Spot on!
not quasi-political, quasi-religious diatribes than smear the whole Body with the same mud.
That second part can be read two ways:
your way which incidentally is as inflammatory/incendiary as any of Voris’ outpourings. All in a fairly short sentence, too.
a second way which points the finger straight at some prelates who have been grossly negligent, or worse.
Voris is not just speaking up and discussing issues. That is the right, and even duty, of all of us. He is attacking the Church and taking money from people in exchange for doing so. Does that not trouble you?
No, it does not trouble me because the assertion is absurd.
Yet again, he’s NOT attacking the Church; he’s calling out those who should be nurturing her, but are not. The Church, herself, is sinless, and Voris knows that. Those of us inside her are sinners…
Why did we have to wait for the secular press to bring out all of the lurid details of the sex-abuse coverups? It’s a pity someone like Voris wasn’t around to do it for us! What were those who should have done something actually doing?
IT.S ABOUT TIME SOMETHING WAS MENTIONED. It’s already been touched on.
During the Church’s 2,000-year history, the laity have had to come to her rescue.
i notice Pulvis’ post #183 quotes Archbishop Sheen and what he said about a
LAY-LED recovery. It would pay some of you here to read or reread it. Ditto for a series of retreat talks (ie audio) in September 1973 in the Diocese of Gary, Indiana. He was a visionary; and even back in the 1930s, he sensed that things were starting to go wrong. He wasn’t the only one who has foretold a lay-led recovery. either:
Very close to where i live, there’s a wonderful hermit priest (Fr Ronan Kilgannon) who sensed a particular penitent’s worry about the state of the Church (The penitent is a friend.) Father told him not to be concerned about it, and that the laity would eventually lead a recovery. He said that they (ie we) can be pushed only so far; and then the reaction and the reclaiming of the Truth. Other good, wise priests and religious and prelates have said the same thing.
The tragedy is that most Catholics rely too much on those who have no intention to renew/clean out the Church. This thread shows it.
So much for clericalism!
Misplaced trust!
Unfortunately, outfits like M Voris and Co are necessary evils.
Did someone on this thread mention the Augean Stables?
The heresies of Americanism and Modernism…
Fr. Richard Rohr is very well respected by many, Franciscans and otherwise.
Fr Richard Rohr is a great example of an off-the-rails priest who has been spruiking off all sorts of Pagan/New Age/ stuff mixed in with some Christian mysticism. And nobody has ticked him off!!!
He’claims that our Lord’s atoning death was not necessary.
He supports so-called LGBT acts, and criticises the Church for not recognising them.
Etc.
His stuff is dangerous, especially to the unwary. It all sounds so “Christian”.
Of course he’s “very well respected by many, Franciscans and otherwise.”! Fr Hans Kung (for example) is very well respected by many people; but that most certainly doesn’t mean that he’s orthodox! Quite the opposite! Sr Joan Chittister is another good example…
Are you against all Franciscans or just the ones that Voris doesn’t like?
i don’t know if Voris has ever mentioned Fr Rohr. But in orthodox circles, Fr Rohr is not respected. He was mentioned on these forums a number of years ago; and that’s probably how i came to hear of him.
In answer to your cynical question, there are other Franciscans i’m not rapt in, eg certain disobedient ones over in Bosnia-Herzegovina who have downfaced two bishops trying to exercise their legitimate authority. The trouble, incidentally, started before 1981; but got far worse in mid-1981. It took an obscenely long time for their provincial to bring any of them to heel.
Closer to home, i had to endure a Franciscan priest who was so determined to delete any masculine terms in the Gospel reading that he said: “…into the everlasting fire which was prepared for the Devil and
the angels.” That sort of thing is common…and petty. Replacing “Mankind” with “Humankind”.
Etc
Another quote from Archbishop Sheen (only from memory) regarding Catholics’ falling away:
“Maybe the Good Lord has to get rid of some dead cells.”
I think you misunderstood my question. I wasn’t asking about Voris in my scenario. I was asking if a faithful member of the Catholic Church created a blog and made no errors, wouldn’t it be fair to call the site a Catholic blog? I would think so, but was trying to follow your reasoning where you might not call it so. I asked in earnest.