EWTN A Network Gone Wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dizzy_dave
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Boy, these numbers are rising…hopefully it will get to 144,000 (the remnant) who choose to love EWTN as the station rocks! I have it on all the time in my car and it drives my hubby crazy! He asks me if I do not get enough of it…and I said NO! 😃
 
40.png
Shoshana:
Boy, these numbers are rising…hopefully it will get to 144,000 (the remnant) who choose to love EWTN as the station rocks! I have it on all the time in my car and it drives my hubby crazy! He asks me if I do not get enough of it…and I said NO! 😃
I don’t blame you.
 
#15 (I think)… We love EWTN, purchased Sirrius radio for that reason alone as I drive alot in my work, and watch it for hours on tv.
 
I’ll claim 16. My wife and I really enjoy “The Journey Home”. I also enjoy “Web of Faith”. In addition, one of the former assistant pastors at my parish, Fr. Peter Mitchell was a commentator on World Youth Day.

God Bless!! 👍
 
I followed the link to the description of the book, and the author seems to be making a very clear point, that is not being well addressed here.

And, that is, that the ownership and - or control was transferred to a lay group. No one has offered an alternative to this, so at this point, I would have to say that is a “fact.”

He alleges that this transfer was made to keep the network out of the control of the USCCB or any sub-branch of that. That statement, too, has not yet been refuted here. I would think that the current management would have done exactly that, for that reason, to keep the network as faithful to the vision of Mother Angelica. And, let’s face it, she complained a lot about the liberalism she saw around her in the churches.

I think the article in the original link also asserts that the network is somehow denigrating or undermining the rosary. If that’s what the guy is saying, then my facts don’t agree with his facts. There seems to be a high commitment to keep those rosary tapes replaying all day. I think they are getting a little stale but they keep them rolling along.

I haven’t read the book so I don’t know if Ferrara has this observation: I think there was a tremendous cult following of Mother Angelica on the network. And, the point is, the producers seemed to be killing the goose that layed the golden eggs – you know what I mean? I didn’t see what in business is called “succession planning.” I didn’t see that any of the nuns was been groomed as second in command, so to speak. And, even none of the priests (MFVA) was being groomed for that spot.

Right now, Fr. Francis Mary has a big presence with one of the prime-time programs, but he’s not in Mother Angelica’s chair. And, his message is not Mother Angelica’s message.

The network still has nothing better to offer than replays on Tuesday nights of Mother Angelica’s bible reflections. I have to give her a lot of credit for one thing I like – looking at the bible verses slowly and up close. She certainly did that with ease and poise.

The only thing that makes me uncomfortable about that, is, is the emphasis not still just on Mother Angelica (the cult, again) or is it on the Bible, where it should be? I still have this sense that Mother Angelica is still the moneymaker, still brings home the bread, and, in 25 years of course, there was very little thought to the future (without M.A.).
 
That post was a bit long, but one more thought: I thought it was bad judgment to keep Mother Angelica on the air even when she had her first stroke.

Yes, so many folks were concerned about her and all that, I can understand.

But, let me put it this way: would want your grandmother of 78 to be in a stressful situation like being live on TV shortly after having a stroke? You can tell that the doctors were ill-advised to send her back on TV, because she just had more problems. (don’t overlook that she had to come in 50 or 60 miles from Hanceville)

Putting M. Angelica on the air with an eye patch should have been a BIG clue that she was too ill to be there. What was the reasoning? Oh, she’s like the Pope and she’ll never give up? she had something to prove about her determination?

Again, I see too much “cult” behavior surrounding Mother Angelica here, rather than a central concern for the gospel.

Unless the Lord comes first, Mother Angelica will go to her reward, and then you can be sure the “cause” of her sainthood will be an endless theme on the network. You can see that coming. The network will be transformed into the “eternal cause television network.” The blitz of the campaign will be stunning, I am sure. Oh, and she will be a doctor of the Church, too. no superlative will be overlooked.
 
Its funny you should use the word cult. In regards to hagiology, Its been the cult of the saint that helps the saint become a saint. That might not be the most common way of phrasing it now, but a saint’s cult plays a role in doing what needs to be done for a saint to become a saint. The public cult of a saint must be appoved by the Church. One important reason why is it is too keep the saint from becoming bigger than God. If Mother Angelica’s to be cult will go overboard it’ll be surpressed.

I don’t think EWTN was ran exactly like your normal TV network. From the sounds of it it seemed like they just got an idea that seemed good and just put it on. I suppose they just figured once one person is gone another will come up. Frankly if they where worried about the future they would have never started the network. But becuase there really isn’t too many other Catholic networks out there, it’s audence is going to be rather forgiving and will stick with it until something hits. I mean whats your alternative. Just put on diverse programming and you’ll get almost everyone who wants to watch a Catholic network something.
 
40.png
jman507:
Its funny you should use the word cult. In regards to hagiology, Its been the cult of the saint that helps the saint become a saint. That might not be the most common way of phrasing it now, but a saint’s cult plays a role in doing what needs to be done for a saint to become a saint. The public cult of a saint must be appoved by the Church. One important reason why is it is too keep the saint from becoming bigger than God. If Mother Angelica’s to be cult will go overboard it’ll be surpressed.

… becuase there really isn’t too many other Catholic networks out there, it’s audence is going to be rather forgiving and will stick with it until something hits. I mean whats your alternative.
The subject of this thread is a book about alleged errancy at EWTN. I’ve tried to stick to that subject. But, it involves looking at the conduct and decisions of Mother Angelica. Sure, EWTN is what it is because many people had a personal liking of her. And, building on that, the network tries to put out a lot of Catholic messages.

My thesis is that EWTN management now has the inevitable task of re-defining itself without the day-to-day involvement of its founder. I only donated a few dollars to EWTN once, over ten years ago. I was overwhelmed by the cult following of EWTN and its message that she personally has done everything to make EWTN what it is.

I happen to think that perhaps God had something to do with it (remember “God”?) and a few people who sent in money “between their gas and electric bills” also had something to do with it.

I think it’s hilarious to say that the “cult is making her a saint.” Again, what about God? Anybody could have done what she did, if it was God’s providence. Why not put the emphasis on God where it belongs, and say ‘thank God’ that He sent us somebody like Mother Angelica to do His work?

Quo vadis, EWTN?
 
40.png
Crumpy:
The subject of this thread is a book about alleged errancy at EWTN. I’ve tried to stick to that subject. But, it involves looking at the conduct and decisions of Mother Angelica. Sure, EWTN is what it is because many people had a personal liking of her. And, building on that, the network tries to put out a lot of Catholic messages.

My thesis is that EWTN management now has the inevitable task of re-defining itself without the day-to-day involvement of its founder. I only donated a few dollars to EWTN once, over ten years ago. I was overwhelmed by the cult following of EWTN and its message that she personally has done everything to make EWTN what it is.

I happen to think that perhaps God had something to do with it (remember “God”?) and a few people who sent in money “between their gas and electric bills” also had something to do with it.

I think it’s hilarious to say that the “cult is making her a saint.” Again, what about God? Anybody could have done what she did, if it was God’s providence. Why not put the emphasis on God where it belongs, and say ‘thank God’ that He sent us somebody like Mother Angelica to do His work?

Quo vadis, EWTN?
Oh now, when you make objections to Mother Angelica it seems your making objections to the whole idea of the Church proclaiming people saints.

I did not say the “the cult is making her a saint.” I said “the cult helps to make a saint a saint” – atleast one as proclaimed by the Church. If the person is a saint in heaven but not proclaimed on Earth it doesn’t much matter to the saint in heaven I’m sure. When I say the cult helps make the saint, they typically are the ones who ask for the investigation and are the ones who do the hard work of the investigation. They play their role, I did not say others do not. Others involved in making a saint, include the person in question, the Pope, God.

The other thing that strikes me, is how one could claim to be apart of “Mother Angelica’s cult” and not also understand that God was not also involved. Nearly every time she talked about EWTN and the shrine being built she gave credit to God. Its almost so obvious that one might neglect to mention it when talking about Mother Angelic and her leading the building of EWTN. But thats really nothing new, that happens all the time. Like when a football team wins a championship, it tends to be a quarterback, receiver or running back that gets all the credit, but everyone knows there is actually a lot of people involved with the winning of a championship. But that guy speaks for all.
 
Raymond Arroyo’s book also pointed out that the network was transferred to a lay group. Archbishop Chaput was on the Board of Directors and he opposed the idea, but it was put into place over his objections. There was an auditor from the Vatican, a bishop from Puerto Rico, who basically told Mother Angelica that because she built the network without the express written consent of her bishop, that she overstepped her bounds as a cloistered nun, and could have had the entire operation taken over by the USCCB. Mother Angelica never wanted any of her nuns to operate or work at the network - that is one of the roles of the Franciscan Missionaries of the Eternal Word.

Mother Angelica had several run-ins with bishops. Among them were bishop Lynch of St. Petersburg, Florida, who was absent when Terri Schiavo died of starvation. We all know about the battle with Mahony. Cardinal Keeler of Baltimore was unahppy with Mother’s criticism of the female actor playing the part of Christ in the World Youth Day in Denver in 1993. Bishop Lynch had to throw his weight around and order the televised ad orientam Masses ended, when there was no reason to do so.

None of this makes EWTN bad, or even mediocre. They are limited by their budget as to what they can produce and televise. They run an English language network and a Spanish language network both TV and radio and they do it all with donations.
 
40.png
dizzy_dave:
Today in the mail I got a newspaper that I never even subscribed to called “Catholic Family News” This is an extreme Traditional Catholic newspaper and on the front page is a story advertising a new book called “EWTN A Network Gone Wrong” by Christopher Ferrara. The newspaper is full of stories about Pope St. Pius X, and how bad Pope John Paul II was, how bad Vatican II was, how bad Pope Benedict XVI new Encyclical is, how bad EWTN is. I was hoping the Society of St. Pius X and the Catholic church would reunite and heal that schism but after reading this I don’t ever see that happening. What is your opinion of these types of papers and how do we keep from getting this junk? I e-mailed them and said I wanted removed from all their mailing lists. I’m sure these stories are on their website. Do a google search for Catholic Family News and you’ll find it.
I caught wind of the book and CFN through a email sent by OLRL.ORG. It was an interview with the author of this book done by CFN Magazine(Fr. Gruner publication!!). I immediately withdrew my support of OLRL.ORG as it supports CFN, Fatima Crusader Magazine(another Fr. Gruner Pub.), and the SSPX concept. The interview knocked me out of my seat! It was full of venomous comments and accusations leveled against EWTN. The only people I have heard strongly criticize EWTN seem to be those on the extreme ends of the Catholic spectrum.(for instance, Anti-Vatican II & Pro-Choice Catholics). This interview with the author speaks for itself- its fruits( or lack of) are apparent.
The fruits of EWTN are huge in terms of thousands of conversions to the Roman Catholic Church as well as the impact on the faithful! I believe it is the strongest and best evangelization tool the church has in USA, if not the world! The expansion of programming over the past years has been incredible as well as extremely informative. I can’t imagine missing the coverage from the Vatican , the coverage of JPII and Mother Theresa, the USA election issues, key interviews, and religious instruction provided by Fr. Corapi, Markus Grodi, and many other outstanding priests and laity, etc. etc… I will try to submit an additional post of the interview with Mike Ferrara by CFN.

God Bless all at EWTN!!!
 
Clarify the issue- the interview between CFN and author, M. Ferrara, part 1

EWTN: VEHICLE OF NEO-MODERNISM

An Interview with Christopher Ferrara on his new book:
EWTN: A NETWORK GONE WRONG

CFN: What prompted you to write this book?

CF: The constant reports and complaints I had heard, and verified by my own viewing and other research, concerning EWTN’s content, which especially since the departure of Mother Angelica, has become in many respects utterly modernist by every objective historical standard of Roman Catholicism. There is no doubt in my mind that St. Pius X, or any other of the great pre-Conciliar Popes, would scream with horror at much of what EWTN broadcasts to the world as authentic Roman Catholicism. And yet for millions of Catholics EWTN is the Catholic Faith. This network has more influence today than the Vatican itself. And that is a serious problem in the Church.

CFN: The first thing I thought when reading the manuscript is that this book is long overdue.

CF: Exactly. That is the comment I have almost uniformly received from people - priests, religious and even former EWTN celebrities - who had heard I was writing this book. They were glad to hear that someone had finally taken the trouble to document the many strange and heterodox elements of EWTN’s content.

CFN: Could you give a summary of what the book contains?

CF: A sketch of the post-Vatican II Modernist uprising in the Church, followed by lots of documentation on how EWTN is promoting it - unwittingly or not. And, finally, a discussion of what Catholics can do about the crisis in the Church in general and EWTN in particular.

CFN: What do you mean when you say that EWTN promotes “moderate” Modernism.

CF: I mean a form of modernism - quite subtle really - that undermines the Faith beneath an outward appearance of piety, and even in combination with many good and praiseworthy elements in EWTN’s programming. For example, an image of the Blessed Sacrament in a monstrance accompanied by pounding rock music, or a so-called “conservative” Novus Ordo Mass that embodies every element demanded by the Protestant “reformers” in the 16th Century, or to give another example, good and pious statements about Jesus and Mary by a Jewish “convert” who says the Church is too Gentile for Jews and that Jews must have their own “Hebrew Catholic” community if they are to convert in any numbers.

CFN: You say in your book that EWTN effectively denies the defined, infallible Catholic doctrine “Outside the Church there is no salvation”.

CF: Most certainly. On EWTN shows conversion to the Faith is discussed entirely in terms of a “fullness” or “closer spiritual walk with Jesus” than people already have in Protestantism, and never in terms of conversion being a matter of spiritual life and death for the members of Protestant and schismatic “churches.” The Catholic Church is presented as the Cadillac of religions, while the others are still perfectly serviceable Buicks or Fords. And a number of EWTN “experts,” including Fr. Benedict Groeschel, openly declare essentially that the practitioners of all religions - all “good people,” really - are saved. The Church is presented as desirable, but not necessary for salvation. The sacraments are presented as promoting a spiritual “fullness,” but not as the means of salvation - directly contrary to the anathema of Trent. As Trent specifically declared in an infallible manner: let anyone who says the Sacraments instituted by Our Lord merely nourish Faith, but are not necessary for salvation, be anathema - that is accursed and expelled from the Church. But the Faith promoted by EWTN disregards every anathema of the Church concerning the objective necessity of membership in the Church for salvation. That is the ecumenical mindset. And EWTN promotes it to the hilt.

CFN: You also point out that they effectively deny the need for dissidents to return to the Catholic Church.

CF: On EWTN there are no longer any non-Catholic “dissidents,” as the Popes constantly referred to them before Vatican II. There are only “brother Christians” of all stripes who are never told they are risking eternal damnation by remaining outside the Church. No, they are told only that they can have a “fullness of truth” in the Church. Even Jews are told they can have a “fullness of the covenant.” What covenant? They reject the only covenant that operates now: the covenant of the Blood of Christ.

CFN: What about the “Cool” Catholicism they promote?

CF: By that I mean EWTN’s lame and offensive attempt to combine Catholicism with pounding rock music, crude slang, slovenly dress, and even such things as a Las Vegas lounge act broadcast on Christmas Eve, hosted by Raymond Arroyo.
 
Part 2, interview continued by CFN with Mike Ferrara, author of this book:

CFN: They also promote the alleged superiority of the New Mass over the Latin Tridentine Mass?

CF: EWTN’s “theological committee” is opposed to any restoration of the traditional Mass, which they view as impossible and undesirable.

CFN: You have an entire chapter entitled “Promoting Paganism and Sacrilege”.

CF: Yes, EWTN has happily promoted the World Youth Day “Catholic Woodstocks” you have exposed, has denied and then tried to cover up the recent sacrilege in the Fatima Shrine, where Hindus prayed to Vishnu, and has reported as if they were the most solemn of Catholic liturgies the late Pope’s bizarre and scandalous “inculturated” Masses, including a pagan purification ritual in Mexico in which the Pope was rubbed down with herbs by women on camera.

CFN: One of the most fascinating chapters in the book is “The Return of the Judaizers”. Could you comment on this?

CF: This is simply unbelievable. EWTN is actively - aggressively - promoting an organization, the Association of Hebrew Catholics, that is calling for the creation of a “Hebrew Catholic” canonical community in which Jews would be separately baptized in the Church, because, as they put it, over the past 1800 years the Church has become “sociologically Gentile,” and there is no place in the Church for Jews to pursue their “collective vocation.” EWTN has also promoted the Catholic celebration of Jewish holidays, and Seder suppers and “Hebrew Masses” on the Jewish New Year in Catholic parishes.

CFN: EWTN has various “experts” to whom Catholics telephone or e-mail asking for guidance. Often times, the answers given are less than Catholic. Could you give us a few examples of EWTN “experts” wayward advice?

CF: That’s almost the whole book. But here are some: Jews need not convert if they “honestly cannot” accept Christ. Married couples must decide every month and even every day whether they are going to conceive a child or avoid conception by using “Natural Family Planning.” Marital relations are a preparation for eternal beatitude, and without engaging in them, a couple will not be ready to stand before God after death. (I am not making this up!) The conversion of Russia does not mean embracing Catholicism. Catholics should celebrate Jewish holidays, including Passover, to learn about their “Jewish roots.” There is nothing wrong with Communion in the hand, and if we find it scandalous, the fault is ours. It goes on for more than 150 pages in the book.

CFN: What do you have to say to those who defend EWTN because of the allegedly good programs it broadcasts.

CF: Even the most sumptuous feast should be avoided if it contains a single drop of cyanide. There are many drops of cyanide in EWTN’s content. That is the essence of “moderate” modernism: getting people to swallow the bad with the good under the pretense that the whole poisonous mixture is sound Catholicism. They end up spiritually dead, or at least gravely ill.

CFN: What do you hope this book achieves?

CF: Making people aware that what EWTN presents to the world as the “gold standard” of Roman Catholicism would have earned the condemnation of any Pope before Vatican II. I hope to warn Catholics not to accept a “sliding scale” of Catholicism much like that we have seen in politics, where today’s “conservative” would have been viewed as a liberal savage only 40 years ago. That is how Modernism destroys the Faith, by the gradual erosion of the very meaning of the Faith. My research has confirmed beyond doubt that, whatever the subjective intentions of its directors and celebrities - and I would never presume to judge them here or in the book - by any objective standard EWTN is a modernist enterprise promoting liturgical, doctrinal and even moral corruption. Catholics must oppose it, and demand that it reform itself or shut down.

The above interview is reprinted from the March 2006 issue of Catholic Family News (cfnews.org/cfn.htm)).
Judge for yourself!!
 
I received that issue of Catholic Family News. I glanced at it, then decided to chuck it into the recycle pile.

I guess we should evangelize using Ferrara-like tactics - specifically,
Believe and practice exactly as we do or you’re going to hell! God listens to nobody but US!

Yeah, that will work. Really well.
 
I thank God for EWTN, a few years ago when I struggled in my Faith and was considering joining the Evangelical movement, Mother Angelica, Father Benedict, Father Corapi, Father Mitch, and many others brought me back to my senses. Thank God for this great network. Mother Angelica will be a Saint someday I believe.
 
Today in the mail I got a newspaper that I never even subscribed to called “Catholic Family News” This is an extreme Traditional Catholic newspaper and on the front page is a story advertising a new book called “EWTN A Network Gone Wrong” by Christopher Ferrara. The newspaper is full of stories about Pope St. Pius X, and how bad Pope John Paul II was, how bad Vatican II was, how bad Pope Benedict XVI new Encyclical is, how bad EWTN is. I was hoping the Society of St. Pius X and the Catholic church would reunite and heal that schism but after reading this I don’t ever see that happening. What is your opinion of these types of papers and how do we keep from getting this junk? I e-mailed them and said I wanted removed from all their mailing lists. I’m sure these stories are on their website. Do a google search for Catrholic Family News and you’ll find it.
Just because they call themselves Catholic doesn’t mean they are. The Catholic Register (RAG) prints heresies. Send them back unopened they will get the hint. Just put return to sender on it and give it to your post man.
GB:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top