Episcopal Clergy Tear gassed

  • Thread starter Thread starter Inquisitor85
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It would be genuinely concerning to me to be in any church wherein I would be likely to have such a difficult time aligning myself with the thoughts of the Bishop, who is the supreme authority within the diocese. The Bishop is the authority, and as a layman to question him is sort of a big deal. The flippancy with which I see the teaching and opinion of Catholic Bishops’ authority questioned in the US might never cease to amaze me.
 
Last edited:
PatrickC1982 said:
It would be genuinely concerning to me to be in any church wherein I would be likely to have such a difficult time aligning myself with the thoughts of the Bishop, who is the supreme authority within the diocese. The Bishop is the authority, and as a layman to question him is sort of a big deal. The flippancy with which I see the teaching and opinion of Catholic Bishops’ authority questioned on the US might never cease to amaze me.
Click to expand...
Ah but you are Orthodox. There is more of an emphasis on bishops so perhaps you are being influenced by that.

What’s more it’s not like you’re going to change the minds of people here by saying your bishop says this! Especially not after the sex abuse scandals.
 
There’s an emphasis on Bishops in the Catholic Church likewise, but I see an amazing flippancy in disregarding them and accusing them of every manner of irreligious behavior from small things to downright heresy on these forums. So your opinion is that after the sex abuse scandals of your own church your Bishops can not be trusted to speak on matters or faith and morals?
 
Last edited:
PatrickC1982 said:
So your opinion is that after the sex abuse scandals of your own church your Bishops can not be trusted to speak on matters or faith and morals?
Click to expand...
No, I didn’t say that. I’m simply saying after the sex abuse scandals bishops weren’t really looked at the same again trust-wise. In addition as I’m sure you know we do have a problem with many clergy pushing ideas that are odds with Scripture and traditions.
 
How do you sit in a Church where the second highest authority next to the Pope can’t even be trusted to make a simple moral pronouncement on the actions happening within his diocese? I can’t even imagine what your archbishop said being construed as contrasting with Scripture or traditions. To not like your Bishop’s pronouncement doesn’t equal a genuine complaint against him. It strikes me as an utter lack of humility to not even be able to accept as simple a statement as he issued, to say nothing of the opinion of the Episcopal Bishop, who we can agree to accord a certain amount of respect whether we agree on the validity of her Orders- not a question we need to make in this instance.
 
And the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch from Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
 
T’would settle all this quite quickly. T’is my own Church that of Antioch- I shall gather the grenade at once!
 
PatrickC1982 said:
How do you sit in a Church where the second highest authority next to the Pope can’t even be trusted to make a simple moral pronouncement on the actions happening within his diocese? I can’t even imagine what your archbishop said being construed as contrasting with Scripture or traditions.
Click to expand...
I think you might be confused as to where I’m located. I’m in Michigan under the Archdiocese of Detroit. I’m not in DC. If a bishop told me his views on a political situation I’d listen respectfully. I wouldn’t necessarily agree, especially if he went against the social doctrine of the Church. The only moral pronouncement my Archbishop has made on this situation is that racism is bad and still exists. That’s not news.
 
I might take a step back before making any judgement on the pronouncements of a Bishop within my own Church. There is a perfectly good chance I disagree with some Bishop within the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America on SOMETHING- but this feels like the sort of thing you back off from and give the Bishop the respect they are due on the subject. A little humility, right? He speaks for his diocese and makes a point which might make some people feel uncomfortable- well, Jesus himself made people uncomfortable at times. We are meant to feel conflicted at times. You don’t belong only to country or God- they can conflict. When they do, as I see it in this case- better to let the words of the Bishop rest.
 
PatrickC1982 said:
When they do, as I see it in this case- better to let the words of the Bishop rest.
Click to expand...
I’ll go by the guidance of my spiritual director and a Franciscan monk who used to post here. But thanks for the advice.
 
Last edited:
Rasoleil said:
Peaceful protesters were attacked…
Click to expand...
You mean the peaceful protesters who had stashed bricks and bats in the area? The ones who were hurling rocks at the police? Who had been burning structures?

Where I’m from rioters and looters get shot, and sane people don’t blame their intended victims for it or make purile excuses for their rioting and looting.

I got gassed during the Miami Beach riots at the '72 Republican Convention. I was just an innocent bystander, but I’ve never been so juevenile that I blamed the cops for it.
 
Last edited:
Poet said:
Who gave you the ability to look into hearts? Did God appoint you the judge of other men’s hearts?
Click to expand...
Seriously? Did you not here his Rose Garden statements, when he said, he was going to pay respects? Did you see any paying of respects? God did give me the ability to see and hear.

“Let him with eyes see; Let him with ears hear”.
 
PatrickC1982 said:
The Bishop is the authority, and as a layman to question him is sort of a big deal. The flippancy with which I see the teaching and opinion of Catholic Bishops’ authority questioned in the US might never cease to amaze me.
Click to expand...
No Bishop has absolute authority in all things. An attitude of blind submission to his every personal opinion is foolish, and what’s amazing is to see reservations about or disagreement with his personal opinion mischaracterized as flippancy about his legitimate authority.
 
Last edited:
Fact: excessive force was used on Americans in DC (there is video of the assault) by the police so that the President could take a picture in front of a Church holding a Bible.

This is shameless nonsense and no one should defend it. Full stop.
 
Rasoleil said:
Trump pulled this stunt purely for the photo op. This could have been done much earlier in the day. The area beween the White House & the church could have been restricted earlier that day, before the crowds grew.The stunt began before he even went to the church. The Rose Garden Airing of Grievances, declaring war on the American people, bringing in 9 military vehicles full of armed military troops, and that was just the beginning of the entire stunt and show. It hadn’t even been close to curfew yet and Trump had ordred the vicinity of Lafayette Park and St. John’s Church cleared. Why before curfew when he knew all along that he was going to the church? Peaceful protesters were attacked ( tear gas, flash bombs, smoke grenades, batons, shields, helicopters hovering dangerously low overhead trying to disperse protesters etc.). People can argue the minutae, but the intent was the same: fear and intimidation, and all part of the show. Innocent, peaceful protestors pushed away violently so that he could complete that particular stunt before the church. The stunt before the church was just the last act of the play he put on for his base. Everyone saw through this charade
Does a loving, caring, compassionate Chrisitian do all of the above?
What’s in his heart? Emptiness. A very dark, cold place.
Click to expand...
Does a loving, caring, compassionate Christian sit in such judgment on another human being, claiming to know his thoughts, his mind, his heart?

Part of what I begin to find frightening is the growing inability for some people to even consider that there might be reasons sometimes other than that the person they have grown to hate is just bad. For instance: Could it be that millions of Americans are living in terror, their cities and businesses being burned, threats of violence, people dying, and many in Minneapolis now left with no stores to buy food at and no public transport to get there even if the stores were open. These people are going to STARVE to death unless others bring food to them. An occupied home was set on fire and the firefighters had to fight their way through these rioters deliberately blocking them to save the child inside.

Given all this, maybe JUST MAYBE the American people needed to see strong leadership and an acknowledgment of God.

Declaring war on the American people? Or could it be he’s declaring war on the terrorists who are turning our cities into war zones, nearly burning a child to death, and leaving millions with their businesses destroyed, their livelihoods destroyed, and no way to get food.

Do you realize these people WANT someone to come in and declare war on these terrorists destroying our cities? What’s your answer? What are you doing to HELP these people who no longer have access to food, who are living in fear of these thugs coming to their street, whose businesses (and that means their ability to feed their children) have been smashed and destroyed?
 
Just a thought: As I read reports that ‘peaceful protesters’ were tear gassed, my first question is: what does ‘peaceful protester’ mean in this case?

Maybe they really were.

But one news reporter actually stood in front of a building in the process of burning down and told the camera things were mostly peaceful.

Is it any wonder if some people doubt the media’s definitions?

This isn’t about whether they were or weren’t peaceful so much as a statement that the media has become untrustworthy and we should ALL be looking at multiple sources before believing everything that’s said to us.
 
I’m not defending anything. I’m saying that we have heard one side of the story in a highly politically charged environment, 200ft from the White House (basically the most political city in the US) when many parties have reason to use the facts towards their own predetermined ends. If one is seeking the truth, immediately listening to partisan sources as the absolute truth, without considering the facts from both sides, is not the most responsible approach.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top