L
Luke6_37
Guest
But not all of them?
I don’t think its proper to take sides. Taking sides is very protestant. Not orthodox at all.
Last edited:
Cardinal Cupich launches Amoris Laetitia seminars for US bishops
- Status
I don’t think its proper to take sides. Taking sides is very protestant. Not orthodox at all.
Mark121359
Well-known member
No. It’s not protestant or unorthodox. Not when they say things contrary to the Catholic Faith. For instance.How about Bishop Franz-Josef Bode? Do you side with him? (read below)
http://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2018/01/12/german-bishop-suggests-blessing-same-sex-unions/
Last edited:
L
Luke6_37
Guest
That story is over month old and has already been debunked.Luke6_37:
No. It’s not protestant or unorthodox. Not when they say things contrary to the Catholic Faith. For instance.How about Bishop Franz-Josef Bode? Do you side with him? (read below)
http://catholicherald.co.uk/news/2018/01/12/german-bishop-suggests-blessing-same-sex-unions/
Mark121359
Well-known member
Source? Where has this been debunked? I think you’re confusing him with Cardinal Marx recent similar remarks, who is also from Germany.
Last edited:
L
Luke6_37
Guest
There have been a couple of threads on this issue in the Catholic News forum. You just need to look through the list.
Mark121359
Well-known member
No, that is simply not correct. Point me to just one of these supposed threads. Oh, that’s right. You can’t, because they don’t exist. Cardinal Marx is the one who refuted what was originally reported about him, not Bishop Bode. On another thread you made this bold claim; "National Catholic Reporter is now more in line with the Vatican than ETWN.” Well look at how giddy the National Schismatic Reporter was over Bishop Bode’s comments. (see below)
Last edited:
I
I_trust
Guest
L
Luke6_37
Guest
I don’t have the time to do your homework for you. If you care so much about it, look down the list on the Catholic News forum.
Personally, I couldn’t care less one way or another if a Bishop or priest wants to bless a same sex union. If they can bless pets on the feast of Saint Francis, I don’t see why they can’t bless other relationships.
However, I do find it disturbing that you feel the need to express hostility towards a Catholic news site by mocking its name. National Catholic Reporter has been around for more than 50 years and has always proudly called itself Catholic. Who are you to take that away from them? If you don’t like their articles, don’t read them. That’s how I handle LifeSiteNews.
Last edited:
B
billy15
Guest
I have to interject here, on numerous points. First, the onus is on you to show where this has been “debunked”. I don’t know what you’re talking about and haven’t seen anything either regarding what you’re talking about.
Second, you honestly couldn’t care less if a priest or bishop wants to bless a couple in a sane sex relationship? Really? THAT, and the fact that a priest would want to bless that which is sinful, is disturbing. Pope Francis himself has said that same sex relationships are in no way analogous to marriage. Let’s look at another case. Should we be concerned if a priest wishes to bless a polygamous marriage with man and his new third wife? Or a polyamarous relationship where the husband and wife have welcomed a new girlfriend into the picture? Should a priest bless these relationships?
Obviously, the answer is no, as these three types of relationships are sinful. Would you really put these three types of relationships on the same level as a relationship between man and wife, or a celibate couple awaiting marriage? Do you see this is the reason why they can’t bless these types of relationships? National Catholic Reporter would obviously say otherwise, and that is scandalous. So yes, National Schismatic Reporter is an accurate nickname, especially since they have NEVER obeyed their bishop who censured them and explicitly told them to stop using “Catholic” in their name. To hold them up as a paragon of orthodoxy (or at least, more orthodox than the wonderful apostolate known as EWTN), when they so blatantly disregard their ordinary, is disturbing.
Now of course, no one is stopping priests from blessing these people individually, but to bless their sinful state would be just as absurd as blessing a loan shark’s new business, on the occasion of legitimizing his fraudulent activity.
Second, you honestly couldn’t care less if a priest or bishop wants to bless a couple in a sane sex relationship? Really? THAT, and the fact that a priest would want to bless that which is sinful, is disturbing. Pope Francis himself has said that same sex relationships are in no way analogous to marriage. Let’s look at another case. Should we be concerned if a priest wishes to bless a polygamous marriage with man and his new third wife? Or a polyamarous relationship where the husband and wife have welcomed a new girlfriend into the picture? Should a priest bless these relationships?
Obviously, the answer is no, as these three types of relationships are sinful. Would you really put these three types of relationships on the same level as a relationship between man and wife, or a celibate couple awaiting marriage? Do you see this is the reason why they can’t bless these types of relationships? National Catholic Reporter would obviously say otherwise, and that is scandalous. So yes, National Schismatic Reporter is an accurate nickname, especially since they have NEVER obeyed their bishop who censured them and explicitly told them to stop using “Catholic” in their name. To hold them up as a paragon of orthodoxy (or at least, more orthodox than the wonderful apostolate known as EWTN), when they so blatantly disregard their ordinary, is disturbing.
Now of course, no one is stopping priests from blessing these people individually, but to bless their sinful state would be just as absurd as blessing a loan shark’s new business, on the occasion of legitimizing his fraudulent activity.
Last edited:
J
JimG
Guest
The National Catholic Reporter, based in the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, has been asked by two different bishops of that diocese to remove the name “Catholic” from its title because it is not considered Catholic and is often at odds with Catholic teaching.
L
Luke6_37
Guest
That may have been true in the past, but the course has shifted and in many ways NCR is now more in line with the agenda set by Rome than ETWN and LifeSiteNews. You certainly don’t find NCR producing hit pieces on the Pope or the bishops implementing his agenda like you do on those media sites.Luke6_37:
The National Catholic Reporter, based in the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph, has been asked by two different bishops of that diocese to remove the name “Catholic” from its title because it is not considered Catholic and is often at odds with Catholic teaching.
Looking at today’s headlines it’s all positive press. Perfectly in line with the Church’s teaching on immigration, gun control and the economy.
Last edited:
L
Luke6_37
Guest
No, the onus is on you. My understanding is that this is no more than right-wing media hype over a faulty translation from German to English. You are free to do your own research and come to a different conclusion, but I will not debate it with you.
I care about other things that I think are more important. I don’t need to be involved in every issue and am perfectly happy leaving it up to the bishops to sort this one out. Looks to me like they are doing a fine job.
My definition of schismatic is someone who sets up their own church, because they can no longer respect the authority of the pope & bishops.
NCR was never like that. They may have pushed the bounds of orthodoxy, but they never questioned that the Magisterium had the authority to set the agenda. They just said that some aspects of the agenda sucked and ought to be changed.
That’s a huge difference from what the folks over at ETWN and LifeSiteNews are doing. They are treating doctrinal disagreements within the church the same way they treat political disagreements between liberals and conservatives. They are using right-wing political tactics to undermine and marginalize the Pope and his bishops. This is just plain wrong. You can’t do that without causing great harm to the Body of Christ. Hyping up opposition toward Rome, like they do at LifeSiteNews, is fundamentally inappropriate and schismatic.
If you want to know what I care about, it’s getting right-wing politics out of my Church. I find it to be divisive and harmful and according to the Apostle, entirely un-Christian:
Mark121359
Well-known member
For the umpteenth time, I 'm not the one who needs to do homework, but you my friend are in great need of this. Bishop Bode was the first to make the statement in support of blessing homosexual unions. Cardinal Marx made similar statements about one month later than Bishop Bode’s, which Marx has now refuted. And various news sources have updated this. Bishop Bode’s remarks have never been refuted. And I challenge you to link just one website that supports your claim that it has been refuted. When you do…I’ll comeback on here and eat royal crow. The ball is in your court. Good luck!!! You’ll need it!Mark121359:
I don’t have the time to do your homework for you. If you care so much about it, look down the list on the Catholic News forum.
Personally, I couldn’t care less one way or another if a Bishop or priest wants to bless a same sex union. If they can bless pets on the feast of Saint Francis, I don’t see why they can’t bless other relationships.
However, I do find it disturbing that you feel the need to express hostility towards a Catholic news site by mocking its name. National Catholic Reporter has been around for more than 50 years and has always proudly called itself Catholic. Who are you to take that away from them? If you don’t like their articles, don’t read them. That’s how I handle LifeSiteNews.
P.S. My “National Schismatic Reporter” comment is not my invention. That beauty comes from none other than Fr. John Zuhlsdorf. He usually follows it up by saying a.k.a. Fishwrap. All of which is 1000% correct I might add!!!
Last edited:
L
Luke6_37
Guest
Regardless of what you say, I still think its all much ado about nothing and am happy to leave it in the hands of the bishops to sort out. Sorry if that bothers you, but that’s where I stand.Luke6_37:
For the umpteenth time, I 'm not the one who needs to do homework, but you my friend are in great need of this. Bishop Bode was the first to make the statement in support of blessing homosexual unions. Cardinal Marx made similar statements about one month later than Bishop Bode’s, which Marx has now refuted. And various news sources have updated this. Bishop Bode’s remarks have never been refuted. And I challenge you to link just one website that supports your claim that it has been refuted. When you do…I’ll comeback on here and eat royal crow. The ball is in your court. Good luck!!! You’ll need it!Mark121359:
I don’t have the time to do your homework for you. If you care so much about it, look down the list on the Catholic News forum.
Personally, I couldn’t care less one way or another if a Bishop or priest wants to bless a same sex union. If they can bless pets on the feast of Saint Francis, I don’t see why they can’t bless other relationships.
However, I do find it disturbing that you feel the need to express hostility towards a Catholic news site by mocking its name. National Catholic Reporter has been around for more than 50 years and has always proudly called itself Catholic. Who are you to take that away from them? If you don’t like their articles, don’t read them. That’s how I handle LifeSiteNews.
P.S. My “National Schismatic Reporter” comment is not my invention. That beauty comes from none other than Fr. John Zuhlsdorf. He usually follows it up by saying a.k.a. Fishwrap. All of which is 1000% correct I might add!!!
I know all about Fr. Zuhlsdorf. I consider him as fringy as Hans Küng, but in the opposite direction. Both have their loyal followers, but I have no interest in being one of them.
Since you refuse to address any of the points I raised, I guess this discussion is over.
Mark121359
Well-known member
Umm…what points?
Last edited:
I
Imdaman
Guest
What a JOke. Sooner or later CHP 8 will be edited to clear up any confusion and the church will begin to clean out its liberalism that affects it every so often.
C
commenter
Guest
EWTN is approved by its local bishop as a Catholic ministry. NCR is not.
P
pnewton
Guest
If NCR is not approved, I did not know they weren’t, then they are in serious violation of Canon Law, represting themselves as a Catholic apostolate when they are not. While I cannot say they are a wolf in sheep’s clothing, I can say as a point of fact they are something other than a sheep in sheep’s clothing. Who would trust an organization that lies in their very name? (as in “Catholic” in NCR and “Life” in LSN)
C
commenter
Guest
Probably the worst offender is “Catholics for Choice”, a/k/a Catholics for a Free Choice, which lobbies for abortion rights. Remember there is no legal protection for the word “Catholic”.commenter:
If NCR is not approved, I did not know they weren’t, then they are in serious violation of Canon Law, represting themselves as a Catholic apostolate when they are not. While I cannot say they are a wolf in sheep’s clothing, I can say as a point of fact they are something other than a sheep in sheep’s clothing. Who would trust an organization that lies in their very name? (as in “Catholic” in NCR and “Life” in LSN)
The way “Catholic” organizations are “approved” is by establishing a relationship with their local bishop, even if they are a national ministry. Not every “approved” agency is necessarily all that good. Some publications and colleges got “approved” over a century ago, and have drifted somewhat since then.
The local diocese can remove the “Catholic” approved designation if it strays too far. I often wish they would do that more often, but I suppose they reason that keeping that publication or college as “approved” gives them a little influence over it; so an approved publication is limited in how far they can dissent.
Some very liberal or conservative ministries choose not to seek “approval” so they can be “independent”. OK, but let the reader exercise caution.
Some very good publications are not “approved” because they are Protestant. For instance, the writings of C. S. Lewis are not imprimatured, even though he is, for Catholics, far more reliable IMHO than many Catholic writers, and countless bishops strongly recommend him.
But by and large, I would recommend approved ministries rather than those not approved.
Last edited:
L
Luke6_37
Guest
The full name of NCR is “National Catholic Reporter | The Independent News Source” - so while you can legitimately accuse them of other things, I don’t think you can add lying about who they are to the list. They make it pretty clear that they are not representing themselves as a Roman Catholic apostate.commenter:
If NCR is not approved, I did not know they weren’t, then they are in serious violation of Canon Law, represting themselves as a Catholic apostolate when they are not. While I cannot say they are a wolf in sheep’s clothing, I can say as a point of fact they are something other than a sheep in sheep’s clothing. Who would trust an organization that lies in their very name? (as in “Catholic” in NCR and “Life” in LSN)
The Episcopal Church in my town also calls itself the Catholic Church, so the label isn’t exclusive. They have a female pastor, which really confuses people some times.
If ETWN represents itself as a Catholic apostate, then what are we to make of the latest brouhaha on Twitter about Antonio Spadaro S.J. retweeting the following message.
Spadaro is a close advisor to Pope Francis. Whether or not an interdict is necessary, this suggests that he agrees ETWN stepped over the line.
Last edited:
- Status