Father Michael Pfleger

[aimee]

I am. He hasn’t formally joined another religion, or he hasn’t renounced his faith to his local ordinary. Presto-still Catholic.

Many people here need to remember that Catholic means universal. The undercurrent here is often “If you don’t agree with MY view of Catholicism, you’re not Catholic.”

Nonsense.

John

Perhaps it is meant "If you don’t agree with the Churchs veiw on being Roman Catholic, why are you still catholic’

 

[John_Higgins]

aimee:

Perhaps it is meant "If you don’t agree with the Churchs veiw on being Roman Catholic, why are you still catholic’

Many (not you) would flatter themselves to think that is what they’re saying. Shoot, the hierarchy cannot even agree with each other on many issues, there is PLENTY of room for divergent opinions.

John

 

[aimee]

Many (not you) would flatter themselves to think that is what they’re saying. Shoot, the hierarchy cannot even agree with each other on many issues, there is PLENTY of room for divergent opinions.

John

ahhh Professeur Higgins…perhaps many have opinions …as long as they don’t advocate dissent from the teachings of our Faith…There is no reason to dissent for dissents sake…wouldn’t that make one a heretic

 

[melensdad]

I am. He hasn’t formally joined another religion, or he hasn’t renounced his faith to his local ordinary. Presto-still Catholic.

No he has not formally joined another church, nor has he formally renounced his faith. . . but he has stated he would leave the church and continue his ‘mission’ if forced to transfer.

What I see is a priest who honestly has done a great job of building a parish and holding it together when other inner city parishes have crumbled. St Sabina’s has grown and is a success. That said, it still is fair to question some of the motives around his publicity stunts that have created something of a cult of personality. It is still fair to question his words and actions when they are UN-Catholic. And it is, when you boil it all down, still fair to ask if he is still Catholic. Some will say yes, others will seriously wonder, and some will say no.

The success and good work at St Sabina’s in not in question. The faith espoused may be a legitimate question. And certainly the question that started this thread, *SHOULD FR PFLEGER BE PROSECUTED FOR HIS HATE SPEECH (threats against the store owner) * is still a valid question!

 

[chicago]

ahhh Professeur Higgins…perhaps many have opinions …as long as they don’t advocate dissent from the teachings of our Faith…There is no reason to dissent for dissents sake…wouldn’t that make one a heretic

Not necessarily. Typically, growth in understandings within the Church come not without a degree of uncomfortability at someone challenging the status quo. Karol Wotlyja’s entire philospohy, for example, was just that… and quite resisted initially (still is by more than a few). Still would be to a greater degree, I’m sure, had he not become pope and were the Church to have taken a decidedly more hardline traditional course over the past few decades.

So there is nothing necessarily wrong with what may seem like dissent if it is really just offering a healthy challenge and calling to self examination. It may prove right or wrong, but isn’t entirely uncalled for in and of itself.

And while his orthopractice can certainly be questioned, I see no where that Fr. Pfleger has formally advocated dissent from the teachings of the faith.

 

[chicago]

No he has not formally joined another church, nor has he formally renounced his faith. . . but he has stated he would leave the church and continue his ‘mission’ if forced to transfer.

What I see is a priest who honestly has done a great job of building a parish and holding it together when other inner city parishes have crumbled. St Sabina’s has grown and is a success. That said, it still is fair to question some of the motives around his publicity stunts that have created something of a cult of personality. It is still fair to question his words and actions when they are UN-Catholic. And it is, when you boil it all down, still fair to ask if he is still Catholic. Some will say yes, others will seriously wonder, and some will say no.

The success and good work at St Sabina’s in not in question. The faith espoused may be a legitimate question. And certainly the question that started this thread, *SHOULD FR PFLEGER BE PROSECUTED FOR HIS HATE SPEECH (threats against the store owner) * is still a valid question!

I think what is being missed is Fr. Pfleger’s personality and style. He engages in a lot of rhetoric, posturing, stirring of emotions. It has a purpose and an effect. But, at the end of the day, it is just “how he is”. As I mentioned earlier on the thread, anyone who recognizes this about him will probably chuckle at the idea that he was actually calling for murder. Rather, they’d quickly see that this is just how Mike goes about, calling people out and calling them to action. And so it is with the “threats” of leaving the Church, too.

So, in the long run, what we have here is a wonderful concoction which got all kinds of people riled up and talking. It served both sides well. A media/ publicity/ marketing crew couldn’t ask for anything more. For the same sort of stir was created in response by his adversaries. But taking a step back reveals how wild and humorous it all has been. And we ought to ask ourselves whether we are not just being used as pawns by the instigators in this scherade. For, in the long run, what are we seeking? Real reconciliation or just war?

 

[melensdad]

I think what is being missed is Fr. Pfleger’s personality and style. He engages in a lot of rhetoric, posturing, stirring of emotions. It has a purpose and an effect. But, at the end of the day, it is just “how he is”. As I mentioned earlier on the thread, anyone who recognizes this about him will probably chuckle at the idea that he was actually calling for murder.

I didn’t see Cardinal George “chuckling”

childofmary:

It is my understanding that when one threatens murder that can be a criminal offense and may include jail time.

Should he be arrested and/or go to jail?

It must be said that Father Pfleger is lying when he says that he didn’t know that “snuff” meant murder as any man who can complete seminary training knows basic English.

These simple questions still seem valid after 9 pages of discussion. If he was not a high profile priest, but just some guy who did it, he’d be arrested for inciting violence. Probably wouldn’t spend much time in jail (a few hours is likely), but he’d have been cuffed and escorted away in a black & white.

As for if he was lying when he said he didn’t know what the term means, yes, he was lying. Anyone over the age of 12 knows SNUFF OUT is to kill. The dictionary says it. The slang dictionary says it.

 

[aimee]

Not necessarily. Typically, growth in understandings within the Church come not without a degree of uncomfortability at someone challenging the status quo. Karol Wotlyja’s entire philospohy, for example, was just that… and quite resisted initially (still is by more than a few). Still would be to a greater degree, I’m sure, had he not become pope and were the Church to have taken a decidedly more hardline traditional course over the past few decades.

So there is nothing necessarily wrong with what may seem like dissent if it is really just offering a healthy challenge and calling to self examination. It may prove right or wrong, but isn’t entirely uncalled for in and of itself.

And while his orthopractice can certainly be questioned, I see no where that Fr. Pfleger has formally advocated dissent from the teachings of the faith.

Ahhh come on Chicago Fr P most definitely does…

Comparing the two…is more than a stretch

 

[chicago]

I didn’t see Cardinal George “chuckling”

He was forced into making a statement by all of the publicity. It is vague at best and filled with buck passing and hypotheticals.

These simple questions still seem valid after 9 pages of discussion. If he was not a high profile priest, but just some guy who did it, he’d be arrested for inciting violence. Probably wouldn’t spend much time in jail (a few hours is likely), but he’d have been cuffed and escorted away in a black & white.

If he was not a high profile priest, nobody would have ever noticed or known or paid it any heed whatsoever. This is only an issue because the gun rights lobby decided to counter attack and make something out of it, precisely because they knew it would draw attention seeing as how Fr. Pfleger is a high profile priest. That’s just the dynamic of how this sort of thing tends to work. It’s all about public posturing on both sides.

As for if he was lying when he said he didn’t know what the term means, yes, he was lying. Anyone over the age of 12 knows SNUFF OUT is to kill. The dictionary says it. The slang dictionary says it.

In listening to his original soliloquy I didn’t take the comments to mean that at all. Rather, I understood it to mean that they were going to expose them and bring them to an accountability. Yes, there would be consequences, was the implication, but not actual death, rather a stopping of what they saw as injustice and violence. A sort of self defense, I suppose one might say. It’s all about context.

 

[chicago]

Ahhh come on Chicago Fr P most definitely does…

Alright, then spell them out. Where has he taught against the faith? Orthopractice violatons, sure. Questioning, perhaps. Advocacy of actions which are at odds with Catholics of another opinion on certain things (like gun rights), sure… though well within his perogative of prudential judgement. But where has he denied the doctrines of faith?

Comparing the two…is more than a stretch

I don’t mean to offer a direct comparison, but merely a complementary example to show where two men (who might be at variance on some things) are both engaging in a sort of progressivism which challenges norms.

 

[Holly3278]

I don’t know. I just pray that God’s will is done.