Is LifeSiteNews anti-Francis?

[I_trust]

I would point you to the response of Archbishop Charles J. Chaput to the La Civiltà Cattolica article. Snip below,

History is also full of unfortunate comments that really were said – as found, for example, in a recent Rome-based journal article that many have already rightly criticized. The article in question, La Civiltà Cattolica’s “Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholic Integralism in the USA: A Surprising Ecumenism,” is an exercise in dumbing down and inadequately presenting the nature of Catholic/evangelical cooperation on religious freedom and other key issues…
Dismissing today’s attacks on religious liberty as a “narrative of fear” — as the La Civiltà Cattolica author curiously describes it — might have made some sense 25 years ago. Now it sounds willfully ignorant. It also ignores the fact that America’s culture wars weren’t wanted, and weren’t started, by people faithful to constant Christian belief.

You said…

The article doesn’t say anything about orthodox Catholics. It talks about Catholics who view politics as extension of their faith and align themselves politically with Evangelical Fundamentalists

We as Catholics have a duty to allow our faith to shape our political beliefs and actions.If you like I can post authoritive Catholic documents. If our Catholic beliefs on abortion, traditional marraige and the family, religious freedom etc. align with Evangelical Christians then why is it a bad thing to work with them?. On this day when Billy Graham passed away, I hope that progressively political Catholics can start to put aside their acrimony towards our Christian brothers. The tenancy to characterize them as mean spirited is decidedly un-Christian.

By the way, the “evangelical fundamentalist” Billy Graham was a friend of both Pope John Paul II and archbishop Fulton J. Sheen.

 

[CradleRC58]

Ha, had me laughing as well !

The National Catholic Reporter

“In 1968, Kansas City Bishop Charles Herman Helmsing issued a statement condemning NCR, saying it had a “policy of crusading against the Church’s teachings,” a “poisonous character” and “disregard and denial of the most sacred values of our Catholic faith.”[11] Helmsing warned that NCR’s writers were likely guilty of heresy and subject to the automatic excommunication that incurs. Because the publication “does not reflect the teaching of the Church, but on the contrary, has openly and deliberately opposed this teaching,” he asked the editors to “drop the term ‘Catholic’ from their masthead” because “they deceive their Catholic readers and do a great disservice to ecumenism by … watering down Catholic teachings.”[11][12]…”

National Catholic Reporter - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I wouldn’t trust a single member of that outfit in a restroom even if they were wearing a muzzle.

 

[Luke6_37]

I would point you to the response of Archbishop Charles J. Chaput to the La Civiltà Cattolica article.

You said…

The article doesn’t say anything about orthodox Catholics. It talks about Catholics who view politics as extension of their faith and align themselves politically with Evangelical Fundamentalists

I think you and Bishop Chaput both fail to see the forest for the trees. Its unfortunate that the Bishop did not take the opportunity to reflect upon the bigger picture and larger cultural dynamics that Spadaro & Figueroa so accurately identify in their article.

Pope Francis is not interested in culture wars. He thinks they get in the way of proclaiming the gospel - and I agree. What he wants is a church that reaches out and builds bridges to the disenfranchised. That means less emphasis on doctrinal purity and more emphasis on mercy and compassion. That’s what I want too.

This is not the agenda of the Christian right - both Catholic and Evangelical. The Christian right is so politically invested in the culture wars that they would endorse and support a candidate as flawed as Donald Trump, a man who wants to build walls and ban Muslims. The difference with Pope Francis could not be more stark.

It has nothing to do with acrimony towards other Christian traditions. In fact, I feel great solidarity with those Evangelicals who feel the same way I do. Here is an example of what I mean:

Has 'Evangelical' Become Toxic?

What lines have to be crossed before the term 'evangelical' becomes too problematic to use?

www.thegospelcoalition.org

The problem is that the term “evangelical” itself has become deeply corrupted by its association with white Republican politics, culminating in the election of Donald Trump. We can cite David Bebbington’s quadrilateral (as Skeel does) of historic evangelical characteristics until we’re blue in the face, but that doesn’t change much about the common cultural perception of who an evangelical is. An “evangelical” in the pervasive pop stereotype today is a white Republican who watches Fox News and who considers himself/herself religious.

The stereotype he is talking about is stifling the gospel.

Billy Graham was an Evangelical, but I don’t believe he was a Fundamentalist and he certainly was not militant like Michael Voris.

 

[DeniseNY]

It’s absurdity certainly is comical.

 

[Feanor2]

Yes Lifesite news is very biased against the Pope and besides that not a good and reliable news source.

 

[Crocus]

The Commonweal piece is about the article in La Civiltà Cattolica. I only included it to provide some context on the magazine and its editor. The excerpt is from the article in La Civiltà Cattolica.

The article doesn’t say anything about orthodox Catholics. It talks about Catholics who view politics as extension of their faith and align themselves politically with Evangelical Fundamentalists. Their model of engagement with the political opposition is one of conflict rather than dialogue and accommodation. They even attack Pope Francis as “liberal” for emphasizing mercy rather than doctrinal purity.

The OP wanted to know why LifeSiteNews prints so many hit pieces on Pope Francis. I thought this was a good explanation.

This, is the kind of work we need to be doing, to properly assess all the information that comes at us. Good contribution as an answer to the OP.

(My bolding above.) I hold to an underlying trust, that the Church has always been moved by the Holy Spirit to emphasize different aspects of doctrine, as needed, at particular times during the last 2000 years. I have no doubt that during each of those times, people have felt discomfort even alienation. Our times are no different.

 

[Mark121359]

Fr. George Rutler has posted a counterpoint to the article you post from Fr. Antonio Spadaro titled “Evangelical Fundamentalism and Catholic Integralism.” (see below)

The Mathematical Innovations of Father Antonio Spadaro

Nearly fifty years go, my parish secretary, who was elderly even then, kept the parish accounts using an abacus. I gave her the latest kind of electric adding machine, which she used dutifully…

www.crisismagazine.com

 

[Imdaman]

The OP wanted to know why LifeSiteNews prints so many hit pieces on Pope Francis. I thought this was a good explanation.

Why do you continually put words into posts that are not there! The OP wanted to know no such thing.

 

[Imdaman]

I don’t know enough about La Civiita to comment but to Quote talk about Spadora and commonweal is the flip side of the coin. If one can not trust Lifesite than one can certainly not trust CW to bring you unbiased news.

Also you opinion that the readers and Editors only want to build walls is just another one of your lies and innuendo. purely opinion without facts. Are you sure you are not a russian bot trying to sow division!

 

[Imdaman]

Eh, I tend to be a truth-seeker. What is uncomftable is every Catholic who thinks he knows better than the magisterium – whether on the Left or Right. But its particularly awkward (to say the least) regarding those on the right who can’t stand a merciful, pastoral, simple approach like Pope Francis is taking the church.

This is a bit disingenuous don’t you think. I have met no one that has a problem with our Popes merciful, pastoral, simple approach. Anyone that i speak with (and this ins not coming from ultratrads by any stretch) has issues and worries with the many contradictions and confusion he spreads. Also with the many Ultra Liberal Cardinals, Bishops and Priests he has in many of his key institutions.

I’m all for Mercy, God knows I need it more than most. Trying to Change church teaching and dressing it up as development has people rightly concerned.

I only know of one Entitiy that revels in consternation and confusion of the faithful. It is neither merciful nor pastoral to do anything to please IT!

 

[Imdaman]

To illustrate the contrast in tone regarding the situation in China and why ETWN is being called out for sowing discord, read this article from the other side of the Catholic spectrum:

With China, Vatican diplomats must make the best of a bad situation | National Catholic Reporter

Times are certainly changing. National Catholic Reporter is now more in line with the Vatican than ETWN. The Holy Spirit does like to shake things up now and then!

Are you sure it is the HS doing the shaking?

 

[TheLittleLady]

Heck, it is not even news! Just really skewed opinions.

 

[Imdaman]

[/quote]
This is what Martin Luther said about reading scripture. He thought that anyone who was able to read should be able to interpret its “plain language”. Well, he was wrong.

Best to leave doctrinal debates it up to the bishops and theologians who have the knowledge and charism to discern the nuances of meaning of what was written in the past. The laity just don’t have the skill set to do it right.

As I have stated elsewhere. Those who profess to be orthodox Catholics have been acting very protestant lately.
[/quote]

Says you! more opinion and innuendo!

 

[Imdaman]

[/quote]
I think you and Bishop Chaput both fail to see the forest for the trees. Its unfortunate that the Bishop did not take the opportunity to reflect upon the bigger picture and larger cultural dynamics that Spadaro & Figueroa so accurately identify in their article.

Pope Francis is not interested in culture wars. He thinks they get in the way of proclaiming the gospel - and I agree. What he wants is a church that reaches out and builds bridges to the disenfranchised. That means less emphasis on doctrinal purity and more emphasis on mercy and compassion. That’s what I want too.

This is not the agenda of the Christian right - both Catholic and Evangelical. The Christian right is so politically invested in the culture wars that they would endorse and support a candidate as flawed as Donald Trump, a man who wants to build walls and ban Muslims. The difference with Pope Francis could not be more stark.

It has nothing to do with acrimony towards other Christian traditions. In fact, I feel great solidarity with those Evangelicals who feel the same way I do. Here is an example of what I mean:

Has 'Evangelical' Become Toxic?

What lines have to be crossed before the term 'evangelical' becomes too problematic to use?

www.thegospelcoalition.org

The problem is that the term “evangelical” itself has become deeply corrupted by its association with white Republican politics, culminating in the election of Donald Trump. We can cite David Bebbington’s quadrilateral (as Skeel does) of historic evangelical characteristics until we’re blue in the face, but that doesn’t change much about the common cultural perception of who an evangelical is. An “evangelical” in the pervasive pop stereotype today is a white Republican who watches Fox News and who considers himself/herself religious.

The stereotype he is talking about is stifling the gospel.

Billy Graham was an Evangelical, but I don’t believe he was a Fundamentalist and he certainly was not militant like Michael Voris.
[/quote]

As always you continue to sterotype. It is easy for PF to work like this. But here on the ground floor of where Good meets evil it is not that easy. To look the other way when the LGBTQ community is beating at the door of your childs school is fool hardy. To pretend that a man living in a adulteress relationship is fine helps no one. To back a candidate that hates the Church and wants mass slaughter of the innocent is wrong on so many levels. Trump was elected by the Not HIlary vote. He has suprisingly done more for unborn chidren, Religious freedom and Family than any president or world leader in the last 50 years. You don’t like Trump, we get it. Trump was the better of the two evils. This is clear to even you!

 

[Imdaman]

Heck, it is not even news! Just really skewed opinions.

That is not true, They use thier own words to report on real events. This is to get people emotionally invested in the story. Are you saying the ambulance that picked up the women at PP and took her to the hospital did not happen? Maybe you should read some of their stories and try to pick them apart if you think its all lies. They report on prolife issues that the Main stream will not touch.

 

[Luke6_37]

At least you recognize there is a range. Some folks on this forum think their point is the only place where the Church exists and any deviation from it is pure heresy.

Just out of curiosity, what article currently posted on the frontpage of the NCR website represents a distortion of Catholicism?

 

[Luke6_37]

Luke6_37:

To illustrate the contrast in tone regarding the situation in China and why ETWN is being called out for sowing discord, read this article from the other side of the Catholic spectrum:

With China, Vatican diplomats must make the best of a bad situation | National Catholic Reporter

Times are certainly changing. National Catholic Reporter is now more in line with the Vatican than ETWN. The Holy Spirit does like to shake things up now and then!

Are you sure it is the HS doing the shaking?

Of course. Either you believe the Holy Spirit guides the Church or you cease to be Catholic.

 

[Imdaman]

So the HS guides the pope and bishops all the time and in whatever they do? They can’t make mistakes or mislead the faithful?

 

[Luke6_37]

So the HS guides the pope and bishops all the time and in whatever they do? They can’t make mistakes or mislead the faithful?

The Holy Spirit guides the Church.

How, precisely, does the Holy Spirit guide the Church? Apologetics

I would like to know, in very precise terms, how the Holy Spirit guides the Church. Whether it be an infallible declaration on faith or morals or just a general guidance, I want to know how. What exactly does God “do” (?) to prevent errors from being made? My question is not about infallibility, understand. I would like to know the specifics of that word “guide.” Thanks!

 

[Imdaman]

Ah yes wise choice to not answer my questions directly. But supply amorphous information that both of us agree on while pretending it objectively answer the questions I asked. possible evidence of your Russian Identity is emerging with your inability to discern the English language.