G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Comcast runs EWTN as basic cable through most of its areas.
First I heard of it. I assumed it was basic cable everywhere in the US with Comcast. Is Comcast the best or better cable service there?
Peace
- Status
First I heard of it. I assumed it was basic cable everywhere in the US with Comcast. Is Comcast the best or better cable service there?
Peace
P
PatriceA
Guest
I feel the same way about Joan Bekonvic. I signed up for her Women of Grace magazine and I was inundated with requests for charity contributions, throught snail mail and even over the phone.
P
PatriceA
Guest
Its not part of the basic cable package in my area. I had to pay extra for the bundle its included in.
Comcast isn’t the best, I don’t think there is one. But I haven’t had too many complaints with the company.
F
FromTheAshes777
Guest
really? EWTN was dropped from basic packages because of protests? I’ve never heard this before, have a source?
F
FromTheAshes777
Guest
really? EWTN was dropped from basic packages because of protests? I’ve never heard this before, have a source?
A
ATeutonicKnight
Guest
Were you perhaps praying at 2:30? At 2:30 it’s completely different people. At 8:30 it is always Mother Angelica and the Nuns.
Why do you find it a problem that they are praying for those two very important things? Everyone seems to have forgotten just how important it is to pray for the reparation of sinners and the conversion of Russia through the Immaculate Heart of Mary. It is good that EWTN has not forgotten this.
P
puzzleannie
Guest
no I don’t get the point
you did not give any examples of how these shows are too secular
you did not given any examples about how any of these people meet your description in OP
we get you either don’t like or don’t get 2 shows.
just listing the personalities or the shows does not give us a clue as to the basis for your rant
if you don’t want to donate nobody is forcing you so where did that come from?
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
A
Alexander_Roman
Guest
But he was a High Church Episcopalian, was he not? I know some Anglicans like that who even accept the Pope while remaining Anglican. One such Anglo-Catholic priest I know invited me to attend a Mass for a deceased friend - he had the Rosary prior to Mass (on his knees) and everyone was mostly on their knees throughout. He aspersed everyone with holy water as well and had a deacon behind him with a subdeacon behind him on three different steps before the altar (ad oriente, of course).
He commemorated the pope and then the Archbishop of Canterbury . . .
I guess in time they struggle with why they continue to be not in the Catholic Church . . .
Alex
M
Melchior_1
Guest
Hahn was a staunch Calvinist/Reformer, if I recall correctly. The Church is the “whore of Babylon” type of beliefs.
S
SteveGC
Guest
Yup. And former Presbyterian minister.
D
daCatholicGuard
Guest
Greetings all,
I would not say EWTN has gotten more secular; however, I would say there have been changes to a more liberal or fundamentalist stance. This can be evidenced in the current programming. For example, shows like “Crossing the Goal” comes across more like it belongs on the PTL network than EWTN.
There have also been a “vanishing” of programs that were unapologetically Catholic; such as The Roman Forum with Dr. Marra; all of Fr. Rutler’s early series, (I also enjoy his current series, “Christ in the City”)- but you should have seen some of his earlier programs- WOW! And there are quite a few other series that have been lost to the years that I, unfortunately, cannot recall the titles of after 20 years.
I still watch EWTN but I don’t think the network has been the same since Mother Angelica suffered that aneurism and others, (I believe more liberal or less orthodox- however you want to say it), took over control of the network. In fact, the only shows I watch are Sunday Night Live with Fr. Groeshel; Fr. Rutler’s “Christ in the City” and the vintage programs with Mother Angelica- the rest of them leave me cold.
Oremus pro invicem,
Sean C. :knight2:
I would not say EWTN has gotten more secular; however, I would say there have been changes to a more liberal or fundamentalist stance. This can be evidenced in the current programming. For example, shows like “Crossing the Goal” comes across more like it belongs on the PTL network than EWTN.
There have also been a “vanishing” of programs that were unapologetically Catholic; such as The Roman Forum with Dr. Marra; all of Fr. Rutler’s early series, (I also enjoy his current series, “Christ in the City”)- but you should have seen some of his earlier programs- WOW! And there are quite a few other series that have been lost to the years that I, unfortunately, cannot recall the titles of after 20 years.
I still watch EWTN but I don’t think the network has been the same since Mother Angelica suffered that aneurism and others, (I believe more liberal or less orthodox- however you want to say it), took over control of the network. In fact, the only shows I watch are Sunday Night Live with Fr. Groeshel; Fr. Rutler’s “Christ in the City” and the vintage programs with Mother Angelica- the rest of them leave me cold.
Oremus pro invicem,
Sean C. :knight2:
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
I don’t care for the news of Raymond Arrroyo but like GK Chesterton. dont like crossing the goal. dont like life on the Rock. dont like that show which a woman is teaching Scriptures to man. there are others shows also that i dont care to watch. dont like how people going there to sell books.
It seems that many are getting in ship and have not much to offer.
K
kitkatty
Guest
I think Alex might have been referring to Fr. Rutler since someone else had mentioned him in a previous post.
A
ATeutonicKnight
Guest
I don’t understand everyone’s aggression to Life On The Rock. It is a wonderful show for teens, and is one of the few shows that the Franciscan Missionaries of the Eternal Word are actually on. Just because you might be a little old to enjoy Father Mark Mary interviewing good Catholics and cracking jokes with them does not mean you have to tear apart the show completely. I think you all should show a little shame for hating the only Catholic television network, which is completely orthodox and only shows orthodox programs.
T
TrueLight
Guest
J
JReducation
Guest
There are a few realities here that must be understood. When EWTN began, there were very few religious programs on the network. Much of the time there were some good family movies. Gradually, Mother met different people whom she liked and invited them to come and do some programs for her. It was never her intention to keep the programming only to religious and clergy. She always had a vision of a place for strong secular Catholics. She knew from the start that the Franciscan family could not and woiuld not allow EWTN to remain religious (as in part of a religious order). It’s contrary to the Rule of St. Francis. What is allowed by the Rule is to get something like this started and hand it over to seculars. That’s why Francis of Assisi founded an autonomous secular order. They had their way of life and they had an apostolic presence in the Church. The secular evangelist goes back to 1221. Mother was actually keeping with Tradition, as the say on Fiddler on the Roof.
Selling books on EWTN serves several purposes. First, it’s a way of letting Catholics know what’s available out there for us. Second, it is better to put money to feed a Catholic scholar than an atheist. Third, EWTN gets part of the proceeds from the book sales. Which is more income for them than if they had commercials. Commercials have an overhead.
Then you have the whole array of other services such as the Internet, radio, videos on YouTube, the News Paper they own (NCR).
Let’s not forget that EWTN’s programming is in several hundred countries and has to be translated. Translations are not cheap. They are not done in AL. They are usually done outside. The network has to pay companies who do this professionally, just like CNN, FOX, MSNBC and some of the other international companies.
To be in the red 800K for an organization that has so much going on and so many expenses is a dream come true for someone like Turner. It’s catastrophic for EWTN, because they don’t have the advertising the Turner and Times get. If we want EWTN with cereal and make-up commercials, then we won’t have to worry about the 800K. I am sure that some companies would love to put their commercials on EWTN. Just think of the size of it’s audience and the age span.
You may be just a tad bit harsh, don’t you think?
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
You lost me here. What is wrong with a woman teaching Scripture to a man? Have you visited many Pontifical Universities and schools of theology? We have many women who are biblical scholars teaching in seminaries around the world, sitting on biblical commissions in the Vatican, running chanceries and serving on the rota as jurists.
Selling books on EWTN serves several purposes. First, it’s a way of letting Catholics know what’s available out there for us. Second, it is better to put money to feed a Catholic scholar than an atheist. Third, EWTN gets part of the proceeds from the book sales. Which is more income for them than if they had commercials. Commercials have an overhead.
They’re supposed to be a stage prop. Br. Leo is a theologian and a teacher. He writes for children. The show targets kids. Imagine Sesame Street without kids or Romper Room.
Chesterton is one of the great modern apologists. It may be that you do not understand his thinking. Dale is an expert on Chesterton apologetics. He interprets his work very well.
This show was created to reach men in the “macho camp.” Those of us who are not part of that culture are not going to enjoy it. Those who are, love it, because it presents faith and morals in a language and tone of voice that keeps their attention.
Now,you’re being unfair. They do very little filming on EWTN. Most of those programs are filmed by organization at their sites, with their money and they pay for the sets. EWTN has to buy many of those programs. Women of Grace, for example, is an organization out of the Diocese of Palm Beach. Sunday Night Live with Fr. Benedict is out of NY and what little EWTN pays for it goes to feed people on the streets of NY. Some programs are imported from Europe. They’re not cheap. They recently had the life of St. John Bosco. That’s an Italian movie. EWTN did not produce it. It had to buy the rights to air it.
Then you have the whole array of other services such as the Internet, radio, videos on YouTube, the News Paper they own (NCR).
Let’s not forget that EWTN’s programming is in several hundred countries and has to be translated. Translations are not cheap. They are not done in AL. They are usually done outside. The network has to pay companies who do this professionally, just like CNN, FOX, MSNBC and some of the other international companies.
To be in the red 800K for an organization that has so much going on and so many expenses is a dream come true for someone like Turner. It’s catastrophic for EWTN, because they don’t have the advertising the Turner and Times get. If we want EWTN with cereal and make-up commercials, then we won’t have to worry about the 800K. I am sure that some companies would love to put their commercials on EWTN. Just think of the size of it’s audience and the age span.
You may be just a tad bit harsh, don’t you think?
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
A
Allegra
Guest
That caught me off guard as well. I’m assuming that he was describing a certain show that he dislikes that happens to have a woman teaching scripture to a man, and that he is not saying that he doesn’t like the idea of women teaching scripture in general.
T
TrueLight
Guest
I think he means the latter not the former
D
daCatholicGuard
Guest
Hello Br. JR,
You lost me on a couple of points.
- How can you be a strong secular Catholic? This is schizophrenic, (I know schizophrenia does not technically mean a split personality; however, that is how the term is applied here), in nature; you’re either secular or your Catholic; a house divided against itself cannot stand.
- I do not recall Mother Angelica EVER commenting on how she was going to hand the station over to secularists; in fact, I remember the exact opposite. I remember on more than one occasion when she remarked in her live show, (that aired Tuesdays and Wednesdays), “she would burn the place to the ground,” before she would let the likes of Turner, (which whom she had a long running rivalry with for years), or anyone else get control of the place.
I find no basis for this argument.
Oremus pro invicem,
Sean C. :knight2:
- Status