The leader dictates sometimes in great detail how members should act and feel, but gives little evidence to his positions. This could include no exergual support to back these, but rather basis his positions mostly (if not entirely) upon his own authority.
Years ago we would often stop by on Saturdays at a Messianic synagogue in our neighborhood for their worship services because we did not feel welcomed at any of the Jewish synagogues near to us. We abstained from their service in the bread and wine (we can’t call this the Eucharist because it’s not), but not initially because we were ignorant of the impact this would have. Over the years we visited there we were assured that he was ecumenical and open to every faith, yet one year he began to “teach” about the Eucharist, stating it was just a symbol. By this time our Scripture Studies on the Eucharist were already written and we had shared our understanding with several there. They spent time to study it themselves and some even began to refrain from their service. Finally, we handed him a copy of our Scriptural study and asked him to peruse it and contact us to discuss the issue, if needed. We were never approached about this again, though we did get a public response in which he announced that the Eucharist is merely a symbol again, after he had the children (who were in Shabbat school) brought out and away from parental reach to receive this unsacramental farce. We were so angry that we brought our children to our seats (making a bit of a scene) and decided that no longer can we trust the place, and permanently left for the safety of our children’s faith.Still this particular risk is usually hard for the lay Catholic to see through, as it requires a very good grasp of the Church’s teaching and G-d’s Word to reason this tactic out. Still the Internet has opened up thousand of excellent resources to the lay Catholic to discern this, our Drashim (reference) section lists many of this as well. One should be able to bring their concern to their local authority, but if unsure of trust you can speak to some leaders in our Church at Greenspun. Still should be leery of those who use their position more than our Church’s teaching to uphold their judgments or those who say one thing for you, but do the opposite themselves. As our Church teaches:
Cat. 2106 “‘Nobody may be forced to act against his convictions, nor is anyone to be restrained from acting in accordance with his conscience in religious matters in private or public, alone or in association within due limits’, DH 2 paragraph 1. This right is based on the very nature of the human person, whose dignity enables him freely to assent to the Divine truth, which transcends the temporal order. For this reason it ‘continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth’”, DH 2 paragraph 2.Cat. 2107 “If because of the circumstances of a particular people special civil recognition is given to one religious community in the constitutional organization of a state, the right of all citizens and religious communities to religious freedom must be recognized and respected as well.” DH 6 paragraph 3
Cat. 2107The right to religious liberty is neither a moral license to adhere to error, nor a suppose right to error, Cf Leo XIII, Libertas praestantissin 16; Pius XII AAS 1953, 799, but rather a natural right of the human person to civil liberty, i.e., immunity, within just limits, from external constraint in religious matters by political authorities. This natural right ought to be acknowledged in the juridical order of society in such a way that it constitutes a civil right. Cf DH 2”
