Bishops want to assert authority on those who claim "More Catholic than the Bishops"

[maggiemay2u]

When did the United States become a secular state? Who signed the proclamation? Just because a group of progressive nutters said it, doesn’t make it so. Secularism dismisses faith, dismisses God, and much of the consequence for actions. Growing up, we heard repeatedly that we were a Christian nation, founded on Judeo-Christian principles, with a guarantee of freedom of religion–not from it. It sounds so safe–no religious influence, no fights among groups. Piffle. The secularist movement is, IMO, is insidious and beguiling to the unformed conscience, hoping to move the US closer to the anti-religious societies of Europe.

Back to the topic. The Bishops have been quiet all too long. The red herring of backlash if the Church asserts authority over her own is silly. Not that it may not happen, and not that many wobbly catholics may not side with the pro-Church of Me crowd, but because it’s the right thing to do. Bishop Sheen had the highest rate program his slot once upon a time-not the highest rated religious program, the highest rated-period.

I believe there is a growing hunger in the US for a moral compass by which to live. Catholics have the duty to know the right direction and lead. The bishops have the duty to instruct Catholics and empower them through the Truth, in unambiguous terms, and to call evil and evil doings out whenever the need arises.

 

[Jan_Bolbot]

Yes and yes to the last several posts–well stated.

If anything Mr Kennedy excommunicates himself. What bishops do is just acknowledge what the sinner has already done to himself. That’s why Bishop Tobin’s letter was so good–it was written in a spirit of justice, charity, and mercy toward Mr. Kennedy. It calls him back to his faith, back to the Church.

The Church moves slowly. It has been frustrating to watch years go by and Catholic politicians, theologians, and some clergy (remember Archbishop Weakland?!) flaunting their opposition to basic truths of the faith. The rot at great old institutions like Notre Dame is sad to see.

But the Church also moves surely. When the earth along a fault line deep under the ground moves a few inches the result is an earthquake. All it takes is a handful of forceful and holy bishops–Dolan, Chaput, Tobin, Nienstadt–and small groups of committed laity who will support them, plus alternative forms of media (EWTN).

One other person to mention here: Archbishop Emeritus of Detroit, Adam Maida. Years ago before it was “okay” for bishops to be speaking out publicly on issues like abortion, Cardinal Maida organized public opposition to proposed euthenasia laws in Michigan. Remember Jack Kevorkian? Cardinal Maida probably did more than any other public figure to shine a spotlight on this man and his evil ideas. He personally lobbied Catholic and non-Catholic politicians in both parties and called on the faithful to stand up to both the euthenasia and abortion lobbies (which overlap anyway). Although he had strong support with the Holy Father, he was really a trial blazer on this.

jb

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

I find solid catholic teaching on this channel

There’s a reason why Mother Angelica resigned and handed the network over to lay people. I believe it had something to do with an investigation on the part of the Holy See for reasons including, but not limited to, disobeying and encouraging lay Catholics to disobey their Bishop.

 

[maggiemay2u]

There’s a reason why Mother Angelica resigned and handed the network over to lay people. I believe it had something to do with an investigation on the part of the Holy See for reasons including, but not limited to, disobeying and encouraging lay Catholics to disobey their Bishop.

Please source where Mother Angelica was held guilty of anything by Rome. To say something like this “There’s a reason why Mother Angelica resigned and handed the network over to lay people.”, and, " believe it had something to do with an investigation on the part of the Holy See for reasons including, but not limited to, disobeying and encouraging lay Catholics to disobey their Bishop." , screams for some sort of documentation of fact. Those who have followed Mother Angelica are aware of what happened, and why. She resigned to save the network from destruction from the progressive bishops, one in particular, whose diocese was teaching the Eucharist “represented he Body and Blood of Christ” to CCD classes. It was a diocese whose priests proclaimed “The Our Father” wasn’t really a prayer to be prayed, but merely an example, and that we should listen to their translation of the bible as opposed to the Church, because theirs was more accurate.

It’s also the reason people flocked to neighboring dioceses.

 

[redrosetea]

There’s a reason why Mother Angelica resigned and handed the network over to lay people. I believe it had something to do with an investigation on the part of the Holy See for reasons including, but not limited to, disobeying and encouraging lay Catholics to disobey their Bishop.

Actually the Pope sent her a huge monstrance…as his sign to her of her fidelity to the magesterium I presume…It was sent during this kerfuffle…and the good Bishop put his foot in his mouth more than once during all of this…pride goeth before a fall

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Please source where Mother Angelica was held guilty of anything by Rome. To say something like this “There’s a reason why Mother Angelica resigned and handed the network over to lay people.”, and, " believe it had something to do with an investigation on the part of the Holy See for reasons including, but not limited to, disobeying and encouraging lay Catholics to disobey their Bishop." , screams for some sort of documentation of fact.

Here are two good articles on the subject:

findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n6_v34/ai_20067461/

findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1252/is_n2_125/ai_20520542/?tag=content;col1

BTW - The whole point of the Vatican investigation was that Mother Angelica was refusing to obey both her own Bishop and the larger USCCB.

 

[redrosetea]

I think this might give a fuller picture of the situation\

catholicleague.org/research/motherangelica.htm

I think Mother might be canonized someday…God always raises up great saints to set the church back on its right path

Mother might be a simple woman but God often uses to lowly to confound the wise

Mother has probably brought more souls to God than that bishop or those Cardinals

 

[maggiemay2u]

Here are two good articles on the subject:

findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n6_v34/ai_20067461/

findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1252/is_n2_125/ai_20520542/?tag=content;col1

BTW - The whole point of the Vatican investigation was that Mother Angelica was refusing to obey both her own Bishop and the larger USCCB.

Here, let me try this again–slowly. Please cite the source that demonstrates Rome held her guilty of any wrongdoing. For that matter, highlight in either of your two citations where Mother was investigated by Rome, or even her own bishop (Foley) I am reading the articles on a cell phone and may have missed the words “investigated by Rome”

The fact that Cardinal “Abortion isn’t part of my expertise” Mahony. The Good Cardinal has been part of the “proximate evil” progressive movement, as exemplified by his Bishop’s (Zavala) letter to the faithful prior to the election. Mother Angelica was on target as to the “representative bread and wine” and had I been more awake, I would have offered to have organized a diocese wide petition as to what was being taught on the Good Cardinal’s watch. Apparently many of his own pastors were as confused as Mother Angelica with the content of his letter.

Thanks.

 

[estesbob]

Here are two good articles on the subject:

findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1141/is_n6_v34/ai_20067461/

findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1252/is_n2_125/ai_20520542/?tag=content;col1

BTW - The whole point of the Vatican investigation was that Mother Angelica was refusing to obey both her own Bishop and the larger USCCB.

Neither of these articles said a word about a vatican investigation. Neither said she disobeyed her own Bishop ,

 

[redrosetea]

I don’t think Rome ever did anything to Mother…Mahoney wouldn’t let it drop and finally with foot in mouth he made the statement the priest shortage was a good thing because it got the lay people involved in the church

At that point all of the bishops were fed up with him too

I read this in an article sometime ago,and I read so much I can’t cite the source…sorry

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

Please cite the source that demonstrates Rome held her guilty of any wrongdoing.

The conclusions of the investigation were never made public.

For that matter, highlight in either of your two citations where Mother was investigated by Rome, or even her own bishop (Foley) I am reading the articles on a cell phone and may have missed the words “investigated by Rome”

This is another interesting piece which, while praising Mother Angelica, makes reference to the investigation.

catholicintl.com/catholicissues/ewtn.pdf

 

[estesbob]

The conclusions of the investigation were never made public.

This is another interesting piece which, while praising Mother Angelica, makes reference to the investigation.

catholicintl.com/catholicissues/ewtn.pdf

There is not a word in this article about the Vatican Investigating Mother Angelica or EWTN. It appears the conclusions were never made public becuase there was no investigation.

 

[Elizabeth502]

When did the United States become a secular state?

Oh, since around 1776 and 1787-ish. All of our founding documents both state and imply the freedom to worship as we wish, but without government approval of specific religions, as the gov’t itself, as a body, is religion-less. We differ that way from a few other countries of the world, but are in common in that regard with the vast majority of governments, worldwide. A country can have all of its inhabitants subscribing to and practicing one or more religions, and yet be a secular state. It’s important to draw that distinction; it is for the freedom of all of us. No one who believes in a particular religion wants to be governed by a party which believes in a different or even contrary religion, and which weaves those differing reliigous assumptions into mandatory regulations and laws which may very well circumscribe the practice of our own religion. I do not want to be governed by Islamic principles, even subtly, or by the assumptions of Wicca, or by certain religions of Asia, including Buddhism, Shintoism, Confucianism, Hinduism.

 

[maggiemay2u]

Oh, since around 1776 and 1787-ish. All of our founding documents both state and imply the freedom to worship as we wish, but without government approval of specific religions, as the gov’t itself, as a body, is religion-less. We differ that way from a few other countries of the world, but are in common in that regard with the vast majority of governments, worldwide. A country can have all of its inhabitants subscribing to and practicing one or more religions, and yet be a secular state. It’s important to draw that distinction; it is for the freedom of all of us. No one who believes in a particular religion wants to be governed by a party which believes in a different or even contrary religion, and which weaves those differing reliigous assumptions into mandatory regulations and laws which may very well circumscribe the practice of our own religion. I do not want to be governed by Islamic principles, even subtly, or by the assumptions of Wicca, or by certain religions of Asia, including Buddhism, Shintoism, Confucianism, Hinduism.

Freedom of religion, not freedom from. With all due respect, I didn’t bother with the rest of the secular rant. I’ve heard it before. I don’t agree.

Back to the topic. Bishops are waking up to find a church hungry for their guidance in fulfilling Christ’s mission to evangelize to all nations, bringing all peoples to Him.

 

[maggiemay2u]

The conclusions of the investigation were never made public. I contend there was no investigation, Unless you have proof to the contrary, then you have falsely accused someone of a serious offense, and at best, uncharitable, which is of course a violation of the rules.
This is another interesting piece which, while praising Mother Angelica, makes reference to the investigation. Nope, wrong again. There’s nothing in the piece that speaks of an investigation, Here’s an idea. Read the article, don’t just throw in a link.
catholicintl.com/catholicissues/ewtn.pdf

There wasn’t an investigation, IMO, this is just an unfounded attempt to besmirch a good and holy woman.

 

[maggiemay2u]

There is not a word in this article about the Vatican Investigating Mother Angelica or EWTN. It appears the conclusions were never made public becuase there was no investigation.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Freedom of religion, not freedom from.

With all due respect, I didn’t bother with the rest of the secular rant. I’ve heard it before. I don’t agree.

Frankly, your tone throughout your postings on this subject does not sound respectful to anyone who corrects you factually (as I have), nor to anyone who disagrees with you in the slightest. People who disagree with you are not “ranting.” They’re correcting, in some cases, your inaccuracies; in other cases, opinions of yours that are based on incorrect assumptions. In other cases, they’re merely stating their equally valid opinions with yours. Dismissing people with “I didn’t bother…” and “I’ve heard it all before” is actually not even in keeping with the rules of this forum.

In any case, back to the historical facts: Yours is an inaccurate cliche. The government is indeed free from religion. It is we the people who have the freedom of religion, in that it is we who are not required (unlike in Europe in the 18th century) to be free from our own various religions of choice and practice a monopoly religion assigned by the government, and/or being persecuted for following a different than “official” (governmental) religion.

The facts and principles may be inconvenient, but it is the realm in which political decision-making actually occurs, which subject is quite relevant, and current, to the topic at hand.

 

[Thomas_Casey]

I’m tyring to clean up this thread of negative and disrespectful comments toward individuals. Please keep it charitable.

Thank You,

Thomas Casey
Moderator

 

[maggiemay2u]

The facts and principles may be inconvenient, but it is the realm in which political decision-making actually occurs, which subject is quite relevant, and current, to the topic at hand.

Sorry, I disagree. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…It’s that second part that seems to cause so much grief to secularists, and secularists cause so much grief to others twisting the intent…

I’m now finished with secularism unless I see it on its own thread:thumbsup:

As for unsourced allegations towards others…repeated accusations that are factually baseless need to be rescinded…to allow misrepresentations and outright untruths, is simply not an option. Had a factual source been provided to prove me wrong, I would have apologized…none was forthcoming.

Now, back to this topic…Cardinal George has a huge task in front of him. I’d love to be a fly on the wall, especially in relation to the lobbying and university discussions!

 

[fish90]

All Catholic institutions must become so devotely Catholic and faithful to the Magisterium that there should be no question in the minds of Catholics what the TRUTH is.

For example, a theology teacher responds to a question of whether women can be ordained. Instead of saying that this is not a debatable topic, the professor shares that there is legitimate sacramental reason for the Catholic Church to not ordain women. Students raise their hands and continue saying that “since women are equal now they should become ordained,” and more typical rejections. The professor responds with “that is also an argument against men-only ordination.” A student raises his/her hand and says that men-only ordination is an infallible doctrine of the Church and this is not up for debate. Some members of the class laugh and the class moves on.

I have issues with freedom of thought in Catholic colleges, because this freedom in some cases can distort the truth. My issue with the example I gave is that a theology professor in a Catholic University should be telling that the issue is a matter of doctrine and then explain the Church’s reasons. I find that this example displays where confusion in many of Catholic children and adult’s come from.

I believe that the laity should engage with lay institutions that help Catholic families decide on a proper college or reveal scandals (sex abuse, CCHD, etc), but they MUST RESPECT the bishop’s authority completely and without discussion. There is always the Vatican and other dioceses with which a lay person can express their concern without “spitting in the faces” of bishops which sometimes happens.