Meet the Press Sunday

  • Thread starter Thread starter Fitz
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Fitz

Guest
Mr. Cahill? Wow, did anyone else hear his litany against our church and Pope John Paul II? I can’t type fast enough. He blamed the priest scandal on immature psychologically deficient priests. Can anyone else help me in this? He said that the people need to elect the Bishops and the Popes.

There was a panel, and fortunately they do have an orthodox priest now in Rome. He is Rev. Joesph Fessio from Ave Maria University.
Russert in challenging him on contraception, married priests, condoms, and women priests.

Fr. Thomas Bouhlin from Opes Dei is speaking about the impact of Pope John Paul II, and how we will have more priests if we adhere to orthodox practices.
 
40.png
Fitz:
Mr. Cahill? Wow, did anyone else hear his litany against our church and Pope John Paul II? I can’t type fast enough. He blamed the priest scandal on immature psychologically deficient priests. Can anyone else help me in this? He said that the people need to elect the Bishops and the Popes.

There was a panel, and fortunately they do have an orthodox priest from Rome.
Click to expand...
Did he also recommend doing away with the Old Testament becuase parts of that are unpleasant to the modern world perhaps to be replaced with the teachings of a more christlike figure like Buddha? Maybe he also recommended some Hinduism replace the writings of Paul in the spirit of conciliation with other faiths?

I wouldn’t sweat it too much Fitz. I actually find the idea of a plebecite for the Pope to be quite humorous. Jesus so clearly wanted someone that would pander to the majority and be a politician. :rolleyes:
 
Thomas Cahill is the same guy who called Pius XII a moral pigmy and is proud of it and JPII’s papacy a disaster and who “appoints fools and sycophants as bishops (because he knew they would never disagree with him). for the last quarter century, John Paul II has gone a long way toward destroying the Catholic Church in the United States. If justice were done, much of the current pedophilia coverup would be laid at his door (because of his appointment of so many mindless institutionalists) – but this is just the tip of an immense, largely submerged iceberg, whose hidden extent should make any thinking Catholic/Christian/believer shudder with apprehension for the future.” Do you really care what this person thinks?
 
gilliam said:
Thomas Cahill is the same guy who called Pius XII a moral pigmy and is proud of it and JPII’s papacy a disaster and who “appoints fools and sycophants as bishops (because he knew they would never disagree with him). for the last quarter century, John Paul II has gone a long way toward destroying the Catholic Church in the United States. If justice were done, much of the current pedophilia coverup would be laid at his door (because of his appointment of so many mindless institutionalists) – but this is just the tip of an immense, largely submerged iceberg, whose hidden extent should make any thinking Catholic/Christian/believer shudder with apprehension for the future.” Do you really care what this person thinks?
Click to expand...

No, I don’t care. I was just amazed at his litany. What is his job? Why did they have him on?

Ok, he is an author. I just read your link. I have not read anything about him. Has he written antiCatholic works?
 
40.png
Fitz:
No, I don’t care. I was just amazed at his litany. What is his job? Why did they have him on?
Click to expand...
He is a historian whose expertise is Western civilization. They probably knew he was anti-current-Vatican (although there is little evidence that he liked any of the Papal Sees throughout history). They probably had him on for “historical balance”. Personally, I think he wants europe to return to the hedonism of ancient Greece.
 
40.png
gilliam:
He is a historian whose expertise is Western civilization. They probably knew he was anti-current-Vatican (although there is little evidence that he liked any of the Papal Sees throughout history). They probably had him on for “historical balance”. Personally, I think he wants europe to return to the hedonism of ancient Greece.
Click to expand...
I just finished reading the link you provided and I think you are right. I really didn’t like him calling all our Bishops sycphants. In his article he pretty much calls Christians simple minded and stupid. I guess I have never even read about him. I disagree with including him on the panel, but then I know Russert likes to mix it up on his panels.
 
40.png
Fitz:
Mr. Cahill? Wow, did anyone else hear his litany against our church and Pope John Paul II? I can’t type fast enough. He blamed the priest scandal on immature psychologically deficient priests.
Click to expand...
Yes, I just heard it about half an hour ago and my gut is still rolling. He also claimed it happened because JP2 appoints the bishops. He sees that as a real problem, all those “yes” men.

Doesn’t Tim Russert know (or anyone in the media out there) that there is a difference between women being ordained and having married priests? Why do they ALWAYS throw those together and then expect the poor guy to explain in one second. Surely they do some pre-interview stuff so they can ask intelligent questions? Surely someone has answered the question so the media can finally go, okay, asked and answered so let’s stop repeatedly confusing the two as the same issue?

Heck, don’t they realize that there are married priests out there??? GRRRR. I’m going into a frenzy. Sorry.
 
Cahill writes controversial books and makes the interview circuit as an allegedly left leaning Catholic. I want to say that he may have been the guy who I actually threw off in my phone call to Milt Rosenburg’s show when he was a guest. He - or whoever it was - ranted about how conservative Pope John Paul II was and I noted that many conservative Catholics thought the pope was too liberal. He was lost for words and finally just said, “Well, I don’t agree with that assessment.”

Obviously, he was on the show to provide some contrast and balance of perspective. That’s good for TV as it makes for debate which is entertaining and furthers discussion by offering differing views. If anything, I wouldn’t complain so much that Cahill was on the show considering that they obviously had two very good and orthodox priests. I’ll rejoice in and be thankful for that. Though I wish that they would have some faithful and articulate laymen commenting, also.
 
40.png
Pug:
Doesn’t Tim Russert know (or anyone in the media out there) that there is a difference between women being ordained and having married priests? Why do they ALWAYS throw those together and then expect the poor guy to explain in one second. .
Click to expand...
I was unhappy with Russert saying that I think devoting an hour to this is quite adequate. However, the priest was given only a small amount of time to devote to the topics at hand. I felt rather sorry for him, and he tried to do his best.
 
40.png
Fitz:
I was unhappy with Russert saying that I think devoting an hour to this is quite adequate. However, the priest was given only a small amount of time to devote to the topics at hand. I felt rather sorry for him, and he tried to do his best.
Click to expand...
I agree, the priest did a fine job in the short time alloted to the topic. I think part of the reason I was annoyed is exactly the comment you zeroed in on.

The priest suggested that people read five hours for the one hour of the tv watching (I think that is essentially what he said, check transcript). I understand where he is coming from. You won’t come to understand these issues from “sound bites”.

I was glad to see two upstanding priests on the show. That is a real plus!
 
40.png
Fitz:
Mr. Cahill? Wow, did anyone else hear his litany against our church and Pope John Paul II? I can’t type fast enough. He blamed the priest scandal on immature psychologically deficient priests. Can anyone else help me in this? He said that the people need to elect the Bishops and the Popes.

There was a panel, and fortunately they do have an orthodox priest now in Rome. He is Rev. Joesph Fessio from Ave Maria University.
Russert in challenging him on contraception, married priests, condoms, and women priests.

Fr. Thomas Bouhlin from Opes Dei is speaking about the impact of Pope John Paul II, and how we will have more priests if we adhere to orthodox practices.
Click to expand...
I thought that Cahill was an embarassment to himself and academia. He made numerous bizarre assertions that Russert never asked him to clarify. He had said that Fessio and Ratzinger’s belief about abortion, women priesthood, homosexuality and celibacy were “ahistorical and fanciful.” Now, most libs say that the Church’s views are too old fashioned (ie historical). Cahill also offered his judgment on Pope BXVI as a theologian. The arrogance is amazing.
 
Fr. Fessio choked on the question concerning married priests, women priests, condoms, birth control, etc. In his defense, he was the only one on the other side of the world, and I don’t know how many talk shows he has been on. His reply about the difficulty of answering the question came out condescending, but it was probably just a poor choice of rhetoric.

Nonetheless, it was a softball question, despite the false premise. Russert ended up offering an answer himself, asking if it was a matter of doctrine. I’m convinced Russert knew what answer to expect, and the point was to make it possible for Fr. Fessio to speak directly to those who do confuse these issues.
 
During the last couple of weeks, we’ve seen the Holy Spirit in action big time. I’ll take Him any day over a whole panel of “Catholics” who prefer Protestant practices. At this stage, I’m no longer screaming at my tv, but laughing at the foolishness of these panels.

By the way, I heard Fr, Fession on the radio today: He’s awesome (and obviously on the same side as the Holy Spirit.
 
Cahill is a seminarty drop out! No lie! A priest at one of our parishes was in the seminary with him and has mentioned Cahill from the pulpit. The priest says he was obnoxious even back then.
 
40.png
grammyof3:
Cahill is a seminarty drop out! No lie! A priest at one of our parishes was in the seminary with him and has mentioned Cahill from the pulpit. The priest says he was obnoxious even back then.
Click to expand...
What do you want to bet it boils down to sex?
 
Philnik,

Russert knew that the question he posed to Father Fessio was NOT answerable in a 30 second sound-bite, and that the faith would look bad. Father Fessio looked dumb struck because he was asked to respond to a question in seconds, when it would take quite a long time to make a proper explanation.

If NBC cared about fairness, they would have a panel of Catholic scholars and Priests (only) to help give thorough explanations of the various teachings in questions…but instead they set up the Catholics to look bad because Catholic teachings cannot be reduced to sound bites.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
Philnik,

Russert knew that the question he posed to Father Fessio was NOT answerable in a 30 second sound-bite, and that the faith would look bad. Father Fessio looked dumb struck because he was asked to respond to a question in seconds, when it would take quite a long time to make a proper explanation.

If NBC cared about fairness, they would have a panel of Catholic scholars and Priests (only) to help give thorough explanations of the various teachings in questions…but instead they set up the Catholics to look bad because Catholic teachings cannot be reduced to sound bites.
Click to expand...
Yeah Fr. Fessio asked him how many hours he could give him because the question could not be answered in sound bites and Russert snapped back at him about giving one whole hour.

Cahill’s charges were left standing. I wish Fr Fessio would have been able to rebut them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top