LA gets three new auxiliary bishops, including Fr. Robert Barron [CNA]

[Joe_5859]

God willing, Bishop-elect Barron will stay here with us for as long as possible! I see a strong possibility that he will eventually move on to head a diocese of his own, or maybe he will stay on as an auxiliary bishop. Our Bishop John Ward served here as an auxiliary bishop for 48 years, from 1963 until his death in 2011, outlasting several of our archbishops (and he presided at my confirmation ).

Yeah, you never can tell. Some auxiliary bishops stick around until they retire while others get moved on up pretty quickly. With someone like -]Father/-] Bishop-elect Barron, I would be very surprised if he did not get moved before too long. But it’s not up to me and I’m sure he will serve to the best of his ability wherever he is for as long as he is there.

 

[Sirach2]

WOW! We were batting 1000 until post #25 – then what happened? Where’s the customary well-wishing and congratulations after that? I know Father has seen these comments and even persecutions prior to this, so it is no surprise that a few sour grapes are surfacing. They must have been late to learn the news.

 

[ringil]

Well, the Church cant specifically name who is in Hell like they can with Saints, but that doesnt mean no one is in hell.

Also, I believe it was Jesus who said many would be damned by entering through the “wide gate that leads to destruction.”

For what its worth, Ive also heard that is precisely what caused so much grief for Jesus on the cross; him knowing all hes sacrificed and still many people would reject it.

Any pondering how many souls are in Hell is just theorizing, whether the school be Universalism or that few are saved.

We do not know. . . . . period.

Folks can list off quotes, writings, and whatnot on both sides and we would be left with the same conclusion- we do not know how many souls are in Hell. The existence of Hell is a point of Doctrine- who is in Hell or how many in Hell is not an issue of the Faith.

Hope that clears this up.

 

[SonOfMan]

Any pondering how many souls are in Hell is just theorizing, whether the school be Universalism or that few are saved.

We do not know. . . . . period.

Folks can list off quotes, writings, and whatnot on both sides and we would be left with the same conclusion- we do not know how many souls are in Hell. The existence of Hell is a point of Doctrine- who is in Hell or how many in Hell is not an issue of the Faith.

Hope that clears this up.

Jesus spoke a lot as if a lot were damned. A lot of those “woe to those that…”, “it would be better for that man to have never been born”, and “depart from me ye cursed” moments. Im curious to know which scriptures youre thinking of that you seem to think justifies that all are saved.

According to the direct words of Jesus, its reasonable to know that a lot are damned, we just dont know who specifically… yet.

 

[ringil]

Jesus spoke a lot as if a lot were damned. A lot of those “woe to those that…”, “it would be better for that man to have never been born”, and “depart from me ye cursed” moments. Im curious to know which scriptures youre thinking of that you seem to think justifies that all are saved.

According to the direct words of Jesus, its reasonable to know that a lot are damned, we just dont know who specifically… yet.

If you read my post above you will see that I don’t express an opinion on how many are damned.

Why? Because I don’t know. The Church has not defined this matter.

I do hope that all men are saved but I have no way of knowing if this is so.

I have no opinion on the matter except that we don’t know the answer to the question.

 

[SonOfMan]

If you read my post above you will see that I don’t express an opinion on how many are damned.

Why? Because I don’t know. The Church has not defined this matter.

I do hope that all men are saved but I have no way of knowing if this is so.

I have no opinion on the matter except that we don’t know the answer to the question.

I am stating that we definitely do know that a great majority are damned for sure (we just dont know them by name), if the words of Jesus are anything to go by.

 

[ringil]

I am stating that we definitely do know that a great majority are damned for sure (we just dont know them by name), if the words of Jesus are anything to go by.

We do not know this as the Church has not defined it.

You are free to believe that more are damned and another is welcome to believe that none are damned.

 

[Tsuwano]

Gomez is a fine archbishop and I wish him many happy years. However, auxiliary bishop is almost always the first stop for a freshly minted bishop. Barron is destined for great things. He could be archbishop of a major archdiocese one day. We’ll just have to wait and “see”!

You may be right. Bishop Elect Barron may be destined for greater things. But we should also remember that even as he is being appointed to something, he is also being removed from something, namely his custodianship of Mundelien Seminary in Chicago, one of largest seminaries in the U.S. and one of the most influential in the formation of American priests, especially in the Midwest. As a protege of the late Cardinal George, Fr. Barron was considered a spokesperson for the right of center views of the Cardinal and influenced the seminary in the same direction. The new Archbishop of Chicago, considered left of center, is now free to install his own man in the seminary and to influence the seminary in a different direction if he so chooses. The present Archbishop of Chicago falls very much in line with the views expressed by Pope Francis. Now, I’m not a conspiracy theorist and I think it’s great news that Fr. Barron has been appointed as an Auxiliary Bishop in far off Los Angeles, but I do note the much looser hand that the Archbishop of Chicago now has.

 

[jflare29]

We do not know this as the Church has not defined it.

You are free to believe that more are damned and another is welcome to believe that none are damned.

I don’t think that statement can be reconciled with the Church’s teaching or with Christ’s comments in the Bible.

I saw a clip of Fr (now Bishop-elect) Barron talking about Hell. He was desperately equivocal about it. I have met far too many people in my lifetime who would be much better served by Archbishop Fulton Sheen’s clarity of thought.

 

[KSU]

You may be right. Bishop Elect Barron may be destined for greater things. But we should also remember that even as he is being appointed to something, he is also being removed from something, namely his custodianship of Mundelien Seminary in Chicago, one of largest seminaries in the U.S. and one of the most influential in the formation of American priests, especially in the Midwest. As a protege of the late Cardinal George, Fr. Barron was considered a spokesperson for the right of center views of the Cardinal and influenced the seminary in the same direction. The new Archbishop of Chicago, considered left of center, is now free to install his own man in the seminary and to influence the seminary in a different direction if he so chooses. The present Archbishop of Chicago falls very much in line with the views expressed by Pope Francis. Now, I’m not a conspiracy theorist and I think it’s great news that Fr. Barron has been appointed as an Auxiliary Bishop in far off Los Angeles, but I do note the much looser hand that the Archbishop of Chicago now has.

A snowball in hell has a better chance than the chance that Pope Francis wants a person to the left of Bishop-elect Barron in charge of Mundelien.

Thanks to the know-nothing, biased media, and the unorthodox, shoot-from-the-hip style of Francis, many/most people believe that Francis tends to side with the Left. That is a false but understandable perception resulting from some of his personal leanings, e.g., that man-made global warming may be partially true.

Theologically speaking, however, when it matters Francis has been showing himself to be every bit as orthodox as B XVI. Which probably is the major reason why his popularity ratings are falling. Unfortunately, a person to the left of Barron may very well be appointed to replace him, but that would not be directly attributable to Pope Francis.

 

[CrossofChrist]

Just because Balthasar was an overall good priest doesn’t mean Benedict agrees with everything he taught. Besides, those statements are not an act of canonization or infallible teaching and thus can be erroneous.

Well, the statements reflect the sentiments of then-Cardinal Ratzinger. Take them for what that’s worth.

Are either pope Benedict or von Balthasar a doctor of the church? Because the doctors of the church are practically unanimous in their denial of anything even close to universalism. They’re all united in the few number of the saved. When von Balthasar becomes a doctor of the church then I’ll take his opinion on this seriously.

If no one took anyone’s opinion seriously who wasn’t a doctor of the Church, we never would’ve had any to begin with . But if you don’t want to agree with vB, I’m not going to stop you.

 

[CrossofChrist]

CrossofChrist’s point was not to imply that Benedict agrees with Von Balthasar’s theological proposal. It was to illustrate that Benedict holds him in high regard and does not consider him a heretic. If he has not declared him so, why should we?

Theologians can disagree with each other with neither one being a heretic. Has anyone here actually read what Von Balthasar wrote on this topic? It seems the common practice is to lump him in with the universalists and then call him a heretic because universalism is wrong. That just shows me they don’t understand what Von Balthasar is actually saying.

Thank you.

 

[CalCatholic]

Well to put this thread back on track, I most definitely welcome auxiliary Bishop elect Robert Barron to our archdiocese (the other two auxiliary Bishop elects are from the LA archdiocese) ! I have used his ‘Catholicism’ series DVDs in my RCIA and Bible study sessions since it was first released several years ago (with great response).

 

[phil19034]

I am stating that we definitely do know that a great majority are damned for sure (we just dont know them by name), if the words of Jesus are anything to go by.

That belief is part of the Jansenius heresy that denies God’s Divine Mercy

 

[KSU]

Originally Posted by SonOfMan:
I am stating that we definitely do know that a great majority are damned for sure (we just dont know them by name), if the words of Jesus are anything to go by.

That belief is part of the Jansenius heresy that denies God’s Divine Mercy

phil, would it still be part of the Jansenius heresy if SonOfMan had said that only “many are damned, if the words of Jesus are anything to go by”?

Is Our Lady of Fatima’s statement that “More souls go to Hell because of the sins of the flesh than for any other reason” part of the Jansenius heresy?

Those are serious questions; I’m not trying to argue with you.

 

[Sirach2]

Originally Posted by SonOfMan:

Is Our Lady of Fatima’s statement that “More souls go to Hell because of the sins of the flesh than for any other reason” part of the Jansenius heresy?

Fr. Trigilio addressed this question just this week on Web of Faith. Someone wrote in asking what Our Lady meant by this. He explained that “flesh” means all those sins we commit due to concupiscence of our flesh: lust, gluttony, coveting that which is not ours, adultery, drunkenness, drugs, impurity, hatred, etc. It does not mean what we might think at first glance, believing these are only sins of sexual deviations.

So if people are in hell, it is due to the concupiscence of our flesh and man’s weakness that causes us to desire worldly things to excess, even sinful excess.

 

[KSU]

Fr. Trigilio addressed this question just this week on Web of Faith. Someone wrote in asking what Our Lady meant by this. He explained that “flesh” means all those sins we commit due to concupiscence of our flesh: lust, gluttony, coveting that which is not ours, adultery, drunkenness, drugs, impurity, hatred, etc. It does not mean what we might think at first glance, believing these are only sins of sexual deviations.

So if people are in hell, it is due to the concupiscence of our flesh and man’s weakness that causes us to desire worldly things to excess, even sinful excess.

Thank you, but it doesn’t address the questions in my post #70 regarding Jansenism.

 

[ringil]

Thank you, but it doesn’t address the questions in my post #70 regarding Jansenism.

Well, firstly, Mary’s words at Fatima are not doctrine. None of the contents of any vision are Doctrine. We are free to have devotion to the messages or not- not acknowledging messages in approved visions is not against Church teaching.

Anyway, that’s kind of beside the point. . . . . Let’s look at what Mary says here.

She states that more souls are lost due to sins of the flesh. She doesn’t say how many are lost. She certainly doesn’t say that most are lost. She is saying that OF THOSE who are lost more are lost . . . . . . . . . .

So no, this statement has nothing to do with Jansenism. To my thinking, folks are certainly free to believe that most souls are lost.

At the same time, under no penalty of heresy, one can believe that all are saved.

The Church simply hasn’t spoken on the matter. . . . . period. . . . . . end of story. . . .

I personally believe that some souls are lost to damnation- I just wouldn’t even begin to guess some kind of percentage or number- that feels obscene to me.

 

[KSU]

Well, firstly, Mary’s words at Fatima are not doctrine. None of the contents of any vision are Doctrine. We are free to have devotion to the messages or not- not acknowledging messages in approved visions is not against Church teaching.

**True, Mary’s warnings are not technically doctrine, nor are we required to have DEVOTION to her statements. But, I hope you are not saying that her warning about many people in hell-- she let the children get a glimpse of it–is no more important to our salvation than the non-Church approved contrary opinion of Fr. Barron.

Her message:
Hell exists, and it is not empty.
Multitudes of people fall into hell every day.
The horror of hell includes the pain of fire and the torments of demons.
Most of the damned are there because of sins of the flesh.
Many people go to hell because NOBODY IS WILLING TO PRAY AND DO PENANCE FOR THEM.
fatima.ageofmary.com/hell/**

Anyway, that’s kind of beside the point. . . . . Let’s look at what Mary says here.

She states that more souls are lost due to sins of the flesh. She doesn’t say how many are lost. She certainly doesn’t say that most are lost. She is saying that OF THOSE who are lost more are lost . . . . . . . . . .

So no, this statement has nothing to do with Jansenism. To my thinking, folks are certainly free to believe that most souls are lost.

I agree with you regarding Jansenism, and I hope not, but don’t know whether most are lost. We just don’t know much about the interplay of Divine mercy and justice.

At the same time, under no penalty of heresy, one can believe that all are saved.

I’m too lazy to research that, but I hope you are not including a multitude of angels–ANGELS–for crying out loud! If angels were lost, the Church will never say that men have not been.

The Church simply hasn’t spoken on the matter. . . . . period. . . . . . end of story. . . .

I personally believe that some souls are lost to damnation- I just wouldn’t even begin to guess some kind of percentage or number- that feels obscene to me.

Me, too.

 

[ringil]

KSU:
That some Angels are in Hell is, I believe, part of Church teaching.

The same doesn’t hold true for humans.