"I do wish Cardinal George would do something about Andrew Greeley".

  • Thread starter Thread starter John_Higgins
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
FiremanFrank:
And to chicago. Hmmm, what to say.

Well, if what my mom told was right - that if you can’t say anything nice about someone, then you shouldn’t say anything at all … (silence)…
Click to expand...
Awwww. I love you too Frank!

Hey, you should talk to Fr. Franzman sometime. He likes restoring old firetrucks.
 
chicago

Awwww. I love you too Frank!

Hey, you should talk to Fr. Franzman sometime. He likes restoring old firetrucks.
Click to expand...
Restore 'em ?

I can barely drive 'em ! :o

And if you ask my Lt. (I’m just a lowly blue-shirt private), I’m quite sure that he’ll tell you that I can’t them. 😦

P.S.
Our city has a few rigs in service that are old enough to be in NEED of a restoration.

Hmmm. Maybe THAT’S WHY I can’t drive them!
 
40.png
BobCatholic:
He should do what +Bruskewitz did.
Click to expand...
Go read canon law and tell me what Father Greeley has done that warrants excommunication. And no fair making stuff up , like he’s not permitted to say Mass in public.

John
 
40.png
chicago:
Well, for one, I think that insinuating Fr. Greeley’s positions are necessarily cancerous might be a bit of an overstatement. Distasteful to some, yes. Taken to an extreme at times. Sure. But he’s not a formal heretic or anything. Basically, he has written some racy books, engaged in promoting Democratic politics, and pushed serious thinking about ideas - frequently, though not always and necessarily, with a liberal bent. That isn’t necessarily all bad in the final equation, even if certain elements might be problematic.

But, in the larger scheme, one must ask if the proposed “treatment” will be effective in counteracting the problem, or if it will just exacerbate it. Sometimes the best course of action is merely to focus on what good can be done elsewhere and let the cancerous element come to it’s ultimate end on it’s own. It may, then, be much more effective to light a candle than to curse the darkness.
Click to expand...
I was implying heterodoxy was cancerous.
 
John Higgins

Frank,

If Stephen Brady of RCF told me the sun rose in the east, I’d seriuosly research the answer. He should have stuck to making pizzas.

John
Click to expand...
And I suppose that the Vatican has made a note of your efforts in the spiritual battlegrounds of the US?

No?

Well then John, perhaps you should consider taking over his old job of making pizzas …

(BTW - please make mine with extra cheese)
STEPHEN BRADY NAMED CATHOLIC LAYMAN OF THE YEAR
Click to expand...
The Immaculate Conception Chapter
Catholics United for the Faith
74 Carman Avenue
East Rockaway, NY 11563

We will honor Steven Brady, founder of the group Roman Catholic Faithful, as Catholic Layman of the Year. Mr. Brady’s national lay organization is openly confronting dissenters within the ecclesial bureaucracy in many American dioceses and his efforts have been noted in Rome.

Along with Dr. Thomas Droleskey, pro-life hero Joe Schiedler, and Dr. William Marra, Mr. Brady has organized a prayer vigil and conference, coincident with the November 10-12 meeting of the NCCB in Washington, D.C., to remind our shepherds that the Faith must be defended against attacks from within as well as from without the Church.
 
Frank,

I’ve read about Stephen Brady for a long time, possibly before you’d even heard of him. Yeah, he’s someone to emulate–get this from his own website:
40.png
RCF:
FIRST AMERICAN BISHOP NAMED BY BENEDICT XVI
IS FROM THE CORRUPT DIOCESE OF SPRINGFIELD, IL.

Pope appoints MSGR. KEVIN VANN as coadjutor bishop of Fort Worth, TX.

RCF PRESIDENT STEPHEN BRADY HAS CONTACTED MSGR. VANN, ACTING VICAR FOR PRIESTS IN THE DIOCESE OF SPRINGFIELD, IN THE PAST TO REPORT INCIDENTS OF CLERGY MISCONDUCT - ONLY TO RECEIVE NO CONSTRUCTIVE RESPONSE OR ACTION. STATED BRADY UPON HEARING THE NEWS, “I GUESS IT PAYS TO COOPERATE, KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT AND TURN A BLIND EYE TO THE IMMORALITY.”

PRESS INQUIRIES, PLEASE CLICK HERE.
Click to expand...
It’s nice to see how supportive Mr. Brady is of our new Pontiff and his selections for bishops. I’m sure he could do a MUCH better job appointing them.

Goodness, why doesn’t he give the guy a chance? Perhaps, just perhaps, Pope Benedict made this appointment for a reason. I’m sure, if he knew, he’d be sorry he didn’t ask Mr. Brady first.

John
 
First let me say that I do not care for Fr Greeley myself but I have not heard that he has been suspended by his bishop. His bishop has the power to suspend him and no allow him to act as a priest and most every bishop in the world would follow suit.

Swiss Guard said:
**First of all, it can’t be slander, since slander covers the spoken word. It would be libel. **

If what I stated is libel, Fr. Greeley would have to prove that I wrote this with malicious intent, which I have not done. Therefore, I am not guilty of libel, I may be incorrect in what I stated.

Please find out the meaining of a word before you start making wild accusations. Thank you in advance.
Click to expand...

I must say Swiss Guard, you come off as very abrasive and condescending. With that in mind I supply the following retort.

I believe it is you who must find out the meaning of words (spelling of meaning would be nice too) before you post becuase what you put forward is the legal understanding of libel. The actual meaning of the work libel is.
Main Entry: 1li·bel [%between%](javascript:popWin(’/cgi-bin/audio.pl?libel001.wav=libel’))
Pronunciation: 'lI-b&l
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, written declaration, from Middle French, from Latin *libellus, *diminutive of *liber *book
1 a : a written statement in which a plaintiff in certain courts sets forth the cause of action or the relief sought b archaic : a handbill especially attacking or defaming someone
2 a : a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression **b **(1) : a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt (2) : defamation of a person by written or representational means (3) : the publication of blasphemous, treasonable, seditious, or obscene writings or pictures (4) : the act, tort, or crime of publishing such a libel
Click to expand...
In this case, 2 a and b fit and do not require any malicious intent. You will also notice that the definition of libel also fits for the spoken word.
 
40.png
ByzCath:
First let me say that I do not care for Fr Greeley myself but I have not heard that he has been suspended by his bishop. His bishop has the power to suspend him and no allow him to act as a priest and most every bishop in the world would follow suit.

I must say Swiss Guard, you come off as very abrasive and condescending. With that in mind I supply the following retort.

I believe it is you who must find out the meaning of words (spelling of meaning would be nice too) before you post becuase what you put forward is the legal understanding of libel. The actual meaning of the work libel is.

Main Entry: 1li·bel
Pronunciation: 'lI-b&l
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, written declaration, from Middle French, from Latin *libellus, *diminutive of *liber *book
1 a : a written statement in which a plaintiff in certain courts sets forth the cause of action or the relief sought b archaic : a handbill especially attacking or defaming someone
2 a : a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression **b **(1) : a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt (2) : defamation of a person by written or representational means (3) : the publication of blasphemous, treasonable, seditious, or obscene writings or pictures (4) : the act, tort, or crime of publishing such a libel

In this case, 2 a and b fit and do not require any malicious intent. You will also notice that the definition of libel also fits for the spoken word.
Click to expand...
Thank you for pointing out my typo. I have a pet peeve about spelling.
I would disagree that 2a and 2b fit the definition of libel, since Fr. Greeley has certainly acted in ways that would cause the Church to forbid him to offer public Mass. Therefore, my comments were not unjust. I still have to look up to see if he has been forbidden to offer Mass in public.
As long as we’re on constructive criticism, may I say I find you to be very arrogant. You believe you are the final authority on every subject you post on this forum. You tend to talk at people rather than to them.
I apologize for offending you in any way. I don’t always realize when I’m being abrasive and condescending. I hope you take my comments in charity as I have taken yours in charity.
I would like to bury the hatchet and start over. While I criticized you, I also find your posts insightful, especially regarding the Byzantine rite. I have had the privelege to attend the Divine Liturgy and have developed a fondness for it. I hope to attend it more, as I have found a Ukrainian Byzantine church near my home. I would appreciate anything you can tell me about the Ukrainian Byzantine rite.
Pax tecum.
 
ByzCathIn this case, 2 a and b fit and do not require any malicious intent.
Click to expand...
Byz,

From the difinition that you supplied us with, #2 a and #2b (1) DO IN FACT REQUIRE that the action should have been done without just cause.
2 a : a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression b (1) : a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt
Click to expand...
How then John, can you make the subjective claim that Swiss Guard DID NOT have just cause? He believed what he had heard was true, and furthermore (by examining his posts here on this thread) it seems apparent that he was not intending to fabricate a lie or manipulate the truth so as to bring a bad light on Greeley.

***Case dismissed … ***
 
FiremanFrank said:
Byz,

From the difinition that you supplied us with, #2 a and #2b (1) DO IN FACT REQUIRE that the action should have been done without just cause.

How then John, can you make the subjective claim that Swiss Guard DID NOT have just cause? He believed what he had heard was true, and furthermore (by examining his posts here on this thread) it seems apparent that he was not intending to fabricate a lie or manipulate the truth so as to bring a bad light on Greeley.

***Case dismissed … ***
Click to expand...

**Thanks for your support 👍 **
 
John Higgins

Frank,
I’ve read about Stephen Brady for a long time, possibly before you’d even heard of him.
Click to expand...
John, please explain to me your purpose for having made the above statement. Because as it stands now, I see no worthwhile purpose or function for it’s use.
It’s nice to see how supportive Mr. Brady is of our new Pontiff and his selections for bishops. I’m sure he could do a MUCH better job appointing them.
Click to expand...
I love all our popes, but I live in one of the most spiritually corrupted dioceses in the nation. One where a past pope had appointed the bishop, and through whom I have personally witnessed multiple onslaughts against the faith in ALL AREAS of Church Teaching/Doctrine/Discipline.

Sp Papal appointments are just that John - appointments. As such, they do not guarantee that the people being appointed were necessarily good choices to begin with. Only the office of the Holy See is specifically guarded over by God. Any pope (including that of our beloved BXVI) does not enjoy though “infallibility from error” in his choice of bishops.

So with Mr. Brady then, we have a person who has personally dealt with some of these priests/bishops in a one-on-one basis, and from those experiences he has therefore made the comment that this was not a very good appointment.

Bully for him John! Bully for him!
Goodness, why doesn’t he give the guy a chance?
Click to expand...
Have you ever heard Mr. Brady speak John? I have, and after hearing how one uncaring bishop after another has lied to him directly and to his face - then I can easily understand how he has developed serious and justifiable doubts about those with whom he has already had personal communictions with.
Perhaps, just perhaps, Pope Benedict made this appointment for a reason.
Click to expand...
And according to the testimony of Mr. Brady …

Perhaps, just perhaps John - BXVI could have stood to made a better choice here.
 
40.png
FiremanFrank:
How then John, can you make the subjective claim that Swiss Guard DID NOT have just cause? He believed what he had heard was true, and furthermore (by examining his posts here on this thread) it seems apparent that he was not intending to fabricate a lie or manipulate the truth so as to bring a bad light on Greeley.
Click to expand...
Because we, as Christians have an obligation not to publish or cause to be published anything we do not KNOW to be true…

By saying “Fr. Andrew Greeley is already forbidden to celebrate Mass in public.”, he avers something not known to be true and implies that either Cardinal George (his ordinary) or Bishop Kicanas (Bishop where he lives in Tucson) has punished him for something he has done. And, until this is proven, even Father Greeley is innocent until proven guilty.

John
 
Frank,

I’m taking RCF out of this thread and leaving it to the original topic. I will shortly start an RCF thread. We can joust over there.

John
 
Swiss Guard said:
Thank you for pointing out my typo. I have a pet peeve about spelling.
Click to expand...

Anytime.
I would disagree that 2a and 2b fit the definition of libel, since Fr. Greeley has certainly acted in ways that would cause the Church to forbid him to offer public Mass. Therefore, my comments were not unjust. I still have to look up to see if he has been forbidden to offer Mass in public.
Click to expand...
Ah, I missed the “without just cause” line.

So I guess you are not even guilty of the everyday definition of slander.

And let me say again, please do not take my previous post as a defense for Fr Greeley.
As long as we’re on constructive criticism, may I say I find you to be very arrogant. You believe you are the final authority on every subject you post on this forum. You tend to talk at people rather than to them.
I apologize for offending you in any way. I don’t always realize when I’m being abrasive and condescending. I hope you take my comments in charity as I have taken yours in charity.
I would like to bury the hatchet and start over. While I criticized you, I also find your posts insightful, especially regarding the Byzantine rite. I have had the privelege to attend the Divine Liturgy and have developed a fondness for it. I hope to attend it more, as I have found a Ukrainian Byzantine church near my home. I would appreciate anything you can tell me about the Ukrainian Byzantine rite.
Pax tecum.
Click to expand...
I thank you for this and I have been thinking about our clashes as of late and I think I see something, I think we share a lot in common and we seem to be “talking” at each other rather than to each other.

I do not wish to hijack this thread so if you have any questions on the Divine Liturgy or anything Byzantine you can send me a PM or we could start a new thread.
 
Byz,

Thanks for your comments about libel/slander earlier on in the thread. I know we don’t always agree, but thanks for getting in there when I didn’t have a chance to.

John
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top