P
PJD1987
Guest
Mr. Allen describes the Holy Father’s actions as revolutionary. Thoughts?
catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=10481
catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=10481
I think Allen is saying that the closure of the abbey is one example of an ongoing “quiet revolution.”Mr. Allen describes the Holy Father’s actions as revolutionary.
ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic/benedicts-quiet-revolution-and-check-catholic-health-careThe essence of it is this: it’s the end of the “by their fruits, you shall know them” logic that once translated into a free pass, or at least a strong benefit of the doubt, for superstar clerics and high-profile groups charged with misconduct. Once upon a time, the working assumption in officialdom often was that if someone is doing great good for the church, then allegations of sexual or financial impropriety against them were likely bogus, and taking them too seriously risked encouraging the enemies of the faith
Without great fanfare, Benedict XVI has made it clear that today a new rule applies. No matter how accomplished a person or institution may be, if they’re also involved in what the pontiff once memorably called the “filth” in the church, they’re not beyond reach…
Actually, he has never said that, although it’s a widespread enough misquoting of what he has said.He has often said that we need a smaller but more orthodox Church.
I don’t understand… why do you think John Allen is attacking the pope?Don’t we all believe that Pope Benedict has enough problems to deal with?Should this Allen be pointing the finger at the Pope and making an issue out of this?people often talk about all the uphevel taking place in the Church.How is a Pope suppose to carry out his job when he’s attacked by his own members?
I don’t think this particular article illustrates it well if you’re not familiar with NCR and his previous writings, I don’t believe Allen is thrilled about the Holy Father, he wanted a liberal pope in the 2005 conclave.I don’t understand… why do you think John Allen is attacking the pope?
Allen is a Vatican reporter, and part of his job involves analysis of events to put them into context. I don’t think the article he wrote was hostile to Pope Benedict. Indeed, I would think that many Catholics in this forum would welcome the changes that Allen is pointing to.
I agree with you. I don’t think the article was hostile at all and, in fact, I do support the changes that Mr. Allen refers to.I don’t understand… why do you think John Allen is attacking the pope?
Allen is a Vatican reporter, and part of his job involves analysis of events to put them into context. I don’t think the article he wrote was hostile to Pope Benedict. Indeed, I would think that many Catholics in this forum would welcome the changes that Allen is pointing to.
It doesn’t matter what Mr. Allen wanted in 2005. This particular article is not offensive toward the Pope at all and, in my view, is supportive of what the Pope is doing. I am familiar with NCR and recognize a liberal or progressive bent in its reporting. That doesn’t mean the paper isn’t valuable or doesn’t have particular insights to offer concerning the Church. To critique this particular article based on what Mr. Allen may have written or thought in the past does not give credit to what he is writing now and is unfair. Take the article at face value and let it go at that.I don’t think this particular article illustrates it well if you’re not familiar with NCR and his previous writings, I don’t believe Allen is thrilled about the Holy Father, he wanted a liberal pope in the 2005 conclave.
Not quite sure what you are saying here. Do you mean that priests are religious should not watch movies or listen to opera? What about a game of golf or, like Pope John Paul II, enjoy skiing and hiking once in a while? These are all earthly entertainments, aren’t they? Heck, I even presume that the good Lord himself, since he spent so much time with fishermen, cast a net into the lake for fun and relaxation every now and then. I think your statement is too sweeping.Priests and religious are set aside to God. Earthly entertainment, no matter how successful and lucrative is, is not for them. This does not mean that earthly entertainment is wrong in itself, only that priests and religious are not to be involved in that.
There is nothing revolutionary in this. The said fact is that many churches became entertainment centers, as an easy way to draw people, and destroy the sacred character of the church for the success. The Church always taught that this is wrong.
I totally agree with your sentiment and did say the article doesn’t illustrate it well, I was merely juxtaposing what he has written before and what he wrote now and simply giving my opinion that I don’t think he is particularly happy with it all. However, we’re all entitled to our opinions, to me what he wrote in 2005 does matter given that it sheds some insight to what he writes now and is interesting to wonder, given his previous writing, what he thinks of the current goings on in the Church and to read his writing through that lens. That’s all I was saying, it wasn’t about this particular article, though I used it to make a larger point. Thank you for your thoughts!It doesn’t matter what Mr. Allen wanted in 2005. This particular article is not offensive toward the Pope at all and, in my view, is supportive of what the Pope is doing. I am familiar with NCR and recognize a liberal or progressive bent in its reporting. That doesn’t mean the paper isn’t valuable or doesn’t have particular insights to offer concerning the Church. To critique this particular article based on what Mr. Allen may have written or thought in the past does not give credit to what he is writing now and is unfair. Take the article at face value and let it go at that.
No kidding. A religious priest I know told us (not in a homily, it was outside of MassNot quite sure what you are saying here. Do you mean that priests are religious should not watch movies or listen to opera? What about a game of golf or, like Pope John Paul II, enjoy skiing and hiking once in a while? These are all earthly entertainments, aren’t they? Heck, I even presume that the good Lord himself, since he spent so much time with fishermen, cast a net into the lake for fun and relaxation every now and then. I think your statement is too sweeping.
Wait a minute. Let’s not get carried away here. There are some forms of entertainment that are out of our reach, because they are too expensive or because they are not appropriate for a religious or a priest. However, there are many forms of entertainment. One doesn’t wipe them out with one stroke.Priests and religious are set aside to God. Earthly entertainment, no matter how successful and lucrative is, is not for them. This does not mean that earthly entertainment is wrong in itself, only that priests and religious are not to be involved in that.
I find this extremely difficult to believe. Just because he PREDICTED a more liberal pope (I’d love to see his list of papbile) does not mean he WANTED one. And Cardinal Ratzinger was NOT the only conservative Cardinal at the time.I don’t think this particular article illustrates it well if you’re not familiar with NCR and his previous writings, I don’t believe Allen is thrilled about the Holy Father, he wanted a liberal pope in the 2005 conclave.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, I thank you for your thoughts. Mr. Allens articles from the 2005 conclave is still available online, I don’t have the link handy at the moment, but itsavailable if you’re interested.I find this extremely difficult to believe. Just because he PREDICTED a more liberal pope (I’d love to see his list of papbile) does not mean he WANTED one. And Cardinal Ratzinger was NOT the only conservative Cardinal at the time.
I have heard no less than Father Zuhlsdorf as well as many others speak very well of Mr. Allen and his writings, and they are far more “conservative” than I am on many matters. I find it unlikely that Mr. Allen is not an orthodox Catholic.
Actually, I’ve been looking and can’t find them. NCR’s archives appear to go back no further than 2006 for his blog ncronline.org/blogs/john-l-allen-jr?page=23 and 2010 for his column: ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic?page=6Everyone is entitled to their opinion, I thank you for your thoughts. Mr. Allens articles from the 2005 conclave is still available online, I don’t have the link handy at the moment, but itsavailable if you’re interested.
. 2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury. He becomes guilty:
- of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
- of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;
- of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
Here is the link of Mr. Allen’s Papabile list for you:Actually, I’ve been looking and can’t find them. NCR’s archives appear to go back no further than 2006 for his blog ncronline.org/blogs/john-l-allen-jr?page=23 and 2010 for his column: ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic?page=6
When a charge like that is leveled against someone, we should be ready to back it up, lest we fall into sins of detraction, rash judgment, or calumny.
Here is another link you may be interested in reading as well that speaks more directly to the point I was trying to make. Of course, as I’ve said numerous times, we’re all allowed to hold our own opinions on the matter. In any event, here is the link to the article:Actually, I’ve been looking and can’t find them. NCR’s archives appear to go back no further than 2006 for his blog ncronline.org/blogs/john-l-allen-jr?page=23 and 2010 for his column: ncronline.org/blogs/all-things-catholic?page=6
When a charge like that is leveled against someone, we should be ready to back it up, lest we fall into sins of detraction, rash judgment, or calumny.