Social Justice groups such as JustFaith, CCHD, IAF

[ljpgoodwin]

It’s not about disagreeing with me…it’s about the fact that many people get there information from the internet and fox news. This is a blight on our wonderful tradition of Catholic academics. I am perfectly comfortable when people disagree with me. That’s part of a good discourse. I just don’t want to have to waste time fighting Glen Beck. Glen Beck is seemingly incapable of having a sustained thought of more than 5 sound bites.
Don’t give up your Catholic academic tradition for the likes of Fox News.

 

[po18guy]

It is true that Saul Alinsky was a social activist, which in itself can be a good thing.

Can be a good thing. “Subversive” is the actual term you might not have been looking for. But, subversive he was, and subversive his organizations and their offshoots remain. Subversive. Your mention of murder is a canard, as Mr. Alinsky would do whatever would keep him out of jail to accomplish his goals. His book “Rules for radicals” is a clue.

 

[ljpgoodwin]

Mimi’s research is the reason I first became aware of these groups and it availed me greatly. Thank you, Mimi for all your hard work!

Just another note…as we study Church history we know that certain heresies formed even at the beginning. St. Paul was constantly refuting them and even rebuked Peter at one point. Because of the current trend of academia toward relativism, and the groups that have been mentioned that have such innocent sounding names, we must really beware, even in the most unlikely places. For instance, I’m teaching religious ed this year; imagine my astonishment when I found out that Dr. Robert Ludwig, professor of Catholic studies at De Paul University in Chicago is writing articles that have appeared in The Catechist Magazine. He is a board member of Call to Action (see Mimi’s comment above) and an ardent supporter of Voice of the Faithful, another dissident group. He has written a book called “Reconstructing Catholicism for a New Generation.” One reviewer of this book wrote, "The reconstructed Catholicism which Professor Ludwig has formulated has little in common with the Catholic faith. It is a veritable Hydra of heresies’ (Homiletic & Pastoral Review, July 1996).

We are living in such deceptive times in government and the Church; what is needed is an open heart to truth and constant prayer for discernment. We, as laity, must guard our own faith against these insidious groups. We do, however, have a champion on our side - Our Blessed Mother under the title of Our Lady of Victories, who has always led the fight against heresies throughout the centuries. Have recourse to her as she opposes those who are revolting against the sound and unshakeable principles that the Magisterium has handed down throughout the ages.

Yes, it seems that Professor Robert Ludwig has written some unfortunate things. I agree. I think part of the problem there is that he has tenure at De Paul.
So are you suggesting that we throw the baby out with the bathwater? Should we close all Catholic schools because of the work of Dr. Ludwig? As it has been pointed out in this forum, we are all give the gift of freedom and the ability to think rationally and to know our God. That means that we have to live with Dr. Ludwig.

 

[po18guy]

Just another note…as we study Church history we know that certain heresies formed even at the beginning. St. Paul was constantly refuting them and even rebuked Peter at one point.

A little clarification: Paul rebuked Peter for his personal behavior, not his teaching. Peter was never accused of heresy.

 

[po18guy]

Just for the record, there is nothing wrong with being left. It is possible to be left leaning and Christian. There is no conflict in that. I don’t know who Stephanie Block is other that the Stephanie Block that came up when I Googled her. She doesn’t seem like someone who I would put a lot of trust in when talking about issues of faith.

The problem arises when one’s faith is subjected to one’s political views. That is what has occurred in such dissident groups.

Also, there is nothing wrong with community organizing. It is a very Catholic thing to be involved in the public forum.

In the absolute sense, of course there is nothing wrong. But again, we are speaking of groups that challenge Catholic teaching and practice while claiming to be Catholic. Groups that are subversive by their nature and/or actions. That is dishonest and deceptive.

 

[Tigg]

It’s not about disagreeing with me…it’s about the fact that many people get there information from the internet and fox news. This is a blight on our wonderful tradition of Catholic academics.

Is this a serious post? There will certainly be no convincing you and this is my last response on this thread for the sake of those still lurking.

So, you would prefer we go to our illustrious Catholic universities for a genuine education on true Catholic teaching and be taught by “real professors?” Here is just a small sampling of who might be teaching that class:

First off, theologians such as the Rev. Hans Kung of Germany and the Rev. Charles E. Curran of the United States, were both stripped of authority to teach in Catholic universities by order of Pope John Paul so I guess we no longer have to worry about them.

A special research report from the Cardinal Newman Society (CNS) published in the June issue of Crisis magazine (this is a dated article) documents the activities of **15 professors at leading Catholic universities who have publicly rejected Vatican teaching **on euthanasia and assisted suicide.

Listed here:

tldm.org/News8/CatholicUniversitiesEuthanasia.htm

Catholic Student Society wants 18 Pro-Abortion “Catholic” Colleges to Dismiss Dissident Professors

CNS names Fr. Kevin O’Rourke, a professor at **Loyola University’s **bioethics institute who, in his work in the Catholic community, gives supposedly Catholic justifications for assisted suicide and euthanasia. Fr. O’Rourke was a key speaker at the Canadian Catholic Bioethics Institute in Toronto where he argued that it was morally permissible to remove nutrition and hydration from disabled patients.

The Society also names, Tom Beauchamp, a philosophy professor at Georgetown; Maxwell Gregg Bloche, Lawrence Gostin and Peter Rubin, Georgetown law professors; Howard Freed, Lauro Halstead and John Collins Harvey, past or current medical professors at Georgetown.

Daniel Maguire, a former priest and theology professor at **Marquette University **argues that there are “two traditions” within Catholic moral theology, one that is “strongly pro-choice” and that neither was “official.” Prior to giving a talk on the “Hidden Tradition of Abortion” in Catholic theology this May, he said on Irish radio, ““The idea of a little cluster of stem cells being a person goes against the longest Christian tradition in existence, and makes no sense at all.”

Also named was Rev. Richard McBrien, a theology professor at the University of Notre Dame who is a notorious dissenter from basic Catholic doctrines regarding the nature of God and the sacraments.

(My note) Notre Dame has long been a hotbed of scandal, heresy and dissident teaching…no need to go over it again – threads abound on this forum.

lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/aug/05081801.html

and finally,

(Deacon)Professor Goes into Schism: More Bad Fruit from Misericordia University

Deacon Calderone will be committing a schismatic act. For this he will incur automatic excommunication.

catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=33547

I could list more, but I fear I’m running out of room!

 

[ljpgoodwin]

Another group like IAF is Gamaliel (Foundation).

Since our parish was asked to become members of the local group in my city a yr ago, I decided to do research on it and found it is an affiliate of Gamaliel.

Here’s some of what I found – we need to know who we are allied with and where our money is going (stewardship).

1. 
   *]Gamaliel is one of the many “faith-based organizations” which share a similar ideology, goals, and subtley misuse Holy Scripture to lure in Christians. The current head of Gamaliel Foundation is Gregory Galuzzo, a former Jesuit.
   
   *]All leaders in organizations under Gamaliel Foundation must read Doing Justice by Dennis A Jacobsen. Jacobsen is a Lutheran minister from Milwaukee and director of the Gamaliel National Clergy Caucus.
   
   *]Catholics listed in the index are all known dissidents: Fr. Leonardo Boff , Fr. Teilhard de Chardin , Fr. Karl Rahner , Rosemary Radford Ruether . (Exceptions are Mother Theresa, St. Augustine, and Dorothy Day.)
   
   ]Doing Justice mentions the Industrial Areas Foundation as well as Gamaliel Foundation, both of which use principles of Saul Alinsky (Rules for Radicals). Altogether, Alinsky provides eleven rules of the ethics of means and ends. They are morally relativistic. This line of thought and tactics are totally incompatible with authentic Catholic social teaching which condemns moral relativism (modernism *) as heresy.
   
   *]Leadership training for Gamaliel (including JOB and other “faith-based organizations”) includes studying situational ethics. This means moral judgements can change according to the situation. This is totally incompatible with authentice Catholic teaching.
   
   *]The Gamaliel Foundation receives grants from the Bauman Family Foundation, the Public Welfare Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, the Ford Foundation, George Soros’s Open Society Institute, and others.
   
   *] George Soros also provides funding for ACORN, Catholics for a Free Choice (pro-abortion), Democratic Party, EMILY’s List (pro-abortion), NARAL Pro-Choice America, Planned Parenthood, and many others.
   
   (more in a follow-up post)

1. 
   You list Karl Rahner as a “dissident”! Wow, that’s a bold statement. It kinda seems that Rahner is higly respected by even the most conservitive theologians of our day, including Hans Urs von Balthasar and Henry de Lubac, not to mention Popes JP2 and B16. These traditional theologians would no doubt disagree with Rahner on a number of issues, however, the are know to have celebrated Mass together on many occations in very public settings.
   
   This is the problem when you get all your information from the internet, as it seems Mimi did. Try Communio. This is a theological review that is one of the most respecting around the world. Pope JP2 and B16 have been regular contributors to this publication. They have written many things exclusively for Communio.
   Communio has a wonderful history that goes back to the Second Vatican Council. It seems that some of the fathers of the Council thought that there were some theologians that were taking a much to liberal view when it came to understand what happened at the Council. So they started Communio. The original editors of Communio included JP2 before he was Pope, von Balthazar and de Lubac. I think Joseph Ratzinger was in the group too.
   
   Let work together to rase the level of Catholic theological discourse on issues of morality, faith and worship.

 

[po18guy]

It’s not about disagreeing with me…it’s about the fact that many people get there information from the internet and fox news.

I note that you are on the internet and we are getting information from you. Should we then disregard all that you have to say?

This is a blight on our wonderful tradition of Catholic academics. I am perfectly comfortable when people disagree with me. That’s part of a good discourse. I just don’t want to have to waste time fighting Glen Beck. Glen Beck is seemingly incapable of having a sustained thought of more than 5 sound bites.
Don’t give up your Catholic academic tradition for the likes of Fox News.

So, you prefer such bastions of objectivity as MSNBC or the NYT? I suggest that you do not watch Glen Beck. If he is deceptive, or lies, that would be news. Personal dislike does not reflect on credibility, one way or the other.

 

[ljpgoodwin]

I note that you are on the internet and we are getting information from you. Should we then disregard all that you have to say?

So, you prefer such bastions of objectivity as MSNBC or the NYT? I suggest that you do not watch Glen Beck. If he is deceptive, or lies, that would be news. Personal dislike does not reflect on credibility, one way or the other.

I have never seen MSNBC and I don’t know what NYT is. Please feel free to disregard what I am saying if you like. But, at least tell my why you don’t find me credible by citing credible source material such as internationally know and widely respected peer-reviewed journals and reviews such as Communio, papal documents and other Magisterial teaching materials.

Generally, I get my news from PBS or NPR, The Christian Science Monitor and the Wall Street Journal. Sometimes I disagree with these outlets as well. My point is that, my opponents in this discourse have not been using academically credible sources for their rebuttals. I would like to point out that there has only been one person who used a papal encyclical to challenge me. Every other challenge has been from some anonymous web sites that are hardly academically reputable or credible.

Even with the person who used the Catholic document didn’t answer my question when I pressed him/her further on what s/he was saying.

All I am really hoping for is a little better awareness of the wonderful resources that are available through our Catholic schools and the USCCB and the Vatican. Read the documents that you don’t agree with as well as the documents you do agree with. If you don’t like Karl Rahner, go find out what he is saying by taking a class in theology at your local Catholic university or seminary.

Being in the seminary myself, I don’t have a choice. Thankfully, I have to read some of the very liberal theologians that I don’t like along with some of the conservative theologians I don’t like. But what I do like is when I find out that, more often than not, the reason I don’t like most theologians is because I don’t understand them.

Mimi listed Karl Rahner as a “dissident”. I would love to hear Mimi discuss Rahner, at length in her/his own words telling my why Rahner is a “dissident”. I don’t want to read about some anonymous blogger thoughts. Give me a well thought out original thought that shows that someone has really thought about and studied in a university classroom some reason that Rahner should be called a “dissident”.

Is that too much to ask?

 

[ljpgoodwin]

Quote from po18guy

“I suggest that you do not watch Glen Beck. If he is deceptive, or lies, that would be news.”

I’m not real sure what you mean here, but I’ll give it a go.

I don’t think Glen Beck is deceptive on lies. I think he is far too misguided and unintelligent to deceive or lie. He is so blinded by xenophobia that he is not free. He is lacking in the kind of human freedom that he would need to be held culpable of deceiving and lying.

 

[ljpgoodwin]

1. 
   *]ourladyswarriors.org/dissent/dissorg.htm#Call%20to%20Action:
   
   So, I think the charge that “the information in certain articles can’t be trusted” is answered. Apparently, it is not only Catholic journalists who have noticed a particular ideology in Gamaliel, IAF and Community Organizing. Block has been researching and writing about Organizing for about 14 years. I think that gives her some credibility!
   

   The "social justice" issues Community Organizers are about are not the same as the Church's. And make no mistake about it, C.O.'s definition of "comprehensive health care" always includes abortion under reproductive services. This has become so taken for granted in the USA that I do not know how it can be extracted from the language and legislation of Health Care. Thank God that some bishops ARE making an effort to help us understand why we cannot be part of that, or that abortion (and embryonic stem cell research, euthanasia) cannot be part of a health care or insurance package that Catholics can agree with.

1. 
   For the record the fact the FOX NEWS is organizing these “Tea Parties” around the country is something that all anti-community organizing people should take note of.
   
   Please take a look at what the USCCB is and has been saying about health care reform for the last 12 or so years. Please note that the source I am using is is authoritative because it is magisterial. It is not some anonymous dubious, source.
   
   usccb.org/healthcare/

 

[po18guy]

I have never seen MSNBC and I don’t know what NYT is. Please feel free to disregard what I am saying if you like. But, at least tell my why you don’t find me credible by citing credible source material such as internationally know and widely respected peer-reviewed journals and reviews such as Communio, papal documents and other Magisterial teaching materials.

It appears to be carefully selected so as to support a narrow viewpoint. I said “appears”. As far as disregarding you, your own words denigrated “internet” sourcing of information - yet that is precisely what you are engaged in. I was just musing, that’s all. Oh, MSNBC is cable news and NYT is the New York Times.

Generally, I get my news from PBS or NPR, The Christian Science Monitor and the Wall Street Journal. Sometimes I disagree with these outlets as well. My point is that, my opponents in this discourse have not been using academically credible sources for their rebuttals. I would like to point out that there has only been one person who used a papal encyclical to challenge me. Every other challenge has been from some anonymous web sites that are hardly academically reputable or credible.

PBS and NPR are government Kool-Aid. I don’t drink that. They are unabashedly secular and liberal. As the term secular essentially means “of the age”, such a news source may not be an appropriate choice, since you and I profess to be captives of the timeless. If PBS and NPR had as many well-connected critics as FOX does, their content would be far less biased, and/or beleaguered taxpayers would have pulled their plugs. As a news source, I suspect that EWTN is too conservative for you, but at least it’s Catholic.

All I am really hoping for is a little better awareness of the wonderful resources that are available through our Catholic schools and the USCCB and the Vatican. Read the documents that you don’t agree with as well as the documents you do agree with. If you don’t like Karl Rahner, go find out what he is saying by taking a class in theology at your local Catholic university or seminary.

Your opinions are controversial because you appear to be proceeding from a self-perceived attitude of superior awareness. Please explain why the groups and organizations which you support are preferable to others. Also realize that those of us currently outside the sphere of academia function in a necessarily different reality. Their are a plethora of other methods of accomplishing the same “social justice” goals. Why should it matter how the goals are reached - unless a certain ideology is intended to accompany the reaching of that goal?

For me, a USCCB affiliation or endorsement has now drawn frighteningly near to a blanket condemnation. The current ACORN scandal is just the latest in a long line of highly questionable prudential decisions the organization has made over recent decades. IMO, something is clearly amiss within the USCCB and investigation, if not reform is needed.

Mimi listed Karl Rahner as a “dissident”. I would love to hear Mimi discuss Rahner, at length in her/his own words telling my why Rahner is a “dissident”. I don’t want to read about some anonymous blogger thoughts. Give me a well thought out original thought that shows that someone has really thought about and studied in a university classroom some reason that Rahner should be called a “dissident”.

Perhaps the fact that his theology was found acceptable, even desirable by many protestants should trigger some suspicion. Shouldn’t it? On a time line, his contribution to VII, combined with the turmoil in the Church since, while far from conclusive, is at least worth noting. I see that you chose only his name to support. What about the others? I note that you have already casually dismissed Fr. Mitch Pacwa as a credible critic. Better to achieve your own ordination before judging his abilities, no? Last I heard, Jesuits like Fr. Pacwa and Rahner were required to have at least a modest degree of education.

As well, I perceive that you are attempting to control the debate by demanding that only your standards of discourse and levels of evidence are met. It need not be at a university level for an individual’s divergence of belief from orthodoxy to be reliably shown. I would think that the standard of a preponderance of the evidence as defined by civil law would suffice. Again, the academic environment in general has become quite averse to intellectual diversity.

As to the USCCB, it was duped, for wont of a better term, into support of a subversive-based group that greatly assisted the most zealously pro-abortion president in history into office. Said organization is being shown to apply morally reprehensible tactics. Yet, only once the election was over did support for this group finally cease. You see no problem here? To be charitable, the USCCB decision making process and sense of timing are deplorable, if not downright suspect. A prudent Catholic should therefore be rather wary of USCCB decisions - most certainly in the area of “social justice”.

In any event, social justice concerns can be addressed through any of a wide variety of methods and organizations. It pains me to say this, but a Catholic might err less by supporting Evangelical protestant charitable organizations, as their vetting process appears much more thorough and transparent than that of the USCCB.

Is that too much to ask?

Well, at least consider that it might be, since you are demanding your personal standard to be met.

 

[po18guy]

For the record the fact the FOX NEWS is organizing these “Tea Parties” around the country is something that all anti-community organizing people should take note of.

I think that your adversaries here are more “anti-subversion” than anti anything else. The fact that FOX is above board about this is commendable. If only the sham “town hall meetings” were as honest.

Please take a look at what the USCCB is and has been saying about health care reform for the last 12 or so years. Please note that the source I am using is is authoritative because it is magisterial. It is not some anonymous dubious, source.

Neither is it dogmatic in nature. Where is the provision for prudential judgment? The USCCB reveals scant evidence of that ability.

The church teaches that “universal access” is to be sought after, not universal provision. You also should realize by now that any public option will have abortion in it. That damns the entire legislation. This is the fatal flaw in much of contemporary Catholic thinking - to minimize the evil and conflate the good in legislation. It is still objective evil.

 

[po18guy]

Quote from po18guy

“I suggest that you do not watch Glen Beck. If he is deceptive, or lies, that would be news.”

I’m not real sure what you mean here, but I’ll give it a go.

I don’t think Glen Beck is deceptive on lies. I think he is far too misguided and unintelligent to deceive or lie. He is so blinded by xenophobia that he is not free. He is lacking in the kind of human freedom that he would need to be held culpable of deceiving and lying.

A secular parable: Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a seminarian and the other was a Fox reporter. The seminarian stood up and prayed about himself: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men—mislead, unintelligent, xenophobic—or even like this Fox reporter. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’ But the Fox reporter stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’ I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.

I am praying for you.

 

[ljpgoodwin]

That being the case, shouldn’t people who don’t have a higher education be docile to those who do as Mimi suggested in an early post? I don’t completely believe that people who don’t have a theological education should be docile to those who do. I’m trying to make a point. My point is that we all should be docile in a large degree to the teaching authority of the Church, not to Glen Beck.
There is nothing wrong with a new agency being secular or liberal. Just like there is nothing wrong with a new agency being Christian and conservative or any combination of the two as far as I can see. The sub-title of Gaudium et Spes is “The Church IN the Modern World” not “The Church AND the Modern World”. The distinction is important. One of the main points of GS is that the world was created good by God. This means that as Christians we can and should participate fully in the secular world in areas upon which we agree, such as the promotion of human dignity. So there is nothing wrong with listening to secular new agencies or sending your kids to public schools.
Just for the record, I happen to like von Balthazar’s ideas of unity in the Church by building a stronger universal Catholic culture. I also like Rahner’s ideas of the importance of human relationships. It’s the tension between unity and diversity. Our Church holds both as vital.
Really, all I am trying to do is to get people to look into some of our more Catholic sources when we have questions about faith and politics or other subjects. Why read someone else’s opinion when you can read the primary source. Why read Joe Blow’s version when you can read St. Augustine for yourself. If you can’t make it to university, as your pastor to have a class on the classics like St. Augustine or Gregory of Nyssa (who I just found out is the coolest theologian ever).
Education builds unity. That is what I am working toward. As the Church stands right now there is a sizable amount of discord. So, if we are going to address that, doesn’t it make sense that we drink from the same well? I’m not talking about from where we get our news. What I’m talking about is from where we are fed spiritually. Obviously, that means that we start with attending to the Eucharist. From there, shouldn’t we learn what the Eucharist means? Shouldn’t we learn the meaning of the Eucharist from people who have been teaching about it for a long time? You are right, don’t take it from me. Go learn from the Church Fathers, the documents of the Second Vatican Council and from your Pope.
You are right; I might have been somewhat uppity. But that is because I see my Church being torn apart for no good reason. This saddens me to think that some people think Glen Beck has anything of value to add in a conversation about Catholic social teaching.
What does it mean that you and some others are suspicious of the USCCB and by extension the Vatican? How can we have a truly Catholic conversation if we can’t even agree that the USCCB and the Vatican are Catholic institutions beyond reproach?

 

[po18guy]

That being the case, shouldn’t people who don’t have a higher education be docile to those who do as Mimi suggested in an early post? I don’t completely believe that people who don’t have a theological education should be docile to those who do. I’m trying to make a point. My point is that we all should be docile in a large degree to the teaching authority of the Church, not to Glen Beck.

Thomas Paine and many others of the revolutionary time in America were not well liked by the landed gentry, either. They were rabble rousers. Good thing we had them, as who else had the fortitude to challenge the King? And, if Beck is ultimately pointing out what is true, are there not alternative organizations to achieve the Church’s goals? Of couse!

There is nothing wrong with a new agency being secular or liberal. Just like there is nothing wrong with a new agency being Christian and conservative or any combination of the two as far as I can see. The sub-title of Gaudium et Spes is “The Church IN the Modern World” not “The Church AND the Modern World”. The distinction is important.

Isn’t the proper distinction between being “in” the world and “of” the world? The Catholic Church has suffered greatly in the past century (and continues to suffer) by being far too much of this world. Rahner and his less-than docile submission to Church teaching on Mary’s perpetual virginity might just have contributed a small bit to this problem. I must ask whether or not his influence on V2 has borne fruit in the turmoil that followed.

One of the main points of GS is that the world was created good by God. This means that as Christians we can and should participate fully in the secular world in areas upon which we agree, such as the promotion of human dignity.

Do we draw the line when objective evil is included, as it is in the president’s “healthcare” legislation? Or do we apply the worldly dogma of proportionality?

Just for the record, I happen to like von Balthazar’s ideas of unity in the Church by building a stronger universal Catholic culture.

Why should this be considered a concession?

I also like Rahner’s ideas of the importance of human relationships. It’s the tension between unity and diversity. Our Church holds both as vital.

As one who was influenced by “enlightenment” thinkers and nazi Martin Heidegger, one would suppose that Rahner held that to be the case.

Really, all I am trying to do is to get people to look into some of our more Catholic sources when we have questions about faith and politics or other subjects.

We have a Pope, his encyclicals, the Bishops and the Catechism. We had the teaching of the Bishops prior to the last election, and defiant “Catholic” voters still voted for, and got, more abortion AND more war. Great deal, huh?

Why read someone else’s opinion when you can read the primary source. Why read Joe Blow’s version when you can read St. Augustine for yourself.

Couldn’t agree more.

Education builds unity.

But, like change, education can lead in both directions. Discernment is key.

That is what I am working toward. As the Church stands right now there is a sizable amount of discord.

An admirable goal, to be sure. However, compare pre- and post-Vatican 2 for a contrast in discord. Either the contents of, or the implementation of V2 are to blame.

So, if we are going to address that, doesn’t it make sense that we drink from the same well? What I’m talking about is from where we are fed spiritually. Obviously, that means that we start with attending to the Eucharist. From there, shouldn’t we learn what the Eucharist means? Shouldn’t we learn the meaning of the Eucharist from people who have been teaching about it for a long time?

If it is orthodox, yes.

You are right, don’t take it from me. Go learn from the Church Fathers, the documents of the Second Vatican Council and from your Pope.

Speaking of discord, we are suffering through the discordant fruits of the second Vatican Council. Again, content or implementation is key. I thank the Lord it was not dogmatic. We need to go back further than that. Better to begin at the beginning and progress forward until you notice an uncomfortable theological change beginning. I have lived through that change and it is the souce of much consternation. Agreed on the Eucharist. Ground zero for Catholics and Orthodox.

You are right; I might have been somewhat uppity. (two qualifiers? ) But that is because I see my Church being torn apart for no good reason.

Orthodoxy has worked every time it is tried. It is the heterodoxy of the 1960s that turned the Church on its ear and initiated the exodus.

This saddens me to think that some people think Glen Beck has anything of value to add in a conversation about Catholic social teaching.

Well, in consideration of diversity of opinion, you might note that he is pro-life. I doubt that can be said of many on NPR or PBS. I don’t think all that much of him personally, but he does serve as a bellwether.

What does it mean that you and some others are suspicious of the USCCB and by extension the Vatican? How can we have a truly Catholic conversation if we can’t even agree that the USCCB and the Vatican are Catholic institutions beyond reproach?

Let’s slow down a little. We are to test everything, and retain what is good. The great Saints, and some Doctors of the Church, have been horribly mistreated by the Church hierarchy. The USCCB in particular, is an independent, non-Magisterial organization that is so impotent that it could not muster an opinion as to whether or not a politician who actively supports objective evil should be honored by a Catholic university! This would have been unthinkable at any prior time in Church history. USCCB support for subversive ACORN. Numerous other USCCB missteps in my lifetime. Thart’s why. I submit the following link as anecdotal evidence only. I neither subscribe to, nor am I familiar with the site itself:

insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4754&Itemid=80

The Vatican must also be watched, as it consists of men who sometimes undercut even our Pope. In particular, the Vatican Secretary of State recently altering and then releasing Benedict XVI’s words, and thus bringing scandal upon the Church. This was a lack of prudence that came to light. We must test everything.

 

[ljpgoodwin]

A secular parable: Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a seminarian and the other was a Fox reporter. The seminarian stood up and prayed about himself: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other men—mislead, unintelligent, xenophobic—or even like this Fox reporter. I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’ But the Fox reporter stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’ I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.

I am praying for you.

So…what are you trying to say in your “secular parable”? I’m sure you are not trying to say that Glen Beck is a humble and lowly pilgrim. And I’m sure you are not trying to say that I am an arrogant slum lord. That would be uncharitable on your part. I’m sure you wouldn’t be like that. Could you be a little more direct?
Please don’t tell me that you can’t see that Glen Beck and most of the Fox News crew are racists. Love the person, hate the sin. You have to give me at least than, no?
What have I done that is so wrong? I have been fighting in defense of the integrity of the Church in the face of people here who are calling bishops deceptive. I am standing up for the USCCB as an institution that is trying to do its job of bringing the Good News of Jesus Christ to American Christian and all who will listen.
I can’t believe how much anti-Catholicism I have run into in this forum. More than once I have seen people write that they think the USCCB is suspect, or that CCHD and JustFaith are suspect too. How very un-Catholic.
So tell me, po18guy, just who is the “seminarian” in your “secular parable”? It seems to me that someone who says that the USCCB, CCHD and JustFaith are involved in some sort of conspiracy to promote abortion is one heck of a lot more arrogant than someone who is asking fellow Christians to go and study the Church.
As a matter of fact, we are all obligated to study the Church and the Bible as best we can. It’s part of being a faithful Christian. Study and community organizing are two very Catholic things to do.
I’ll pray for you too. I’ll put you on our Rosary prayer list too.

 

[Tigg]

What have I done that is so wrong? I have been fighting in defense of the integrity of the Church in the face of people here who are calling bishops deceptive. I am standing up for the USCCB as an institution that is trying to do its job of bringing the Good News of Jesus Christ to American Christian and all who will listen.
**I can’t believe how much anti-Catholicism I have run into in this forum. More than once I have seen people write that they think the USCCB is suspect, or that CCHD and JustFaith are suspect too. How very un-Catholic. **

The evidence is right before your eyes, but you seem unwilling to look. I wonder why? To see what is happening in our Church is very painful for us all. It is precisely because of our love for Her and the truth that is held in the Deposit of Faith that we question these things we know to be contrary to the foundation of Truth. This isn’t being UN-Catholic, in fact, to not defend the faith would be a serious omission on our part. We are not to blindly accept whatever the USCCB says, or for that matter what any theologian says who deviates from a previously Revealed Truth.

Perhaps this will help you. This is directly from the Catechism:

CCC: 907 “In accord with the knowledge, competence, and preeminence which they possess, [lay people] have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church, and they have a right to make their opinion known to the other Christian faithful, with due regard to the integrity of faith and morals and reverence toward their pastors, and with consideration for the common good and the dignity of persons.”

It is not being disrespectful to our bishops to question their political motives in giving OUR donations to groups that clearly advocate abortion and other things contrary to the moral teaching of the Church. In fact, I would go so far to say THEY have an obligation to US, as our Shepherds, to explain this because bad fruit is issuing forth and many are being led astray. Were you aware that the USCCB film office (a few years back) gave a glowing review of Brokeback Mountain and The Golden Compass and stated they were “Entirely in Harmony with Catholic Teaching." It was only the resulting outcry from the faithful and a handful of bishops that reversed that glowing review to one of morally objectionable.

Here is a much quoted saying from our Beloved Fulton J. Sheen:

Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops, like bishops, and your religious act like religious.

Why don’t you do your own research into these groups that are being funded by the CHD? I did a while back, and was, quite frankly, shocked!

 

[jewells17]

And besides everything already mentioned on this thread…look at what else has been infecting the church by reading Marcia’s personal story on www.christiananswersforthenewage.org it is a must read and she is so honest! Also check out www.crossveil.org regarding more of same. We have alot to pray about.

 

[St_Francis]

Lost reply—reconstructing below