O
OhioBob
Guest
The truth! How refreshing.
I agree completely. Thanks for the prayer suggestions.
Blessings.
- Status
I agree completely. Thanks for the prayer suggestions.
Blessings.
O
OhioBob
Guest
A rather extreme point of view, don’t you think?
D
deogratias
Guest
“As refered to in Michael Rose’s book Goodbye, Good Men the Phoenix diocese was an example of a top-down theologicaly “liberal” community that resulted in an epidemic of sexual abuse cases and cover ups and largely gay priesthood (Bishop O’Brien’s aide was an open and avowed lesbian who was quoted by Phoenix New Times as considering the marriage of Joseph and Blessed Mary as a type of pederastic act).”
Lion - while I said I totally concur with your assessment of Bishop Olmsted being a wonderful Bishop, I can’t help but wonder if your statement about his aid would be considered detraction or calumny.
"
Detraction
A term for those sins commonly referred to as uncharitable talk; it is unjustly depriving another of his good name behind his back, either by calumny (which see) or by saying that which is true; in the latter case there is no right to publish what is true against him without just cause if it is not publicly known, for every man has a right to his good reputation so long as he can retain it. But for a just cause (e.g., the public good, or to protect the innocent) the secret sin of another may be made known. The degree of seriousness of detraction is in accordance with the harm done to the person detracted and the malice of the speaker; being a sin against justice as well as charity, it leaves an obligation of making restitution as far as possible. He who by listening to detraction encourages it actively or passively, sins equally with the detractor." Encylopedia of the Catholic Bible
"Calumny–detraction by lies–is committed in different ways. While the lie constituting calumny can be a straightforward assertion, lacking and known to lack any basis in fact, often it is less blatant, but no less calumnious, and all the more effective in sullying reputation: something false is not asserted unqualifiedly but proposed as a suspicion (“I think the boss is taking kickbacks”); or something likely is asserted unqualifiedly (“The Admiral’s wife has been cheating on him”); or something with some basis in fact is exaggerated " Living a Christian Life, Chapter 7.
I would hardly put much stock in anything the New Times published for one thing
Lion - while I said I totally concur with your assessment of Bishop Olmsted being a wonderful Bishop, I can’t help but wonder if your statement about his aid would be considered detraction or calumny.
"
Detraction
A term for those sins commonly referred to as uncharitable talk; it is unjustly depriving another of his good name behind his back, either by calumny (which see) or by saying that which is true; in the latter case there is no right to publish what is true against him without just cause if it is not publicly known, for every man has a right to his good reputation so long as he can retain it. But for a just cause (e.g., the public good, or to protect the innocent) the secret sin of another may be made known. The degree of seriousness of detraction is in accordance with the harm done to the person detracted and the malice of the speaker; being a sin against justice as well as charity, it leaves an obligation of making restitution as far as possible. He who by listening to detraction encourages it actively or passively, sins equally with the detractor." Encylopedia of the Catholic Bible
"Calumny–detraction by lies–is committed in different ways. While the lie constituting calumny can be a straightforward assertion, lacking and known to lack any basis in fact, often it is less blatant, but no less calumnious, and all the more effective in sullying reputation: something false is not asserted unqualifiedly but proposed as a suspicion (“I think the boss is taking kickbacks”); or something likely is asserted unqualifiedly (“The Admiral’s wife has been cheating on him”); or something with some basis in fact is exaggerated " Living a Christian Life, Chapter 7.
I would hardly put much stock in anything the New Times published for one thing
F
Fortiterinre
Guest
I had an opportunity to talk very openly and privately with a very well known “conservative” bishop about the American bishops as a group and what their inter-relationships were like. I was edified by his response–that all of the Bishops are very well educated, and that even when very strong, disagreement was very civil and reminiscent of how philosopher and orators in antiquity debated. It is not at all like members of a modern political party–very restrained and sometimes slow-moving. The blackest of black sheep might not fall within his description, but my perception was that even a disappointing bishop is more orthodox and well-intentioned than we in our frustration might think, so I trust them.
F
Faithful_2_Rome
Guest
Well…seeing that only SIX out of 183 Bishops in June voted for DENYING communion to those public servants who are for abortion and vote that way…I dont have much trust in them…it also bugs me that Cardinal George was NOT one of the BRAVE and TRUE of the 6 who properly interpreted the churches documents on this issue…but yet he correctly told priests to deny communion to heretics of rainbow sash…a mixed message…as usual.
S
Sherlock
Guest
It’s worth remembering that Arius was a bishop.
I don’t trust the US Bishops to tell the truth. However, I’m not going to go so far as to say, as another poster has, that “the American Bishops have already proven to the whole world that they cannot be trusted”. I guess I just have to weigh what they say against the teachings of the Church. There are good bishops, and there are rotten bishops… I will always respect the office, and pray that all who hold that office will be truthful and effective stewards. But they are fallible humans, as the example of Arius shows.
My bishop is Harry Flynn in St. Paul and Minneapolis. I think he is a politician bishop----more interested in consensus than in truth. I don’t think that he teaches falsehood so much as he is afraid of correcting falsehood. However, since I can be a cowardly Catholic too, I pray for him and other bishops.
I don’t trust the US Bishops to tell the truth. However, I’m not going to go so far as to say, as another poster has, that “the American Bishops have already proven to the whole world that they cannot be trusted”. I guess I just have to weigh what they say against the teachings of the Church. There are good bishops, and there are rotten bishops… I will always respect the office, and pray that all who hold that office will be truthful and effective stewards. But they are fallible humans, as the example of Arius shows.
My bishop is Harry Flynn in St. Paul and Minneapolis. I think he is a politician bishop----more interested in consensus than in truth. I don’t think that he teaches falsehood so much as he is afraid of correcting falsehood. However, since I can be a cowardly Catholic too, I pray for him and other bishops.
A
achaean
Guest
Not at all. I’ve got one acronym for the American Bishops…RICO.A rather extreme point of view, don’t you think?
~achaean
D
DrCat
Guest
Extremely good (and important) point.
Most of us include the Holy Father in out prayers, but how many of us remember our bishops?
Unlike Poisson, I live in an American territory. But like him, we have our own Episcopal Conference and (as far as I know) do not belong to the USCCB. I trust the Episcopal Conference (Puerto Rico Conference of Catholic Bishops) to lead me to Heaven. I believe they provide us with the true teachings of Christ as taught by the Catholic Church.
At the same time, I was raised in the Archdiocese of St. Louis, and, for this reason, pay attention to what is happening in the American dioceses. As a group, I will trust them until they prove to be untrustworthy.
As for my own bishop, I consider him to be orthodox and am quite happy with him.
John
B
Bonnie
Guest
That describes our Bishop to a T (& the last sentence describes me, too
) He’s a good administrator & politition - a lousy shepherd. Which I told him, tho more diplomatically than that. In all the new guidelines about abusive priests, there was not one word about being holy & spiritual, or even marginally Christian.
E
Emmaus
Guest
Do you trust the American Catholic Laity to follow the true teachings of the Catholic Church?
I suspect that such a poll would have very similar result to this one on the bishops.
I suspect that such a poll would have very similar result to this one on the bishops.
J
Joe65436
Guest
Wow, looking at the results of this poll, I guess I have been living in a closet. I didn’t realize American Bishops’ credability is so low.
P
Polish753
Guest
In the U.S. we have two distinct Catholic Churches. I would describe one as the AM (American) Catholic Church which does its own thing in opposition to Rome. We can readilly see which diocese is part of the AM church by its disregard for Rome. I do not trust the bishops of these dioceses. The other Catholic Church is the one loyal to Rome and obeys its rules and regulations and takes the Holy father’s encyclicals and teachings seriously. I trust the bishops of these dioceses. Let’s see how the Catholic dioceses respond to the Holy Father’s latest teachings about the Eucharist and the liturgy, and we will see which bishops can be trusted.
D
deogratias
Guest
Perhaps you are right and please feel free to begin such a poll in a different thread.
L
Lion_of_Narnia
Guest
Perhaps, but the article “What Was He Thinking?” was researched with the cooperation of that aide–and not one word of protest in regards to her orientation or the quote. I think we can, for now, take it as a fact
C
CathyR
Guest
C
CathyR
Guest
As far as the recent decision made regarding politicians who openly and actively go against the church’s teaching (in this case, the gravity of this is a mortal sin), the American Bishops are right in line with Canon Law and have every right to make that statement. I think it’s collective statements like these that are going to engender the trust of the American flock, and present to all Americans that we are not afriad to speak the Truth and stand by our convictions even in the midst of our own sin.
L
Lonevoice
Guest
Well, our Bishop Sheehan here in ABQ is great; he was appointed by the Holy Father to be the “temporary” Bishop in the Diocese of Phoenix while they went through that aforementioned difficulty last year, and he took a hard stand during our troubles with molestation charges ten years ago. Zero tolerance right from the get-go, and cleaned up the problem quickly. Their (the offending priests) duties were ended right there, and they went into therapy, and in some cases were prosecuted, depending on the view that law enforcement took.
O
oldfogey
Guest
I trust my bishop, because he has thus far been faithful to the teachings of the Church and to Rome. But I do NOT trust the USCCB, because as a whole I think it is lukewarm, exemplifies the worst aspects of governance by committee, and many times takes the easy road.
The USCCB deserves our prayers, but it is not uncharitable to point to its failings. Not to criticize it is the uncharitable thing to do.
The USCCB deserves our prayers, but it is not uncharitable to point to its failings. Not to criticize it is the uncharitable thing to do.
D
deogratias
Guest
One thing to keep in mind is that the USCCB really has no power. They meet, they make recommendations by committee (which never worked in business either) and the majority, right or wrong, comes out with the recommendation.
It is your own Bishop who has any power that a Bishop may have and it is to his leadership you must look. If his leadership is in error, however, we do have recourse now to bring it to the attention of the Holy See, so long as we do it with charity and an eye on improvement and not out of any mean-spirited dislike for the Bishop.
It is your own Bishop who has any power that a Bishop may have and it is to his leadership you must look. If his leadership is in error, however, we do have recourse now to bring it to the attention of the Holy See, so long as we do it with charity and an eye on improvement and not out of any mean-spirited dislike for the Bishop.
O
oldfogey
Guest
Although an individual bishop does have ultimate authority in his diocese, the USCCB does have power.
Refer back to the topic of the poll. At its last public meeting, the USCCB was informed that no catechetical course used at the high school level can be relied upon. So, my answer to the poll was no. My son is in catholic high school, and by their own admission the bishops are allowing the use of materials they admit are unfit to instruct the faith. Could an individual bishop rectify this in his diocese? Yes, with the proper effort. Should he? Emphatically yes-the instruction of his flock is one of the main roles of the bishop.
To my way of thinking, this should be a priority issue, a showstopper, not allowed to continue. But I fear my son will pass through high school using bad materials. It will be years before changes are made, because it will be done through the USCCB, at their pace.
So, yes, they do have de facto power, and no, I don’t trust them to convey the teachings of the Church.
Refer back to the topic of the poll. At its last public meeting, the USCCB was informed that no catechetical course used at the high school level can be relied upon. So, my answer to the poll was no. My son is in catholic high school, and by their own admission the bishops are allowing the use of materials they admit are unfit to instruct the faith. Could an individual bishop rectify this in his diocese? Yes, with the proper effort. Should he? Emphatically yes-the instruction of his flock is one of the main roles of the bishop.
To my way of thinking, this should be a priority issue, a showstopper, not allowed to continue. But I fear my son will pass through high school using bad materials. It will be years before changes are made, because it will be done through the USCCB, at their pace.
So, yes, they do have de facto power, and no, I don’t trust them to convey the teachings of the Church.
- Status