List of Liberal, Conservative Bishops

  • Thread starter Thread starter MusicaDonumDei
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It is not that difficult to do once you understand the Faith, before then you can’t do it properly. 😃

It’s best to simply make a list of the “conservative” bishops, since it’s very short and simple, rather than citing all the rests peccadillos and rating how bad they are. :eek: That would be… bad.

It’s rather like England just before the Anglicans. 🤷
 
Mahoney in LA upsets me so much that I refuse to give $ @ mass anymore, almost never go to mass anymore. I have visited a Carmelite traditional Church, and have spoken to SSPX by telephone as my local churches and my former “catholic” university are infected by god-less humanism, environmentalism and homosexuality.
 
While some have problems with terms “liberal/conservative” or “orthodox/heterodox,” and others take issue with listing certain bishops, etc., surely everyone must recognize that Abp. Raymond Burke and Card. Ratzinger/Pope Benedict have, let’s say, somewhat of a different “perspective” than, say, Bp. Tod Brown, Card. Mahoney, and Abp. Weakland. For the sake of terminology, most would probably categorize the Burke/Ratzinger camp as “conservative,” while categorizing the Brown/Mahoney/Weakland camp as “liberal.”

However, some, for example, Bp. Michael Driscoll of Boise, are a little bit more difficult to categorize: solid and “orthodox” enough on theological issues, but who don’t really take a strong stance like Burke. Basically, “caretaker” Bishops who run the Diocese, maintain the Status Quo, make the rounds at confirmation time, but pretty much let the parish Priests do what they’ve always done, whether they’re F.S.S.P priests offering the E.F., or “Novus Ordo all the way,” and “possessed by the Spirit of Vatican II.”

Unlike Congress, I don’t think you have a group like the American Conservative Union studying their “voting record,” and assigning a “conservative rating.” Whether that would be a worthwhile endeavour is debatable, but I am not sure if anyone has taken the time to do that.
 
JaMc said:
While some have problems with terms “liberal/conservative” or “orthodox/heterodox,” and others take issue with listing certain bishops, etc., surely everyone must recognize that Abp. Raymond Burke and Card. Ratzinger/Pope Benedict have, let’s say, somewhat of a different “perspective” than, say, Bp. Tod Brown, Card. Mahoney, and Abp. Weakland. For the sake of terminology, most would probably categorize the Burke/Ratzinger camp as “conservative,” while categorizing the Brown/Mahoney/Weakland camp as “liberal.”

However, some, for example, Bp. Michael Driscoll of Boise, are a little bit more difficult to categorize: solid and “orthodox” enough on theological issues, but who don’t really take a strong stance like Burke. Basically, “caretaker” Bishops who run the Diocese, maintain the Status Quo, make the rounds at confirmation time, but pretty much let the parish Priests do what they’ve always done, whether they’re F.S.S.P priests offering the E.F., or “Novus Ordo all the way,” and “possessed by the Spirit of Vatican II.”

Unlike Congress, I don’t think you have a group like the American Conservative Union studying their “voting record,” and assigning a “conservative rating.” Whether that would be a worthwhile endeavour is debatable, but I am not sure if anyone has taken the time to do that.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t lump Brown in with Mahoney. Granted I haven’t had a lot of direct experience of his teachings in my short 3 years in Orange diocese, but I just don’t hear the kind of horror stories here that I have about L.A. diocese, or other places on threads in this forum. Also, the Tridentine Mass has been allowed to start flourishing here and that must count for something. 😉
 
**A good bishop should save souls, cast out demons, preach the gospel and heal the sick in the name of Christ our King and see that his priests do likewise.

At the very least, he should foster holiness in his clergy and his diocese, leading to vocations and conversions.**

A bad bishop reigns over parish closures and mergers and near-empty seminaries. He may be homosexual and open about it. He may embrace every novelty in our religion and have a distaste for tradition. He may favour ecumenism-as-indifferentism rather than ecumenism-towards-conversion.

Just wonder how may good bishops as I have defined them now exist. I dare say they don’t advertise themselves, whereas we’re likely to hear plenty about the bad ones.
 
Layman said:
**A good bishop should save souls, cast out demons, preach the gospel and heal the sick in the name of Christ our King and see that his priests do likewise.

At the very least, he should foster holiness in his clergy and his diocese, leading to vocations and conversions.**

A bad bishop reigns over parish closures and mergers and near-empty seminaries. He may be homosexual and open about it. He may embrace every novelty in our religion and have a distaste for tradition. He may favour ecumenism-as-indifferentism rather than ecumenism-towards-conversion.

Just wonder how may good bishops as I have defined them now exist. I dare say they don’t advertise themselves, whereas we’re likely to hear plenty about the bad ones.
Click to expand...
As I said it’s a short list. . .

Sometimes it’s best not even to start to make it, if one is prone to discouragement or has mistaken ideas about actually how far the Gates of Hell can get without prevailing. 😃

In such a case one needs to fix and prepare oneself first before contemplating it all. So that one’s sees God’s Hand of Providence in all and is content no matter how visibly disasterous all else goes, trusting in Him.
 
I have a question:

During the past few years I have been beat-up pretty bad here on these Catholic Internet Forums for simply stating the views and practices of our Bishop. The hostilities toward me and this so called, “Liberal Bishop” have lead to me being kicked out of several Yahoo Catholic Forums, and also this Catholic Answers Fourm. A few days ago, I was finally allowed back onto this Forum, so I now use the handle, “banished”.

What’s going on here? Why are so many Catholic lay people hell-bent on stamping out another Cathodic’s faith? I am a regular EWTN viewer and they have a list of priest who will answer e-mail questions posted on their web site. The priest that I chose said that when a Catholic finds “truth” look out! There was no mention of what, “truth” is, so I am wondering where I’m in violation.

By the way, I am a baptized and confirmed Catholic who, like a million others, have hit a few bumps in the road. And yes, I was exposed to Protestantism and consider myself to be a “Born Again Christian”.

Richard
 
banished said:
I have a question:

During the past few years I have been beat-up pretty bad here on these Catholic Internet Forums for simply stating the views and practices of our Bishop. The hostilities toward me and this so called, “Liberal Bishop” have lead to me being kicked out of several Yahoo Catholic Forums, and also this Catholic Answers Fourm. A few days ago, I was finally allowed back onto this Forum, so I now use the handle, “banished”.

What’s going on here? Why are so many Catholic lay people hell-bent on stamping out another Cathodic’s faith? I am a regular EWTN viewer and they have a list of priest who will answer e-mail questions posted on their web site. The priest that I chose said that when a Catholic finds “truth” look out! There was no mention of what, “truth” is, so I am wondering where I’m in violation.

By the way, I am a baptized and confirmed Catholic who, like a million others, have hit a few bumps in the road. And yes, I was exposed to Protestantism and consider myself to be a “Born Again Christian”.

Richard
Click to expand...
I would imagine that it has a lot to do with how you present your views and the views and position of this “liberal Bishop” as you call him.

If the views and positions that you present and that you claim he presents are in contradiction to the teachings of the catholic Church ,AND you present these views on a forum such as this that is dedicated to Traditional Catholicism, then you may have problems.

But I think deep down you already knew that, so what is the real purpose of the question?
 
palmas85 said:
I would imagine that it has a lot to do with how you present your views and the views and position of this “liberal Bishop” as you call him.

If the views and positions that you present and that you claim he presents are in contradiction to the teachings of the catholic Church ,AND you present these views on a forum such as this that is dedicated to Traditional Catholicism, then you may have problems.

But I think deep down you already knew that, so what is the real purpose of the question?
Click to expand...
Glad to meet you, but it seems like you came in with your helmet on? Well, I didn’t know that there were “Liberal” Bishops until I got evolved with you guys, so please don’t manipulate your words, so that they point the finger at me. Okay? Plus, I asked an honest question. If I knew the answer, or if the EWTN staff knew the answer, I wouldn’t have to ask it here on this forum.

There is only one Yahoo Catholic Forum that is Traditional and the other 3 are are what I would call center of the road conversational forums. I was posting regularly on both the Traditional and Charismatic Sections here and there, and regularly attend Tri dentine Mass at St Margaret Mary Catholic Church in Oakland. Then the axe fell on me.

Shortly after the axe fell, our so called, “Liberal” Bishop was promoted to Archbishop and and was installed at his Archdiocese in Detroit. What makes me wonder is that Catholic Charismatic Renewal Office of the Diocese of Oakland just sent me another “Burning Bush Newsletter”, and we have a new Bishop .

Now remember, I stopped attending these evening Catholic Charismatic Masses until I find out where I am in error on these Catholic Forums?

Richard
 
I think what we need to see is the church has been infiltrated by imposters . This is upsetting but its true. We have clear documentation from freemasonary that this was there goal. There stated goal was to infilatrate the catholic church, then to change it to fit its own agenda. They have done this but not entirely of course. Look at the nab notes though, if thats not a clear sign the church has been infiltrated im not sure what is,Or the coverups, or the fact the seminarys have many homosexauls .We need to be honest about the issues and face them head on.

We need to stay close to the orthodox teachers like karl keating and the bishops who are orthodox, AND to call out those who have turned there back on there faith to serve some other agenda.

I know most who post on this traditional section are great catholics. you people are the salt of the church.
 
banished said:
Glad to meet you, but it seems like you came in with your helmet on? Well, I didn’t know that there were “Liberal” Bishops until I got evolved with you guys, so please don’t manipulate your words, so that they point the finger at me. Okay? Plus, I asked an honest question. If I knew the answer, or if the EWTN staff knew the answer, I wouldn’t have to ask it here on this forum.

There is only one Yahoo Catholic Forum that is Traditional and the other 3 are are what I would call center of the road conversational forums. I was posting regularly on both the Traditional and Charismatic Sections here and there, and regularly attend Tri dentine Mass at St Margaret Mary Catholic Church in Oakland. Then the axe fell on me.

Shortly after the axe fell, our so called, “Liberal” Bishop was promoted to Archbishop and and was installed at his Archdiocese in Detroit. What makes me wonder is that Catholic Charismatic Renewal Office of the Diocese of Oakland just sent me another “Burning Bush Newsletter”, and we have a new Bishop .

Now remember, I stopped attending these evening Catholic Charismatic Masses until I find out where I am in error on these Catholic Forums?

Richard
Click to expand...
Richard:

P/M me with any questions you might have. If you concerned about a particular post, send it to me first…

I wondered why you chose that handle - It’s gotta hurt. God doesn’t “Banish” anyone. Please try to think on that.

Part of our job is to “speak the truth in love”. Ask yourself if what you’re saying is truthful and being said in love. Also ask if it is edifying to those who are going to read it. If you can’t answer yes to all of the above, don’t post it. If what ever you need to talk about is driving you up the wall, P/M it to someone you trust.

I hope this helps.

Your Brother & Servant in Christ, Michael

P.S.: Please don’t stop attending Masses because you don’t know the answer to a question or because you’re afraid you’re doing something wrong.
 
TruthisBeauty7 said:
I think what we need to see is the church has been infiltrated by imposters . This is upsetting but its true. We have clear documentation from freemasonary that this was there goal. There stated goal was to infilatrate the catholic church, then to change it to fit its own agenda. They have done this but not entirely of course. Look at the nab notes though, if thats not a clear sign the church has been infiltrated im not sure what is,Or the coverups, or the fact the seminarys have many homosexauls .We need to be honest about the issues and face them head on.

We need to stay close to the orthodox teachers like karl keating and the bishops who are orthodox, AND to call out those who have turned there back on there faith to serve some other agenda.

I know most who post on this traditional section are great catholics. you people are the salt of the church.
Click to expand...
Hello TruthisBeauty7

Here in California we have millions of Mexican Catholics who are honest hard working family people, so we don’t have to worry about imposters or freemasonry overwhelming us. Everyone is welcome, including freemasons and imposters. However, like I stated in my above posts, I did suffer limited abuse because of what some here on these Catholic Internet Forums called my, “Liberal” bishop. I would like to get to the bottom of this, because the bishop in question is really a nice guy. Everyone in this diocese loved him. He even attend our Friday Evening Charismatic Healing Masses. Everyone was attracted to this guy. Like, I couldn’t take my eyes off him when he was sitting up there in his chair.

Is there a demonic spirit hanging over us that causes lay people to suffer discontent about our Catholic Bishops? Lets ask Jesus to protect us. Lets bind that bad spirit in the name of Jesus. Catholics don’t have to worry about imposters or freemasonry, because we are protected by the Blood of Jesus!

Richard
 
ByzCath said:
What exactly were the Archbishop’s stated views?
Click to expand...
ByzCath:

Archbishop Rembert Weakland - served as Archbishop of Milwalkee, WI 1977-2002. Appointed by Pope Paul VI on Sept. 20, 1977
Criticised Dominus Iesus in 2000
Retirement was overshadowed by revelations that he paid $450,000 in Archdiocesan funds to fend off a threatened lawsuit in May, 2009.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rembert_Weakland

Former Catholic head of Milwalkee admits he’s gay
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090512/ap_on_re/us_rel_gay_archbishop
Weakland’s Exit
nationalreview.com/dreher/dreher052402.asp
Weakland says he didn’t know priests’ abuse was crime
jsonline.com/features/religion/45191277.html
Outside Catholic Church no Salvation?
By Archbishop Rembert G. Weakland, O.S.B.
tinyurl.com/l4el33

Your Brother in Christ, Michael
 
Forgive me if I have been misled in a topic I have studied on my own for years now…but this is what I know about Catholic teachings on homosexuality:

1.) Natural law makes homosexuality pointless. It is a trait that cannot reproduce itself, among other reasons.
2.) There is much scientific evidence that homosexuals brains are truly “wired” that way. There is also scientific evidence that Bulimia and Anorexia are genetically predisposed conditions. This may seem unrelated, but I wanted to point out that I have found many theories that offer explanations for certain behaviours from a genetic standpoint.
3.) This may or may not be true, but this is irrelevant, since it is contrary to natural law. Still, if one is born this way, he/she cannot be held responsible for the way that he/she thinks. Homosexuality, in itself, is blameless.
4.) Acting on this impulse to engage in homosexual behaviour, and thus directly disobeying natural law, is where a blameless thought process goes over into grave sin.
5.) This is, in every way, comparable to a heterosexual person having sexual thoughts about a member of the opposite sex outside the context of marriage. Of course anyone with hormones is going to have these thoughts, but having thoughts is not the same as acting on those thoughts through masterbation or pre-marital sex.
6.) Both the homosexual and heterosexual are called, in equal measure, to remain chaste during all stations of life. The heterosexual cannot act on these impulses until marriage, and maybe never if he/she shooses the religious life. The homosexual is called to life chastely as well, which would be celibacy for life since homosexual marriage is not allowed. Why? Because:
7.) A marriage is only valid if the two people entering into the sacrament intend and desire to produce children. Natural law shows that homosexuals can never produce children, and so this marriage can never be valid. This is not unfair. Two heterosexuals who marry without the intent or desire to have children (indeed, if they avoid having children) their marriage would be invalid for the exact same reason as homosexual marriage is invalid.

In conclusion:

HOMOSEXUAL THOUGHTS are not the same as HOMOSEXUAL ACTIONS

A homosexual is not evil, flawed, or bad, any more than anyone else with a certain genetic difference.

They are, however, called by natural law to live a chaste life just like everyone else. Chastity takes tremendous amounts of courage…for EVERYONE, not just homosexuals.

All of this is based on well thought-out logic and reason (as are all things in Catholicism, which is why I converted).

So…now that I have said all of that, let me ask a few questions:
  • Was the Bishop in question engaging in homosexual behaviour?
  • If yes…then I have no further questions…he is in a state of grave sin and we should all pray for him.
  • If no…(and I’m hoping this is the answer since he is a priest, and priests are called to celibacy regardless of their private thoughts) then where is his sin?
  • Do you all realize how many Catholics struggle with this hatred and homophobia? I have some friends who are inclined towards homosexuality but have had the courage to follow their personal path of chastity, which is a celibate life. They are some of the most courageous people I have ever met. Do you not agree?
I consider myself a very traditional-minded Catholic, but I also read a lot and study the reasons behind everything (again…leading me to conversion). I have found that the real reasons behind the Church’s teachings on homosexuality are very misunderstood and mis-used by people who spew hatred and feel like anyone who is homosexual cannot be a devout Catholic.

It is not easy to be true to our faith, especially chastity. Let’s try and be supportive of eachother?
 
VanillaBean,

Thanks for posting that, because my younger brother died from Aids while living that lifestyle. I would like to add something to your excellant post: Regardless of thier sexual orientation, the Bishops are called by God and anointed to preach good tidings unto the meek, to bind up the brokenhearted, proclam liberty to captives, and open the prison to them that are bound. As in Isaiah 61.

I believe that it’s our Christian responsibility not to be a stumblingblock for our brothers in Christ, as in Romans 14, 13-14. “Let us not therfore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in his brother’s way. 14 I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean”

Richard
 
VanillaBean said:
Forgive me if I have been misled in a topic I have studied on my own for years now…but this is what I know about Catholic teachings on homosexuality:

1.) Natural law makes homosexuality pointless. It is a trait that cannot reproduce itself, among other reasons.
2.) There is much scientific evidence that homosexuals brains are truly “wired” that way. There is also scientific evidence that Bulimia and Anorexia are genetically predisposed conditions. This may seem unrelated, but I wanted to point out that I have found many theories that offer explanations for certain behaviours from a genetic standpoint.
3.) This may or may not be true, but this is irrelevant, since it is contrary to natural law. Still, if one is born this way, he/she cannot be held responsible for the way that he/she thinks. Homosexuality, in itself, is blameless.
4.) Acting on this impulse to engage in homosexual behaviour, and thus directly disobeying natural law, is where a blameless thought process goes over into grave sin.
5.) This is, in every way, comparable to a heterosexual person having sexual thoughts about a member of the opposite sex outside the context of marriage. Of course anyone with hormones is going to have these thoughts, but having thoughts is not the same as acting on those thoughts through masterbation or pre-marital sex.
6.) Both the homosexual and heterosexual are called, in equal measure, to remain chaste during all stations of life. The heterosexual cannot act on these impulses until marriage, and maybe never if he/she shooses the religious life. The homosexual is called to life chastely as well, which would be celibacy for life since homosexual marriage is not allowed. Why? Because:
7.) A marriage is only valid if the two people entering into the sacrament intend and desire to produce children. Natural law shows that homosexuals can never produce children, and so this marriage can never be valid. This is not unfair. Two heterosexuals who marry without the intent or desire to have children (indeed, if they avoid having children) their marriage would be invalid for the exact same reason as homosexual marriage is invalid.

In conclusion:

HOMOSEXUAL THOUGHTS are not the same as HOMOSEXUAL ACTIONS

A homosexual is not evil, flawed, or bad, any more than anyone else with a certain genetic difference.

They are, however, called by natural law to live a chaste life just like everyone else. Chastity takes tremendous amounts of courage…for EVERYONE, not just homosexuals.

All of this is based on well thought-out logic and reason (as are all things in Catholicism, which is why I converted).

So…now that I have said all of that, let me ask a few questions:
  • Was the Bishop in question engaging in homosexual behaviour?
  • If yes…then I have no further questions…he is in a state of grave sin and we should all pray for him.
  • If no…(and I’m hoping this is the answer since he is a priest, and priests are called to celibacy regardless of their private thoughts) then where is his sin?
  • Do you all realize how many Catholics struggle with this hatred and homophobia? I have some friends who are inclined towards homosexuality but have had the courage to follow their personal path of chastity, which is a celibate life. They are some of the most courageous people I have ever met. Do you not agree?
I consider myself a very traditional-minded Catholic, but I also read a lot and study the reasons behind everything (again…leading me to conversion). I have found that the real reasons behind the Church’s teachings on homosexuality are very misunderstood and mis-used by people who spew hatred and feel like anyone who is homosexual cannot be a devout Catholic.

It is not easy to be true to our faith, especially chastity. Let’s try and be supportive of each other!
Click to expand...
Vanilla Bean:

Very good summary of Catholic Teaching on Homosexuality. I know someone who spent several years of his career (as a Physicians Assistant) treating people who had AIDS - He started in the early 1980’s (then AIDS was called GRID) and retired from this in the lated 1990’s. Several of his former patients attended his ordination as an Anglican Priest (ACC/TAC).

Sadly, Bishop Weakland admitted to having had & still having a Gay lover. Please pray that that this man who was once a “shepherd of souls” would repent of this gravely sinful and disordered lifestyle and would become a chase example to others in the Body of Christ.

I know from my own life that God’s Mercy & Love can overwhelm even situations such as this.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael
 
Hey richard.

Im in cali, you talking about bishop brom in san diego?

God bless the Charismatics, they too are the salt of the church.
 
MusicaDonumDei said:
When former Archbishop of Milwaukee Rembert Weakland recently came out as gay, many people’s sentiments on here were, “That’s not a surprise” or “Who didn’t know that already?”

Well, since I’m new to the Church, I didn’t 🙂 I don’t have the background yet to know which bishops are notoriously liberal, or which ones are conservative, etc. So in a charitable manner, how do some of our bishops fall politically?
Click to expand...
MusicaDonumDei-

There is an obvious hesitancy by posters here to not identify bishops by name. However, you can make your own deductions by reading any papers or articles by bishops in various areas. If they are advocating or overly accepting of a gay lifestyle, ordaining women as priests, ignoring the magistererial teachings of the church, disloyal to the pope, teachng contrary to the Catechism of the Catholic Church then they would obviously not be considered as “orthodox” or right teaching" by the Catholic Church.

I might also suggest, you try and get a copy of Michael S. Rose’s book- “Goodbye, Good Men: How Liberals Brought Corruption into the Catholic Church” The book was written in 2002, so some of the information is a bit dated. It basically addresses the changes in thought in what was being taught in some seminaries through the latter part of the 20th century shaped the mindset of the Catholic Church in America today. It does identify some bishops and their stances on some of these issues. Fortunately, my understanding is that many of the seminaries mentioned in the book have had significant reform, that is more in line with the traditional teachings of the Catholic Church.

Hope this helps.
 
Traditional_Ang said:
Richard:

P/M me with any questions you might have. If you concerned about a particular post, send it to me first…

I wondered why you chose that handle - It’s gotta hurt. God doesn’t “Banish” anyone. Please try to think on that.

Part of our job is to “speak the truth in love”. Ask yourself if what you’re saying is truthful and being said in love. Also ask if it is edifying to those who are going to read it. If you can’t answer yes to all of the above, don’t post it. If what ever you need to talk about is driving you up the wall, P/M it to someone you trust.

I hope this helps.

Your Brother & Servant in Christ, Michael

P.S.: Please don’t stop attending Masses because you don’t know the answer to a question or because you’re afraid you’re doing something wrong.
Click to expand...
Michael,

Thanks for the advice. I will pin it up here at my computer as a reminder, but its hard to edify people who’s Jesus is hanging on a wall in a church. I was really suprised when I found out how some Catholics relate to Jesus. I had to put everything on hold until I learn more. The Protestants are easy to figure out, because they fellowship more. But, after a Latin Mass everyone exits quietly, and goes directly to thier vehicle.

Richard
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top