Attacks from within the Church on the hierarchy - unprecedented?

[Crusader13]

If you consider the Catholic Church a useful guide to discerning the Christian Truth, keep in mind CM isn’t a Catholic ministry. If you consider independence from the Catholic Church a benefit for discerning Christian Truth, welcome to Protestantism.

There is nothing Protestant about CM. Just because they don’t fall under the jurisdiction of the Catholic Church doesn’t mean their message is not Catholic.

Your comment makes no sense. CM has never advocated independence from the Church, but they have consistently pushed for a return to Catholic teachings. I see that nobody has chosen to refute the topics that I used as an example of their reporting, but instead the focus always seems to be on the character of the employees or more specifically on Voris himself.

I’ve said this time and time again, you don’t have to like Voris to accept his findings and those of his colleagues. He’s stated more than once that they have refrained from going after people purely on theological grounds. Instead they have focused on exposing the paper trail of corruption within the Church.

If it wasn’t for organizations such as CM or Lifesite or the Remnant or even individuals such as Dr. Taylor Marshall, many of these stories or questionable comments or documents would remain unknown and/or unexplained.

 

[Finn]

I agree with this, particularly the last paragraph. The OP wasn’t actually centering their question on this though, they were asking whether such criticism levelled at the Church by its own members was unprecedented.

That said, I definitely detected implicit disapproval of CM in the framing of the question, which I’m sure you did, also. I share your views about media such as CM & Lifesite news. If their content seems increasingly critical, it’s because there are an increasing number of matters worthy of critique.

 

[Crusader13]

I agree with this, particularly the last paragraph. The OP wasn’t actually centering their question on this though, they were asking whether such criticism levelled at the Church by its own members was unprecedented.

That said, I definitely detected implicit disapproval of CM in the framing of the question, which I’m sure you did, also. I share your views about media such as CM & Lifesite news. If their content seems increasingly critical, it’s because there are an increasing number of matters worthy of critique.

I too agree and the OP is right in pointing out that criticism of the Church or more specifically of the clergy, is probably at an all time high. And as you pointed out, there has been a rise in the amount of questionable actions by members of the clergy or maybe Catholic media outlets have just gotten better at uncovering these scandals.

In any case, I think it’s important that we remain vigilant and we continue to study and live our faith so that we can safeguard ourselves from those who would seek to undermine the Church lead us astray.

 

[FiveLinden]

You say that their articles aren’t baseless and not without merit, yet you obviously posted this to highlight CM’s behavior of “attacking” certain clergy members.

No I did not say that. And I posted for the reason I stated: trying to work out if the CM attack is unprecedented from within the Church. Sometimes people just mean what they say. Always the case with me. If I wanted to criticise CM it would be clear I was doing it. I’m not doing it here.

 

[commenter]

Sites such as CM or National Catholic Reporter reflect the bias of the secular culture, anti religious authority. So they really are not independent.

CM, along with 1Peter5, Rorate Coeli, Lepanto, and the other rivals, is biased, limited, tied to the escalating market pressure of competition. Nothing brings in donations like finding dirt, the more lurid and higher up, the better.

There are some kinds of articles that would cost them market share; so they can’t print them. NCR online is not the opposite of Rorate, for instance, it is the same genre, but aims at a different segment of the anti authority market.

Without the lurid, their hits decline, they go broke. So, no objectivity, no independence here.

 

[Crusader13]

No I did not say that. And I posted for the reason I stated: trying to work out if the CM attack is unprecedented from within the Church. Sometimes people just mean what they say. Always the case with me. If I wanted to criticise CM it would be clear I was doing it. I’m not doing it here.

I asked for some clarification because I didn’t understand your views on why you think they are attacking the clergy within the Church and this is what you said

CM attacks those found guilty (except Cardinal Pell); those accused; those associate with the accused and those who say things the accused might have agreed with.

So, I guess the misunderstanding is on me then, because I was trying to determine if you feel their actions are justified or uncalled for and I still don’t know your position on the matter. Your post sounded critical of the “attacks” by CM. I tried to highlight that CM and similar organizations aren’t, to use your word, attacking anyone.

All that aside, I feel their reporting is in response to the number of questionable acts that keep surfacing. The attacks, as you put it, are aimed at those who have done harm to the Church and her members, either through physical harm and abuse or by those who seek to undermine her teachings. But that’s just my view of it.

 

[Crusader13]

CM, along with 1Peter5, Rorate Coeli, Lepanto, and the other rivals, is biased, limited, tied to the escalating market pressure of competition. Nothing brings in donations like finding dirt, the more lurid and higher up, the better.

Well I’m biased against corruption too. Lol. It sounds like you’re more upset with these types of organizations for even bothering to find the “dirt” than you are with the actual “dirt” itself.

Unfortunately, money is what is needed to operate their organization and to collect a wage for their employees. They aren’t part time investigative journalist, who only do work from their computers on the weekends.

If you look at the history of CM for example, you’ll see that Michael Voris started his apostolate merely to bring forth authentic Catholic teachings and to combat many of the errors that were being taught by other lay organizations and even by certain members of the clergy.

Their focus shifted when they realized that simply refuting errors was only part of the solution, but they wanted to know why such errors and actions were even being pushed to begin with.

Why is Cdl so-and-so sending nightly night baby tweets to his sister, maybe because it wasn’t his sister but the gay man he had living in the rectory? Let’s look into that.

Why is bishop so-and-so posing with and attending pro LGBTQ events, maybe it’s because his diocese has been making donations to several subsidiary organizations of the larger LGBTQ group? Let’s look into that.

Why did Father so-and-so organize a large fundraiser at his parish under the guise of restoring the Church and then donate a large portion to several pro planned parenthood groups? Let’s look into that.

 

[commenter]

Just because they don’t fall under the jurisdiction of the Catholic Church doesn’t mean their message is not Catholic.

Do you think NCR online is more authentically Catholic than it would be if it were affiliated with the Catholic Church? In many ways NCR and Commoweal were the forerunners for CM, and similar.

What are your thoughts on NCR online? They were the pioneer, set the template for 1P5, etc.

 

[Crusader13]

What are your thoughts on NCR online? They were the pioneer, set the template for 1P5, etc.

I don’t know much about the history of NCR. And by NCR I’m assuming you mean National Catholic Reporter and not the National Catholic Register lol

I’ve heard a lot of criticism towards the NCR, some even referring to it as the National Catholic Distorter. I know a common criticism leveled against them is their failure or unwillingness to go after corrupt clergy members. In my opinion, some of their articles have a progressive/left leaning position. For example, a recent article claims Raymond Arroyo is anti Francis and pro Trump, to the detriment of him no longer being capable of reporting fairly.

I don’t know if a media organization that fell directly under the control and oversight of the Catholic Church would be inherently more Catholic than those that aren’t. Becuse then the question would be, are we talking about oversight from the Vatican itself or merely the USCCB? I think that there would be a lot of potential for clergy that oversaw a particular media outlet, to control the kind of information that they feel should be disseminated.

 

[commenter]

Your response is good.
Actually they do dig up dirt on Catholic leaders, but only the conservatives. I consider NCR despicable.
The problem is they benefit from, and feed into, the prevailing secular climate of anti religious authority. They don’t offer any support for resisting the secular climate. Neither they, nor the Far Right offer anything towards the reader’s conversion, and we nee d that.

The far Right and Far left aren’t opposites, they blend together behind the scene.

I think we all agree that the minority of bad bishops and priests make it harder to respect the Church. You could say the same thing about bad laity!

 

[BartholomewB]

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI recalls a situation prevailing at an unspecified date in the last century, evidently at a time when he was already a cardinal but not yet the pope. I think it could be considered a form of attack on the hierarchy from within the Church, though back in those days, of course, there was no internet and the laity never found out about it until now. This is the situation he describes:

There were — not only in the United States of America — individual bishops who rejected the Catholic tradition as a whole and sought to bring about a kind of new, modern “Catholicity” in their dioceses. Perhaps it is worth mentioning that in not a few seminaries, students caught reading my books were considered unsuitable for the priesthood. My books were hidden away, like bad literature, and only read under the desk.

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/...-church-and-the-scandal-of-sexual-abuse-59639

 

[commenter]

Dissent on doctrinal issues led to dissent on moral issues. Dissent in theory left to perpetration of, and condoning of immoral deeds.

They would argue that they never promoted child abuse. But if you lead 100 people up to the edge of a cliff, you are responsible if several weak ones go over it.

We are reaping the fruits of situation ethics and relativism mostly of a few decades ago. In a few cases todays bishops are at fault, but often the current bishop is slammed for the sins or neglect of his predecessors.

 

[FiveLinden]

Thanks for the replies - yes, I’ve decided, it is unprecedented. And so is the intervention of a Pope emeritus.

 

[FiveLinden]

So, I guess the misunderstanding is on me then, because I was trying to determine if you feel their actions are justified or uncalled for and I still don’t know your position on the matter.

So the thread seems to have come to an end but on re-reading I realised I had not responded to your perfectly reasonable question about my attitude. I am not a believer so many of the particular focuses of CM are races in which I have no horse. I literally don’t mind if Catholics prefer the EF, the OF or masses involving clowns. But I am interested in the beliefs giving rise to these things. As a humanist I do not agree with various CM approaches in which my horse is running. For example I find their attitude to homosexuality to be distasteful in its focus on shocking individual cases and its false association of homosexuality with child abuse. And I don’t like its overall political position. But I don’t have a view on whether it is right or wrong from a Catholic point of view; I am, rather, perplexed at the sight of ‘faithful Catholics’ so vigorously condemning such a large number of the Church leadership and clergy in the way they do.

 

[Gab123]

As some will now I am interested in how people come to believe and the different beliefs they develop.

I have continued to read 'Church Militant’s site over the past couple of years and seen it develop from a polite but critical conservative place carefully critical of a few individuals in the hierarchy to a daily swinging attack on a huge number of Church leaders, often in the most intemperate terms.

Not only Church Militant but a plethora of other Catholics talking heads with blogs and YouTube channels,TnT is an example of one that is getting a strong following.

The problem is that the fruit of all that is rotten fruits of suspicion, division and slander, affecting many people in many different ways. I find TheTnT boys are particularly irresponsible in spreading gossip and misinformation via layers of speculation and conclusions built upon sensational headlines. We live in a age of misinformation and political spin; and much of it within the Catholic blogosphere is politicizing the faith and spreading gossip which turns into slander… behind it all is the devil, who uses and deceives people on both the left and the right to slam the Church and the Holy Father…

 

[BarbTh]

And really, “The Church” means the group of all Catholics on earth, the true “church militant”, not just the Church organizations or the bishops, Magisterium, employees, clergy, religious etc.

Important point. Thank you for posting it.

 

[Moose]

Perhaps unprecedented.
Sadly…necessary.

 

[Crusader13]

I disagree with your comments in that it sounds like you’re blaming the person or persons who reported the scandal rather than those who actually committed it.

The Church never gave carte blanche to the clergy so that they can impose their will and personal beliefs over the laity. If I chose to post a topic regarding James Martin’s questionable teachings, or Tobins attempts to dismiss his tweets or even asking for clarification on Bishop Barron’s views on salvation, or Pope Francis’ remarks in his encyclicals, it is not done out of disobedience or to be divisive.

It is because my fidelity lies with the Church and her rich history of truth and traditions, which have been consistently guided by the Holy Spirit since her founding. So that if our shepherds lose their way, we as the laity will not be left to wander aimlessly in the desert.

The only division being sown is by those who seek to undermine the Church. And that’s not the same thing as resisting the McCarricks, the Martins, the Tobins or the Cupiches of the clerical world.

 

[Crusader13]

I literally don’t mind if Catholics prefer the EF, the OF or masses involving clowns

I’m not trying to personally attack you or belittle your beliefs, but your comment was disheartening. It’s this same indifference and impartiality that allows such liturgical abuses to continue. I’m not implying that your dispassion for such is to say that you’re advocating for its implementation, but there are many who unfortunately share a similar attitude.

They view all masses as equal and to quote a common response on these forums “a mass is a mass”. So some actually see no difference in its celebration, other than the obvious, but they don’t view these misconstrued acts of piety as anything but a perfectly acceptable form of worship.

So long as they receive their host, it doesn’t matter if it comes from the priest at the Tridentine mass or the the one riding in on a hover board, wearing clown makeup and being flanked by liturgical dancers.

Which I think gives me better insight into why you seem “so perplexed” at the sudden spike in faithful Catholics condemning church leadership in such an alarming way.

After all, if you have no views as to the issue of homosexuality, especially from a Catholic perspective, how can you see the errors of it by those who advocate for its place in the Church.

 

[Gab123]

it sounds like you’re blaming the person or persons who reported the scandal rather than those who actually committed it.

The only division being sown is by those who seek to undermine the Church. And that’s not the same thing as resisting the McCarricks, the Martins, the Tobins or the Cupiches of the clerical world

The MCarricks and the James Martins are cancers in the Church; but another cancer is all the gossip, misinformation, vilification and slander that is being spread through many of the “super-Catholic” YouTube channels, blogs and Internet news sources that spread disingenuous narratives, lies and half-truth spin-offs of sensational headlines about Pope Francis, leading many people from many different walks of life down many false conclusions and dark conspiracy holes.

I hate to say that the TnT guys are part of that cacophony of talking heads; I’ve watched some of their sensational video topics and much of what they blather about turns our to be nothing but gossip and innuendo. It’s one thing to have a private conversation; it’s quite another to preach it to thousands of people while peddling their latest products. And the more sensational the topic the more viewers they get, so…

On the extreme are the DimondBrothers from “True Vatican Catholic” and other sede Vacante groups who spin the documents of Vatican II with the same skill that antiCatholics spin the Sacred Scriptures against the Church. Beware; the devil uses both people on the left and in the right to slam the Church.

On the left are the heretics, the blind leading the blind by spread theological lies; while on the right is the proud Pharisee mentality blinded by pride spreading falsehoods and worst possible spin about people they put under their magnifying glass.