Why is it that the only time you hear of a Catholic (priest/nun/theologian/politician) being in good standing is when they have a history of dissenting from doctrine and even dogma?
What do you mean? Who dissented from doctrine or dogma and is in good standing? Maybe your definition of ‘good standing’ is not the same as mine, for example. Mine means that someone has been given authority to teach/preach by the Church, and that authority has not been revoked somehow. What does it mean to you?
The Catholic Culture article gives a good summary of McBrien’s career of dissent at the end of the article. This is why he cannon be given the benefit of the doubt.
I had never heard of Fr. McBrien before. He may not be my ‘cup of tea’…but that is as far as I would dare go in a statement regarding a Catholic priest or theologian, or Catholic Theologian even -out of respect for the Church.
The way I see it,*** whatever others do, I’m not responsible for, whatever I do, I’m responsible for.***
Regarding Michael Voris, if he is your friend, God bless him, but I cannot stand to listen to him. I have no idea what degree he has or formal knowledge of Catholicism, but his mannerism is definitely not Catholic. I have never seen a Catholic teacher speak with such contempt -even if what he said were correct, which I’m not sure yet- and sensationalism.
There is NO excuse for that…and there should be no place for such talk within our Church. If he feels that his view of things is more correct than the views of a priest or theologian, then he should explain his opinion -as HIS OPINION- which is ALL he can have, since he has NO formal knowledge, until he works hard and obtains his PhD in Theology…and then, only within the subject of Theology that he studied, and not on ALL subjects of theology.
For now, he is simply working hard at pressing emotional ‘hot buttons’ and striking the ‘high cords’ of people against someone who has been given authority to teach/preach, and it has not yet been revoked…lack of respect…lack of obedience. The ‘right’ words even show up written as he is stating them, in case you are not ‘emotionally moved’ enough by the sheer force of his cynic arguments.
I doubt if he even has some courses on philosophy…his reasoning process is incoherent and his premises are not clear, it is difficult to establish whether they are true or false statements because of the lack of clarity in the wording. People are simply moved -positively or negatively- by ‘code words’ that he allows people to interpret at will, so that they all think he is saying what they are interpreting him to say…due to ambiguity, we may all be thinking different things!
BTW, is it optional to publicly show respect to someone who has received authority to teach/preach by the Church? Does THIS not cause scandal? I would say these attacks are more scandalous, much more than whatever a theologian may say in matters that are optional to begin with!
Maybe we, the laity, should make a promise of obedience, whereby we will at least show respect, even if don’t fully understand or agree, when someone having given authority attempts to teach.
Why are we SO concerned with HIS obedience to the truth and the Church, when we are not being obedient ourselves?
The problem is that we LACK HUMILITY…maybe the good priest has the same problem, I don’t know, but most of us do show evidence of this problem when we believe WE are right and regardless of his decades of study, work, preaching, and living the priesthood, WE know better.
For the record, I pray the Rosary and Divine Mercy Chaplet
daily in front of the Blessed Sacrament at a Perpetual Adoration Chapel! The entire Communion of Saints could tell me otherwise, but I simply cannot live without HIM in the Adoration Chapel…that is all I would humbly tell anyone who is not an adorer.
I am NOT saying that I agree with him, just that I respect and defend anyone who has been given authority to teach/preach and who is not teaching against doctrine nor dogma -out of respect & obedience, and to avoid causing scandal.
]
BTW, some refuse to even accept changes to these devotions, such as the ‘new’ Luminous Mysteries…because they are not ‘traditonal’ enough…even if they are wonderful and nothing in them is ‘new’! [the mysteries contained]
