Bishops Begin Distancing from Vatican Document on Gays in Priesthood

[Orionthehunter]

From Brad: And I would say that I agree with you except in the situations where they have made public statements that are contrary to the document. In this case, they are not discerning but casting judgement or politically posturing. The fact is that we have seen politcal posturing from many Bishops for some time now. I would much rather they discern for their flock in prayer and put the politics asided.

I have confidence that the Holy Spirit is with each and every Bishop as a consequence to their ordination. Even in their public statements the Holy Spirit is at word either in their private discernment or from the intervention of the Vatican. In the past, errant (whether intentional or unintentional) Bishops didn’t get immediate feedback on their “inerrancy” from the Vatican. In this modern world of instantaneus communication, feedback is more often and timely.

From Brad: We should indeed rely on our Bishop. You bring up an important case. What to do when The Bishop errors in interpretation? How about when (this is more common) they simply ignore the document? In the latter case, the Pope will not correct anything because He has already taught. We follow the instructions as they were taught.

This infers a passiveness about Pope BXVI that I don’t ascribe to him. I trust that he will act according to his own discernment from the Holy Spirit. I trust both his action or inaction equally.

From Brad: Even when a Bishop errors in interpretation, he is rarely publically corrected. One reason is because the Pope is extremely busy. The other is because he more likely will do the correction in private. The Pope understands that these Bishops are directly accountable to God - they are directly responsible for the souls they shepherd. It is not feasible for the Pope to fix every faulty instruction of every Bishop. That is not his role. This is another reason why the laity must find a voice during these tumultuous times.

I pray only in the rarest cases is a Bishop ever publicly corrected. A public correction sows seeds of disunity and diminishment of the Church. Furthermore, I find it ironic that in some cases there is a call for lesser roles for laity in some places in the Church and yet they are to become arbiters of Bishops adherence to Papal Instruction and Direction. Personally, I’ll trust the Curia and Pope to be the arbiters.

 

[Orionthehunter]

Brad:

It is less narrow that you are implying. “Excessively judgemental” is a pretty strong assessment. I don’t think there are too many on these forums that fall into that category.

If I am wrong, I would like to see examples. Let’s remember that making judgements regarding the truth or error of statements and teachings is natural and correct. When Orion says “excessively judgmental”, I presume that it means discounting the individual and his prospects for salvation.

I define excessively judgmental in the context of this thread and many like it when anyone presumes or infers that the motives of a Priest or Bishop is anything sinister or with an agenda contrary to their vocation. While it MAY be appropriate to disagree with a Priest or Bishop with charity and respect on a matter in acknowledgement that the Bishop or Priest may be in error out of ignorance, inadequate grasp of the issue or even their sinful nature, to make the judgmental assertion that it is with ill-intent is “bearing false witness” as I don’t think anyone here has adequate personal intimate knowledge of what is in the Bishop’s or Priest’s heart. This is something exclusively reserved to God.

Additionally, I acknolwedge that walking a path of truth with charity is narrow and hard. We all fail at it but that is the aspiration that Christ calls us to.

 

[Brad]

Orionthehunter:

I define excessively judgmental in the context of this thread and many like it when anyone presumes or infers that the motives of a Priest or Bishop is anything sinister or with an agenda contrary to their vocation. While it MAY be appropriate to disagree with a Priest or Bishop with charity and respect on a matter in acknowledgement that the Bishop or Priest may be in error out of ignorance, inadequate grasp of the issue or even their sinful nature, to make the judgmental assertion that it is with ill-intent is “bearing false witness” as I don’t think anyone here has adequate personal intimate knowledge of what is in the Bishop’s or Priest’s heart. This is something exclusively reserved to God.

Additionally, I acknolwedge that walking a path of truth with charity is narrow and hard. We all fail at it but that is the aspiration that Christ calls us to.

1. Just out of curiosity, what is the difference between teaching incorrectly due to a sinful nature and teaching incorrectly due to ill-intent?
2. I don’t know of too many that fall into this category as you have it defined. Who has said they know their heart? Who has said they are purposely acting with evil intent? Many have said they believe they are incorrect and that a leader being inocorrect publically causes scandal to the faithful.

The fact that them being publicallly incorrect is seriously wrong does not mean that pointing out this fact is judging their heart.

 

[fix]

Orionthehunter:

I define excessively judgmental in the context of this thread and many like it when anyone presumes or infers that the motives of a Priest or Bishop is anything sinister or with an agenda contrary to their vocation. While it MAY be appropriate to disagree with a Priest or Bishop with charity and respect on a matter in acknowledgement that the Bishop or Priest may be in error out of ignorance, inadequate grasp of the issue or even their sinful nature, to make the judgmental assertion that it is with ill-intent is “bearing false witness” as I don’t think anyone here has adequate personal intimate knowledge of what is in the Bishop’s or Priest’s heart. This is something exclusively reserved to God.

Additionally, I acknolwedge that walking a path of truth with charity is narrow and hard. We all fail at it but that is the aspiration that Christ calls us to.

Can’t you see you may be guilty of what you accuse others of? Who has typed they are judging a bishops heart? They are judging his words. Perhaps we all need to be more accurate in our choice of terms we use, but I see little difference between what you accuse others of and your own words of judgment toward them?

In all fairness my reading of your posts shows you are quick to judge others who comment on bishop’s actions, public history and words and turn those comments into something more sinister than what they are. How is that charitable?

 

[Orionthehunter]

1) Just out of curiosity, what is the difference between teaching incorrectly due to a sinful nature and teaching incorrectly due to ill-intent?

1. I don’t know of too many that fall into this category as you have it defined. Who has said they know their heart? Who has said they are purposely acting with evil intent? Many have said they believe they are incorrect and that a leader being inocorrect publically causes scandal to the faithful.

The fact that them being publicallly incorrect is seriously wrong does not mean that pointing out this fact is judging their heart.

1. If I strike my children out of anger, it is succumbing to my sinful nature. If I strike my children to hurt them, it is out of ill-intent.
2. I believe that the application of labels to people and attributing the attributes of the label as the motive for a Bishop’s statement is making a judgment into the Bishop’s heart. A better approach would be to keep the focus on the words and or action and discussing only your views on the correctness of the words or action. Specifically, there were inferences about Cardinal Murphy-OConnor’s statements that I think were open to a different interpretation. However, others not only had a different interpretation but inferred that the statement was a direct attack on the Vatican. Ithink the words were thumb their noses, turn a blind eye, or something like that.

 

[fix]

Orionthehunter:

Specifically, there were inferences about Cardinal Murphy-OConnor’s statements that I think were open to a different interpretation. However, others not only had a different interpretation but inferred that the statement was a direct attack on the Vatican. Ithink the words were thumb their noses, turn a blind eye, or something like that.

Please post exactly what you are referring to.

Any* inferences* from any post would be your private conclusion which may be very different from what the poster was implying.

 

[Brad]

1) If I strike my children out of anger, it is succumbing to my sinful nature. If I strike my children to hurt them, it is out of ill-intent.

And how does this matter for the child. It is ok to continue to strike him out of anger?

Orionthehunter:

1. I believe that the application of labels to people and attributing the attributes of the label as the motive for a Bishop’s statement is making a judgment into the Bishop’s heart.

This simply isn’t true. People act according to ideologies that they have accepted. Sometimes, these actions justify an overt sin in their minds. Sometimes they do not. Sometimes these actions involve culpability. Sometimes they do not. Ascribing someone’s actions based on their acceptance of an ideology because you have witnessed a consistent pattern of actions on their part that fit the same ideology does not suggest that they are sinning. Neither does pointing out that they are teaching incorrectly. There has to be more information. And if one is not making a statement that someone is sinning then they are most certainly not judging their heart.

By making this leap, Fix is correct. You are making an assessment of what “someone that disagrees with a consistent pattern of behavior” is thinking about the individual’s heart.

Orionthehunter:

A better approach would be to keep the focus on the words and or action and discussing only your views on the correctness of the words or action. Specifically, there were inferences about Cardinal Murphy-OConnor’s statements that I think were open to a different interpretation. However, others not only had a different interpretation but inferred that the statement was a direct attack on the Vatican. Ithink the words were thumb their noses, turn a blind eye, or something like that.

I agree with your “better approach”. That is the difficult part. Truth and Charity.

 

[AJC]

Is anyone actually shocked by this reaction by some US Bishops?

Like most politicians the Bishops, what I call our weak kneed sisters, want to be popular. They therefore kow-tow to popular opinion and popular trends. But, those who marry themselves to this age Bishops, soon find themselves divorced in the next.

AJC

 

[miguel]

Brad:

Disunity is indeed a problem. However, It is wrong to be silent when heterodoxy is contributing to the collapse and eternal damnation of souls.

Heterodoxy causes disunity. Heterodoxy is disunity. Orthodoxy speaking up is unity.

 

[Orionthehunter]

fix:

Please post exactly what you are referring to.

Any* inferences* from any post would be your private conclusion which may be very different from what the poster was implying.

From Fix: Yes, it is simply a clarification of what has been “on the books” for decades. As always, some will be loyal to Rome and others will defy Rome and thumb their noses.

The use of the word “defy” implies a conscious act to disobey and requires intimate knowledge of motive and prior disposition to defy. Even for my own Bishop who I observe closely, I doubt I have enough insight to make this charge. Unless one were a particularly “plugged-in” lay person as in a Papal, USCCB, or diocesan employee, I have a hard time imagining us meager “cheeks in the seats” having enough information to make such a charge. Misinterpret (while still needing correction) implies a less sinister intent and at least is within the competence of us average lay people.

From Miguel: One thing the Bishops understand is dollars. If dollars keep going out the door to pay off abuse claims, they will change the status quo.

Now this is a serious charge to make against any Bishop. I definitely won’t go there.

From Fix: Because I am using liberal in a pejorative way to make the point. I do not have to make this stuff up, just read the paper or the links in these fora.

Why do we have to be “pejorative” of a Bishop to make a point?

From Brad: And I would say that I agree with you except in the situations where they have made public statements that are contrary to the document. In this case, they are not discerning but casting judgement or politically posturing. The fact is that we have seen politcal posturing from many Bishops for some time now. I would much rather they discern for their flock in prayer and put the politics asided.

Even among my closest friends and business associates, it is hard for me to determine w/ absolute confidence that a person is posturing and not discerning out loud. I don’t deem myself worthy or informed enough to characterize out loud the “heart and mind” of any Bishop.

I want to point out that many of these comments appear to be related to comments made by Cardinal Murphy-Connor who is located in the UK and reputed to be close to the Pope. I really don’t think anyone here in the US is qualified to comment on his “heart and mind” and what he meant. The only people potentially qualified to even broach the subject are people under his pastoral care and they all came to his defense.

 

[fix]

Orionthehunter:

The use of the word “defy” implies a conscious act to disobey and requires intimate knowledge of motive and prior disposition to defy. Even for my own Bishop who I observe closely, I doubt I have enough insight to make this charge. Unless one were a particularly “plugged-in” lay person as in a Papal, USCCB, or diocesan employee, I have a hard time imagining us meager “cheeks in the seats” having enough information to make such a charge. Misinterpret (while still needing correction) implies a less sinister intent and at least is within the competence of us average lay people.
Now this is a serious charge to make against any Bishop. I definitely won’t go there.
Why do we have to be “pejorative” of a Bishop to make a point?
Even among my closest friends and business associates, it is hard for me to determine w/ absolute confidence that a person is posturing and not discerning out loud. I don’t deem myself worthy or informed enough to characterize out loud the “heart and mind” of any Bishop.

I want to point out that many of these comments appear to be related to comments made by Cardinal Murphy-Connor who is located in the UK and reputed to be close to the Pope. I really don’t think anyone here in the US is qualified to comment on his “heart and mind” and what he meant. The only people potentially qualified to even broach the subject are people under his pastoral care and they all came to his defense.

Do you know the difference between and inferring and implying?

I ask because you continue to infer things that are not necessarily implied by any poster mentioned.

 

[Orionthehunter]

fix:

Do you know the difference between and inferring and implying?

I ask because you continue to infer things that are not necessarily implied by any poster mentioned.

Webster’s New Word Dictionary-

“Infer: 1) to conclude by reasoning from something known or assumed 2) to imply: still sometimes regarded as loose usage.”

I apologize for using loose usage. However, the words are very nearly interchangeable.

“Defy: To resist or oppose boldly or openly”

 

[miguel]

Orionthehunter:

Now this is a serious charge to make against any Bishop. I definitely won’t go there.

I was referring to disobedient Bishops in general. (Obviously I would have no problem with obedient Bishops.) If they continue to disobey Rome by ordaining homosexuals, and in consequence our kids continue to be abused, and they continue to be hit by abuse claims, maybe the dollars going out the door will motivate the disobedient ones to be obedient. Obviously, they should be motivated by a desire to protect the flock. But failing that (and this is where my cynicism came in), maybe they’ll be motivated by the outflow of cash. Whatever works.

 

[manualman]

Orionthehunter:

The use of the word “defy” implies a conscious act to disobey and requires intimate knowledge of motive and prior disposition to defy. Even for my own Bishop who I observe closely, I doubt I have enough insight to make this charge. Unless one were a particularly “plugged-in” lay person as in a Papal, USCCB, or diocesan employee, I have a hard time imagining us meager “cheeks in the seats” having enough information to make such a charge. Misinterpret (while still needing correction) implies a less sinister intent and at least is within the competence of us average lay people.
Why do we have to be “pejorative” of a Bishop to make a point?
Even among my closest friends and business associates, it is hard for me to determine w/ absolute confidence that a person is posturing and not discerning out loud. I don’t deem myself worthy or informed enough to characterize out loud the “heart and mind” of any Bishop.

I want to point out that many of these comments appear to be related to comments made by Cardinal Murphy-Connor who is located in the UK and reputed to be close to the Pope. I really don’t think anyone here in the US is qualified to comment on his “heart and mind” and what he meant. The only people potentially qualified to even broach the subject are people under his pastoral care and they all came to his defense.

Good points, all. Ones I will try to take to heart. God didn’t make me a bishop. Probably for a pretty good reason.