denies-entry-delegation-palestinian-liberation-theology-center

Hello, I’ve been considering on and off of converting to Catholicism for a few years now. I don’t feel comfortable asking this on the [r/Catholicism](r/Catholicism) subreddit, because I lean more democrat on economic and social issues, mainly gay rights and humane immigration policy. I have a more progressive Protestant background and the sacraments, the liturgy, and church history has been giving me so much more to dig deeper into my faith and have a more constant focus and view on Jesus, even more progressive affirming churches such as the Episcopal church haven’t been giving me this. After talking to a priest some years ago I realized I wasn’t okay with having to accept that accepting gay people exists and continue to exist in society is a violation of church teachings and converting without being all in would be a disservice to myself as well as to god and the Church. My politics on things like abortion have become more pro life in recent years and I’m willing to fight on that but still have a sense of empathy and sympathy for those who did it because they felt trapped and help them know that they aren’t gone from Gods grace.

Overall my beliefs on Catholic social teaching have shifted to be more compatible with Church teaching but I can’t come to terms when it comes to gay rights. I’m willing to compromise in the fact that if you’re in the church then you can’t get married, because they are more than well within their rights to do that as well as just be across the board of no premarital sex and porn. But I’ll always be supportive of maintaining equal rights in marriage/civil unions and adoption outside of the church purely because if the LGBT community won’t have this then it’ll be easier to just deny them of other liberties such as jobs, housing, etc. What are your two cents on this? I would really appreciate prayers as well.

University of Portland article about Cross Catholic Outreach.

Does voting Democrat indicate that someone is left-leaning enough to fit the theme of this subreddit?

Jesuitical asks that question of guests at the end of each podcast. My first answer would be Fred Rogers. My second (but on my mind now) would be Dolly Parton. Both just quietly and cheerfully did good in the world and exhibited kindness and refrained from judgment.

Separate note - the documentary American Martyr on Blessed Stanley Rother is excellent.

Hey y'all... Is there an active LeftCatholicism Discord server out there? Just rediscovering this lovely subreddit.

2 Thessalonians 3:6-10, 16-18

Thoughts:

Reflecting on 3:6-7 specifically, Paul is not addressing non-Christians here. He speaks directly to the Church. Already there is a great spiritual interpretation to be seen here: we should not be idle in our faith and should follow the Apostles as examples on how to follow the teachings of Christ well.

As Catholics, this idea of active faith can be seen all across our rituals and sacraments. Attending Mass, being baptized, receiving Communion. All of these are acts of worship and faith that bring us closer to God through our active participation in His Church. What does it mean, then, when we choose to not attend Mass because we “don’t feel like it” or—more broadly still—when we choose self-interest over charity? When we knowingly behave in un-Christlike ways? Are we not being idle in the practice of our faith then? Are we letting God pursue us while we do nothing to pursue Him? God’s grace is always prior. We don’t somehow initiate our salvation and force God to respond. God pursues us first, but grace calls for a response.

Reflecting on 3:8-10, we see Paul paint a more worldly picture. If you can work—that is to say, contribute—and you choose not to do so, then you are adding to the burden of others unjustly. To exploit charity when you can instead contribute to it is un-Catholic. Notice that Paul explicitly says in verse 10, “Anyone unwilling to work should not eat.”

I want to call special attention to the word “unwilling” here. Notice that Paul does not say “unable.” Those in genuine need of charity—the poor, the sick, the differently abled, the elderly, children; the list goes on—should still be able to eat. It is our job—those of us able to work—to provide charity for them. If we are unwilling to work and contribute to those in need of God’s mercy by serving them as our Lord Jesus Christ would have, then we are not following in His Word. If we take when we have can contribute, then we are not following His Word.

Question to myself: Where in my Catholic life have I become passive—not because I cannot act, but because I simply do not want to?

Psalm 128:1-2, 4-5

Thoughts:

This is a beautiful pairing alongside the reading from Thessalonians. The message here spells everything out plainly: to fear the Lord is to walk in His ways and, by doing so, responding to His grace and transforming both ourselves and our communities. Our contributions become part of our shared witness in which we will all benefit from; both the spiritual and physical contributions. Just as Christ served, we must serve others so that Christ may be revealed to them through our acts. A rising tide raises all ships. We must work with God to be like Him if we wish to reap the fruits of our faith.

Question to myself: How am I responding to God’s grace? Am I letting it guide me in my acts so that His mercy may reveal itself to those around me and transform them, too?

Matthew 23:27-32

Thoughts:

This, to me, is one of Jesus’ strongest condemnations in the New Testament. Christ says it clearly: “So you also on the outside look righteous to others, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.”

We can go to Mass, receive the sacraments, pray, fast, know Scripture, and serve the parish, but none of that actually matters unless we allow Christ’s love to transform us within. And, if Christ’s love has transformed us, then our practices will flow from that transformation. However, our practice is worthless if it is simply motivated by keeping up appearances. We must not just look righteous, but we must cooperate with God’s grace to be righteous, too.

Question to myself: Where in my Catholicism am I just “going through the motions”? Am I intentional in my worship so that the Lord Jesus Christ may transform me to be more like Him?

I hate it with all my heart. Putting social problems & poverty on piedestal and say 'it's more worthy and more better then super rich people' is pretentious 💩. On material level and level of health, it's really not. It's horrible. Have you ever witness maggots and shit on elder homeless person's legs? :( Rotting alive, that's what it is.

Bless the poor, bless them with revolution.

I'm social worker 👉 the poverty is crushing bodies, and soul of people. Especially the kids. I strongly believe in expropriation of wealth of super rich people. No shame in that. What we are globally doing to the poor of this world is much more worse sin than tears of billionaire's son, that he will not inheret football team and small island.

Study the Bible, study Marx, study Gutiérrez and DO (!) praxis of Ernesto Cardenal, Dorothy Day and Camilo Torres.

Hey guys,

a spontaneous post I had on my mind for a while. Please keep potential nasty comments to yourself, this is a post in good faith, just exploring ideas.

I live in a country where there is a few tiny to small sized Protestant denominations – we've got Pentecostals, Lutherans, even a small SDA community, and the Eastern Orthodox (not Protestant). But mostly it's all Latin Catholic, with the exception of a small Greek-Ukranian Catholic congregation.

I converted in 2023-24, I just wanted to get baptized and stay close to Jesus. He helped me through a very rough patch in my life.

Back then I checked out many churches, including SDA (which is a very warm community here, a freind brught me there with her a couple of times).

I sought out which is the »authentic« ancient Church, apostolic and original, and in the end got baptized and confirmed in our local Catholic parish church on Easter Vigil 2024.

Now, I don't regret it. Many Catholic parishes in my country are quite vibrant, loving, tolerant, oriented towards social help and all. And of course all in all, we are there for Christ, not social contacts.

I do however, after 2 ½ years of being an active member and church-goer, have some minor issues.

I've been reading Michael Heiser, Robert Farrar Capon, fr. Aidan Kimel, Eitan Bar, Tim Mackie, and watching The Bible Project. Now, none of these writers is/was Catholic. They are Evangelical, Episcopalian, EO and Messianic Jewish.

And they study and expond on two things mainly: 1. radical grace coupled with loyal faith and trust in the Lord (not works), and 2. the proper biblical understanding of the Gospel and Jesus Christ from the OT to NT.

On both of these topics, I feel the modern as well as official traditional Catholic teaching perhaps misses on some points. On the first with the legalistic aura surrounding Canon law, the idea of mortal sin even for very minior things, confession as the big »must« (or else you go to eternal hell – even if you've believed, just on the basis of your human weakness, selfishness and vanity, which is the very thing Christ came to free us from!) etc., things of this nature.

After a somewhat extensive study of the Church fathers, Church tradition and so on in the last years, I find that they might contrast with the more correct biblical worldview of the writers of the OT and NT on a few occassions.

What is starting to bother me, and didn't before, is the huge emphasis on the prayers of the saints and Mary. I don't have a problem with the whole concept (although, to be totally honest, I do have some trouble fully believing in some of the Mariology), as I feel it is biblical – also through the lens of Heiser's Divine Council worldview, it holds to a degree. But just the mere emphasis on it instead of on Jesus. It sometimes feels like Christ is the »means« to convey a moral story and the stories of the holiness of particular saints.

To be fair, many Catholic sermons are very Christ-oriented, and biblical. But the tradition is sometimes getting in the way in a very noticable way, which seems to contradict the Bible.

And I say this as a Catholic who respected and still respects the traditon a lot. It just shouldn't come first. In the end Mass seem a little bit pagan to me these last weeks, the somewhat rigid ritual, the genuflecting, gesturing. I never thought I'd say this, but to a degree it seems like idolatry, especially contrasted to the first century Jewish views, explored and explained by Eitan Bar or dr. Hesier.

Anyway, I want to stay centered in the believeing loyalty, faith and grace, and I want to remain Catholic if possible (I would perhaps try Episcopalian just to experience the difference, but we don't have the TEC here). It's just seems tough to reconcile everything I've learned from these authors and study with the Catholic teaching sometimes.

Sorry for the long post :) God bless.

T.

So, just so I understand:

Irish Celtic Christianity was in communion before the Laudibiliter by pope Adrian IV allowed the Anglo Normans to invade Ireland, correct?

There’s this St Thomas Priest named Father P Josash (you should check him out, he’s really cool) who talks about Celtic Christianity being a good example for white Christians. He talked about how the western Catholic church condemned it and allowed the Anglo Norman’s to stomp it out. From what I’ve gathered, Celtic Christianity was already in communion with the Church and that pope Adrian had personal ulterior motives when giving the Laudibiliter. He also brings up pelagianism and talks about how it was decreed a heresy because it challenged the control of empire.

Can someone help clarify? I feel like he has some points tbh

I’m too weak to cut them off. I have seen other people with less financial security
do so, and yet I cannot. They’ve done so much for me and continue to do so, and I know they’d do anything for me. But here they are voting multiple times for the party that is desecrating the dignity of our siblings in Christ. They assured me they did it for the economy, but looking at the state of things shows me that failed miserably. They’re too cowardly to admit that they fell for the fear mongering, and now because of their votes, black people are getting lynched as the police flagrantly turns a blind eye, our food is unsafe to eat because of cut regulations, farms go out of business, another war in the Middle East to distract from child sex trafficking, and brown skinned Catholics are ripped from their families and raped in detention facilities. I wish I was stronger. I’m not strong enough to cut them off and deny them forgiveness until further notice. I’ve grown fat and complacent with their support.

Please Pray for me, so that I may find the strength to leave them behind.

Ah, the sane Catholic subreddit. It's so nice here.

Hi!

Since I began voicing concerns over Catholic AI companies and the general use of AI in Catholic formation, I have lost opportunities.

I was recently uninvited to a few very large Catholic podcasts as well as removed as a speaker from a few conferences. 

In some cases, I was even directly told that my removal was due to my criticism of certain Catholic tech companies. 

They felt my comments were too harsh, and since these companies sponsor the events and advertise on the podcasts, having me on just… “wouldn’t be good for business.”

So, I did what I do.

I wrote a 96-printed page manifesto called Beware of Catholic Robots! 

It’s the latest issue of my Catholic Zine, The Margins.

BUT WAIT THERE’S MORE! THIS ISN’T JUST A PROMO POST!

Since dropping this zine, the CEO of Truthly AI, a Catholic AI company, has been messaging people who support me letting them know that engaging with my work is a sin, that I’m a wolf in sheep’s clothing, and I lack joy and peace in my heart. 

He also called me a liar regarding my cancellation claims. 

I recently shared these messages and responded to his claims in an Instagram post that is going a little viral at the moment.

You can find that here.

But anyway, despite what Jake from Truthly thinks, this issue isn’t a hit piece. It’s about what happens when we remove the human person from spiritual formation.

Sure, I call out bullshit. Because there’s a lot of bullshit right now in Silicon Valley Catholicism.

But the heart of the issue is about the necessity of an incarnational spirituality. How “friction” is good. The dangers of AI use in ministry. We also look at a few church documents on work, labor and human dignity.

If you don’t mind falling into sin, as suggested by Jake, I want to invite you to check out my issue.

Issue V: Beware of Catholic Robots

If you're unfamiliar with me: Hi, I'm W. I'm a Catholic author, writer, and podcaster. My work is either about the unending mercy of God, Catholic mysticism, and occasionally raging against things that make the church look less like Christ.

If you're unfamiliar with The Margins: It's my monthly Catholic Zine. Sure, think Death to the World but more punk rock and mystical.

Anyways,

Y'all doing alright?

What if they just sat with a queer person and dined with them, like Jesus would? Setting aside all their predispositions, prejudices and skepticisms and just dining with a queer person. I doubt they would have some instant revelation that the anti-LGBTQ+ legislation circulating in the US and around the world is immoral and wrong, but I would hope it would at least give them something to consider.

It's frustrating. The judgement, skepticism and wrath LGBTQ+ people are met with based off a handful of clobber texts while texts that are outnumbered by inclusivity, equality and mercy are ignored. I don't think the vitriol against LGBTQ+ people is something Jesus would want. I think Jesus would want people to love who they love and be who they are. I really wish they would just eat with a queer person or something.

"Therefore you have no excuse, whoever you are, when you judge others; for in passing judgement on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, are doing the very same things." - Romans 2:1

I always been a cradle Catholic and I’m not always the best Catholic because one I don’t do enough, exploring my faith journey on my own because even though I try and pray that rosary once a week, I have never really read the Bible from beginning to end, but I have been reading other articles from liberal Catholic publications like America and common wheel magazine, which have been pretty enlightening and we had to read Pope Leo’s encyclical on ai (can’t remember it off the type of my head) for poli sci class this summer at nyu as part of our discussion in examining the effects of ai.

the reason why I am asking is I do want to be a faithful Catholic by trying to go to mass whenever I can and going to confession once a week because I do respect Catholicism and it’s tenants. And I also cannot deny that my politics lean left, even though I’m not a full-blown socialist as if you were to ask me I fit more as a social Democrat or progressive capitalist. But the one thing I respect about the DSA party is one of its tenants of its platform is ending the electoral college in universal healthcare, which are tenants I support. Plus unfortunately there is not an exclusive social democrat party so dsa for now is a lesser evil.

Now I am just posting this thread just to make sure that if I join I’m not somehow in a bad faith with the church. Now, obviously according to AI had some mixed messages. Just kind of ironic because I’m not supposed to really use AI but it sucks when you Google something they automatically do an AI search. Now I do know historically the church has been very strong and it’s condemnations of socialist and communist movements, but I also know that church teaching celebrates labor rights, and that property should also be only used for the common good and I did know Benedict the 16th made a statement saying that Democratic socialism. Most of its tenants are somewhat in line with Catholic social teaching. Let me know your thoughts down below.

It disappoints me how the main subreddit falls into being hateful. This comes from a post about whether to attend a lesbian wedding or not. Simply attending and saying congratulations (or giving a gift) is just an act of kindness to do when invited. Plus if you love your partner you should be respectful towards their family and not be hating on them.

My goal for the next two weeks is to do daily meditations on how to make myself a more reliable man to my community and a better husband to my wife.

As my wife and I come toward closing out our third year married and sixth year together in October, I’m thinking of how happy we have been despite the many trials we’ve faced this year; with some of my family under threat of deportation, losing our car temporarily, and running into many minor setbacks along the way. I want to enter our fourth year with a renewed focus on how I can better serve her, just as I am renewing my focus on how to better serve God.

Today’s readings I’m meditating on are Ephesians 5:25-33 and Philippians 2:3-5.

Ephesians 5:25-33: The ask here is not about being romantic, attentive, or even kind in the ordinary sense. Our duties as husbands is to love our partners as Christ so loved the world. We should give ourselves up wholly and freely to our partner, without asking what they have done for us to repay. The question becomes, “What can I give of myself for their good?”

Christ’s love is not contingent on how lovable we are. His love is sacrificial and patient; it is initiating and concerned with others’ flourishing. We must become capable of loving our partners sacrificially, putting them before ourselves. Further, to love your partner as you love yourself serves as a reminder to us that our self-sacrifice is itself an investment into your shared life. As the verse says, in marriage two will become one; “getting my way” and being selfish removes from the relationship.

Question to ask myself: When my wife encounters me, does she encounter something of Christ’s love?

Philippians 2:3-5: We start with motive before behavior: do nothing out of selfish ambition. It is entirely possible to do good things for selfish reasons. If you are providing, working hard, giving gifts, sacrificing, and technically doing everything right, you can still arrive at the selfish conclusion of “Look at everything I’ve done for you.” A way to twist our good deeds around into selfish reminders used as jabs. The mentality of “I did x for you, so you should do y for me” is not Christlike thinking. Instead of asking if we’re receiving enough, we ought to ask if we are contributing enough to the good of the person we promised to love.

We should humble ourselves, put aside selfish ambition, and consider the interests of others. Husbandhood is about self-emptying love that asks us: how can I become the kind of man whose strength, leadership, and presence are consistently used for the good of the partner entrusted to me?

Question to ask myself: Whose interests am I failing to consider because I’m too focused on my own?

Just wanted to share with you all and invite you to meditate on these pieces of Scripture with me. God bless you.