Fr. Rohr is only one fish among many, and not the largest one. i
m sure his order has been protecting him, too. And, the **FACT** remains that he is involved in at least error; and im convinced its outright heresy. The audio clip is proof; and hes quite happy to tell us. 
s started the ball rolling. The howls of rage after each sacking show that the dissenters arent happy. 
Couldn
t agree more. As already said: im frustrated by the seeming inaction.s guarantee that the Church wont fail. The Church is at her best when she`s enduring persecution, when she seems to be fighting for her very life. We apathetic members finally get stirred up enough to fight for her. God knows how to motivate us.s no point in my going on about him any more, except to say that im convinced hes playing the part of a wolf in sheeps clothing, making pleasant music for itchy ears. Youre fortunate to have a great enough grasp of the Faith not to fall for lies, but there are some who worry me. ***Truth is truth, and error is error. Full stop.*** Error doesnt come from God.
t envy bishops their task; but why so many of them seem to have forgotten their calling is beyond me. If they were in a corporate setting, theyd have been dismissed long ago. Is there too much SOCIAL INTERACTION between some of them and civic leaders and politicians? Its more difficult to try to correct someone if youre on friendly terms with him, and sit at the same table at functions.m old enough to remember the pre-V II Church; and it wasnt basking in some sort of Golden Age, as extreme Traditionalists like to think. The faith of a lot of Catholics was cold, bloodless, lifeless.
No, I just rated the thread excellent because of your post and some others ITT. This is a great discussion because it’s not as polarized as so many with the PerfectChurch/BadChurch dichotomy, so there seems to be actual dialogue going on.Pray that i`ll shut up; and not inflict any more on this thread.
To have issues with the Church, and to be disobedient to the Church, are two different things. To be frustrated with things she does, does not mean one doesn’t love her. When others have problems with me, I often benefit because even though they may be mean about it, they may still have a point that I could consider.
Honestly, this is one of the most serious issues I’ve come to recognize, and it’s so simple it’s amazing that it took me this long to figure it out. Simply put, bishops and parish priests are put in charge of both the temporal possessions and the money, but also the spiritual lives of the people they would like to help “get on board.” God says you cannot serve both God and mammon, so in essence we have assigned them to do a job that God says cannot be done. Some have tried to tell me this warning by Jesus doesn’t apply to priests and bishops, but not convincingly so.
You’re not the only one. In my particular parish, I don’t have any big issues with the way money is spent; mostly just the way it is raised.
) are like “leeches,” sucking the blood out of the parish. That may be how he felt, but I think saying it in a homily is unlikely to improve the situation, and in fact makes it worse. As it says plainly and simply in our (virtually unused) diocesan stewardship manual, true stewardship is based on the parishioners’ need to give, not on the parish’s need to receive. It’s hard to keep that perspective when the bills are higher than the income. Of course, if stewardship had been properly implemented 20 years ago we wouldn’t have this problem today.Agreed.
Thanks!
Yep. And a good dose of persecution, no matter how bitter the pill.
d be embarrassed. Its good that the Vatican State is so tiny.Well, God`s forcing more and more to do just that.
In 1973, Archbishhop Sheen said that in earlier decades the attitude among clergy and religious was: “I
m holier than thou." And then it changed to: "Im worldlier than thou.”They have to stop rubbing shoulders with The World, at least with the wrong members of it.
s on our side." On the side of the corrupt and decadent West? Presumptuous! :( Poor beggars! i gave em an earfull! Brings to mind St.Francis’ insistence that his followers follow the rule of poverty…not just the idea of poverty and being detached from things/money, but the actual life of poverty…To have issues with the Church, and to be disobedient to the Church, are two different things. To be frustrated with things she does, does not mean one doesn’t love her. When others have problems with me, I often benefit because even though they may be mean about it, they may still have a point that I could consider.
Honestly, this is one of the most serious issues I’ve come to recognize, and it’s so simple it’s amazing that it took me this long to figure it out. Simply put, bishops and parish priests are put in charge of both the temporal possessions and the money, but also the spiritual lives of the people they would like to help “get on board.” God says you cannot serve both God and mammon, so in essence we have assigned them to do a job that God says cannot be done. Some have tried to tell me this warning by Jesus doesn’t apply to priests and bishops, but not convincingly so.
You’re not the only one. In my particular parish, I don’t have any big issues with the way money is spent; mostly just the way it is raised.
I think with all the pressure to pay the bills, priests who are responsible for getting it done tend to get frustrated and harp on “accountability” and “responsibility” or the parishioners to give, and in one case a priest, during Sunday homily, said those who aren’t living up to their pledges (and don’t get me started on pledges
Agreed.
Alan
Without the actual words of Sheen, on the surface I am wary of this. First of all, the way a well-trained (dualistic) mind works, is as soon as you say, “do not think outside the box” the first thing I think of is that there is a box, with an outside.
If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, looks like a duck, it is a duck.
Do you know what he meant by “fusion” in that quote? Does the use of a word you don’t understand or disagree with constitute “masked” words?
I guess because you took my comments out of context. That’s just not right.
I think of fusion in terms of relationships. If I have a friend that is getting into some sort of trouble or evil, I have basically three options. I can ignore the friend’s behavior, which doesn’t work, I can run away from the friend, which might work marginally only in extreme abusive behaviors, or I can stick it out with the friend, get good eye contact with the person, hold their attention, be “still” and “present” with the person, and by patience and example help to show them another way over time. I think Rohr is encouraging changing the evil in the world by the third option. I feel certain he did not mean to become part of the evil behavior. I have seen lots of adult Christians who believe that they must isolate themselves from evil to the point that they cannot help others to learn and transform. I think there needs to be a learning process to not recoil from others that are acting in an evil fashion…sort of going into the trenches with them and pulling them out the other side. It is hard to do, but I think that is how transformation happens. I think through that type of “fusion” souls are saved. Alan, I so agree with you about contemplative prayer helping in this process of transformation. I think in contemplative prayer, a person first learns to be still “within” so that then they later can be “still” and know that He is God.
If I understand Rohr on this term, he talks about two major stages of life, and “mature” mains we have moved into the second stage. Not exactly sure that’s right, though.
Richard Rohr is very New Age. I recommend you go to the Radio program on the main page of catholic.com and search for the New Age Deception shows. Or also go to www.newagedeception.com where she exposes some of Rohr’s views as unorthodox and heretical.
If that’s all he meant then there’s nothing controversial about it.
I think what some of us find so annoying about “special” teachings like those of Fr. Rohr is that they are often presented in place of the basics of the faith. Many of us were never taught the normal, traditional, mainstream catholic theology, but this “experimental” theology is all over that place and we get presented with things like that instead.
I’m always leery of propositions that limit my options by telling me how many options I have.
Fr. Rohr’s teachings are about participation instead of just sitting in churches, listening to teachings, and “believing” they are true just because the church says they are true. His center includes the word “actIon” in its name to remind each of us that being a follower of Christ has much less to do with what we think or believe and much more to do with our action in the world that unites and heal divisions wherever they may occur. People of faith (Mother Theresa, etc) are always found stepping into darkness and bringing light. I’d say that is catholic thought at its best.
I think I know what you mean…
Does “sin” mean going against the rules of His church? What about picking grain on the sabbath? What about washing the outside of the cups? Not only did he allow such “sin,” he attacked those in charge when they observed that Jesus’s followers were not following the rules. Jesus was clearly much more upset with mental attitudes toward others, than with alleged “sinners” breaking a few rules.
In any given situation, there are typically many. Still, I agree that fight or flight is what we are usually taught through socialization – both religious and secular. And yet, Jesus almost never fell for those types of traps. When He was asked whether He would uphold the “mainstream” rules which commanded the woman to be stoned, He refused to side with either the woman or the Church, opting for another way out that brought teaching to a higher level than a “yes/no” decision. If He were really in-line with His Church, He would have said, “yes, it is proper and good that we follow the law – stone away!”
While I await the reply to this, I am curious how situations are “never vague” and actions are “always specific.” Are you saying that you do, or intend to, amass such knowledge of rules and teachings, that you are never in a quandary as to what to do? I wish life could be so cut-and-dried for me.
But if we could get to heaven by “good behavior,” isn’t that something that scripture says is impossible, and against what Jesus constantly reinforced about how heaven rejoices more over 1 repentant sinner than 99 righteous? And by “repentant” I’m talking about someone who’s willing to change through and through, from the core, not just somebody who has to tweak their interpretations of the rules a bit from time to time and/or exercise greater care to follow them next time.Funny thing that when I bring these up, I typically a) get called names, such as CC, b) hear crickets chirping, or c) get reminded that Jesus told the prostitute, “go and sin no more,” as if the Good News is about Jesus scolding sinners.
I don’t know the history of it, but it astounds me when scholars who should know this stuff way better than I do, seem to miss the most important points that are obvious to anyone who has seriously been marginalized in their life – whether it was “their fault” or not. Can’t see the forest for the trees, as it were.