CathInfo.com

Speaking strictly from a political point of view, "Liberal" can mean one of three things, depending on where you are in the world.

In Europe, and other democracies other than the United States, "Liberal" often refers to a person or group that favors little government intervention in the economy, low taxes, strong personal liberties, and a generally secular society, but usually only to the point of being ambivalent to religion.  They often fall in the center of the political spectrum with Social Democrats and Socialists to the left (who favor strong government regulation of the economy, high taxes, and secularism to the point of being hostile to religion) and Conservatives and Christian Democrats to the right (whose political positions vary greatly depending on the country).  A European "Liberal" can be equated with a "Libertarian" in the United States.

In the United States, "Liberal" basically means the same thing that "Social Democrat" or "Socialist" means in Europe.  They are opposed, on a large scale, only by American-style Conservatism.

In the rest of the world, "Liberal" usually refers to a person or group that is pro-democracy and (especially in the Middle East) pro-secularist.

What I have always understood by liberalism (since I began to move towards Catholicism) is the ideology of liberty of conscience.

That liberalism is such a large error explains why its use and meaning sometimes appear diffuse.

For instance, individualism is a species of liberalism. Encouraging single young men to move away from home as soon as possible is a policy which derives from and promote individualism, rather than that closeness and interdependence of family members across multiple generations which has typically characterised the natural household; calling it liberal is no less correct than calling it individualistic, just less accurate. To be clear, I'm talking about encouraging this as a general policy and a builder of manhood, not about it occuring in unusual circuмstances. And I'm not accusing Matthew of sin, since to me his idea was simply tainted with liberalism, rather than being outright liberal. But Matthew very rightly retracted and modified his initial position.

Another defining feature is the confusion of tolerance with charity, such that tolerance effectively becomes the greatest Christian virtue. People who exhibit this tendency in practice can rightly be called liberals, and while often posing as doctrinally staunch traditionalists are really the enablers of more radical liberalism. Thank you MaterDominici for linking to Liberalism is a Sin, and if anyone wishes, refer to chapter 19.

I read some of what Chapter 19 was talking about. Is this source official dogma? Or is it an opinion of another Catholic?

It is derived strictly from the two great commandments.

Chapter 19 talks about correcting someone (crossing them) if they are in the wrong, and how this, if done correctly, is charitable. While I can see that if a neighbor of mine, who is outside of my family, is about to commit a mortal sin...it is my obligation to bring that to his/her attention. But Chapter 19 goes as far as punishing your neighbor for doing something wrong. I'm not sold on this.

When done for love of the neighbour's soul, it is charity. According to the Baltimore Catechism, the first spiritual work of mercy is to admonish the sinner, the second is to instruct the ignorant.

It is: Sovereign Catholic inflexibility is sovereign Catholic charity. This charity is practiced in relation to our neighbor when in his own interest, he is crossed, humiliated and chastised. it is practiced in relation to a third party, when he is defended from the unjust aggression of another, as when he is protected from the contagion of error by unmasking its authors and abettors and showing them in their true light as iniquitous and pervert, by holding them up to the contempt, horror and execration of all. It is practiced in relation to God when, for His glory and in His service, it becomes necessary to silence all human considerations, to trample under foot all human (106) respect, to sacrifice all human interests, and even life itself to attain this highest of all ends. All this is Catholic inflexibility and inflexible Catholicity in the practice of that pure love which constitutes sovereign charity.

This kind of charity is difficult to practise.

Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil; Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth with the truth; Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

The thing is to purify our intentions so as to be capable of it.