Fr Richard Rohr on Oprah's Super Soul Sunday

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimR-OCDS
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Obviously I’m too obsessed with being concerned over what people say about Rohr, regardless of my opinions or experience with his writings and other materials.

I’m going to try giving up caring what others say about him, maybe for the rest of Lent. So I apologize if I’ve offended you; you may have your opinions back without my judgment. Go ahead and say what you will about Richard Rohr; I need to let go of this because if I become upset over what others say then I have lost the war anyway. My attempts to defend him as a man of value to “good Catholics” are not helping and I’m probably making it worse.

I’m pretty sure I could care less, and now I’m going to make my best attempt at doing just that. Sorry to hog the thread. I was hoping for a while it would go past 500. 😃
 
Mystical_Seeker said:
Racist comment. :mad:
Click to expand...
Without a doubt the singularly most uninformed reaction I have ever seen in my life.

Etymology

From the game of bridge in which spades is the highest suit.

Adverb

in spades (not comparable)
1.(idiomatic) In large quantities; to a high degree; without restraint; to excess.  [quotations ▼] Last year we harvested almost no potatoes, but this year we’re getting them in spades.

2.(idiomatic) Beyond doubt.

Synonyms[edit]
(in large quantities; to a high degree): abundantly, but good

Enjoy Rich and Oprah! You’re meant for each other - like a hand in glove! (Hopefully you’re familiar with how gloves fit hands - if it’s the right glove and the right hand).
 
Mystical_Seeker said:
Oh. So if he were a human being acting like that, maybe we could perceive that sort of behavior as challenging the establishment. Especially since, oh yes. He became a human being and when He was in that form, He challenged the establishment.
Click to expand...
He was and is God. That makes all the difference between him and a rebel or revolutionary or a social critic or reformer. He rebuked the scribes and pharisees from his divine authority,not from a merely human,worldly sense of justice or a malcontent desire to tell off and scare authorities.
You speak for your personal opinion because your ego likes to keep you above others and you choose to do this by falsely denying that they are even members of your religion. You don’t want to be seen as a member of the same group as him, just as the Pharisee thanked God for not making him like the tax collector.
Click to expand...
Or show me I’m wrong. Show me that the Church shares your opinion. Show me the part in the CCC where it says under what conditions a Catholic is no longer to be considered Catholic.
Click to expand...
The catechism doesn’t specify what incurs excommunication except abortion. But canon law says:

Can. 1364 §1. Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3.

vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2H.HTM
By your own definition, you should not be considered Catholic because you are right here in this paragraph denying what she teaches – and why? So you can maintain a house divided within the Church by calling others you don’t agree with “non-Catholic.”
Click to expand...
If someone teaches things that he knows are against Catholic doctrine,he is not a true Catholic. It’s not a matter of my disagreement with him,but his disagreement with Church doctrine.
This is what I call the More Catholic Than You syndrome. If Rohr is non-Catholic because of his heresy, then so are you.
Click to expand...
I don’t hold heretical opinions.
 
The catechism doesn’t specify what incurs excommunication except abortion. But canon law says:
Click to expand...
Can. 1364 §1. Without prejudice to the prescript of ⇒ can. 194, §1, n. 2, an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; in addition, a cleric can be punished with the penalties mentioned in ⇒ can. 1336, §1, nn. 1, 2, and 3.
Click to expand...
vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2H.HTM
Click to expand...
I don’t hold heretical opinions.
Click to expand...
For the reader:

The word “heresy” and “heretic” has been bounced around quite a bit on this thread, and it is true that canon law addresses heresy, and the above was extracted. However, the above was taken out of the context of the whole.

In our Church, the word “heresy” and “heretic” are taken very seriously, and Canon Law specifically lines out how and when those labels are used, and they are definitely not terms for lay people to use on each other; such use is essentially contrary to Canon Law.

It serves us well to remember these words:

New International Version Luke 6:42
How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when you yourself fail to see the plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

That said, I always assert that hypocrisy is the rule, rather than the exception, when it comes to our criticism of anyone. I am speaking from first-hand experience. In fact, I have experienced a lot of growth when I ask “When am I guilty of exactly what I am criticizing in the other?”. Chances are, in my criticism I have been inconsiderate to someone, and I am criticizing someone else of exactly that, being inconsiderate.🙂

So, yes, I have removed plenty of planks, and I have many more to remove, probably.😃

Join me, fellow Christians, in the endeavor!

God Bless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top