Some Catholic bloggers are calling out other Catholics on their actions (or should I say faith)

[didymus]

I find most of the charges of “lack of charity” or “incivility” hollow – this from the people who have been running the show and haven’t had any respect for conservative Catholics.

If the secular press found and reported financial shenanigans at a diocese or Catholic Charities, or sexual harassment at a Catholic university I would them to report the stories.

If bloggers are reporting truthfully about church leaders causing scandal or leading dissent they have a right to write about it.

That said, some are uncharitable (the Vortex being the wort IMHO), I can’t read anyone’s heart. I read blogs from across the spectrum and I certainly don’t see any “Taliban” cabal of conservative Catholics.

But heads of Catholic Charities, Catholic hospital or school administrators, diocesan spokesmen, all are our “civil servants” if you will. The Church is not a democracy but we are entitled to some transparency.

 

[The_Reginator]

Real Catholic TV has some insightful comments on the following article:
Catholic bloggers aim to purge dissenters

To view Michael Voris’ comment see:
Hating on Catholics

 

[SunshineZA]

I find most of the charges of “lack of charity” or “incivility” hollow – this from the people who have been running the show and haven’t had any respect for conservative Catholics.

If the secular press found and reported financial shenanigans at a diocese or Catholic Charities, or sexual harassment at a Catholic university I would them to report the stories.

If bloggers are reporting truthfully about church leaders causing scandal or leading dissent they have a right to write about it.

That said, some are uncharitable (the Vortex being the wort IMHO), I can’t read anyone’s heart. I read blogs from across the spectrum and I certainly don’t see any “Taliban” cabal of conservative Catholics.

But heads of Catholic Charities, Catholic hospital or school administrators, diocesan spokesmen, all are our “civil servants” if you will. The Church is not a democracy but we are entitled to some transparency.

Well said.

Regards, S.

 

[John21652]

Real Catholic TV has some insightful comments on the following article:
Catholic bloggers aim to purge dissenters

To view Michael Voris’ comment see:
Hating on Catholics

Many complain that the Church heirarchy don’t do enough to “protect” the standards of the Church. Perhaps a more active laity will put some backbone into the Church’s leadership.

 

[FAB]

I find most of the charges of “lack of charity” or “incivility” hollow – this from the people who have been running the show and haven’t had any respect for conservative Catholics.

If the secular press found and reported financial shenanigans at a diocese or Catholic Charities, or sexual harassment at a Catholic university I would them to report the stories.

If bloggers are reporting truthfully about church leaders causing scandal or leading dissent they have a right to write about it.

That said, some are uncharitable (the Vortex being the wort IMHO), I can’t read anyone’s heart. I read blogs from across the spectrum and I certainly don’t see any “Taliban” cabal of conservative Catholics.

But heads of Catholic Charities, Catholic hospital or school administrators, diocesan spokesmen, all are our “civil servants” if you will. The Church is not a democracy but we are entitled to some transparency.

At least with the news there is some assemblage of having facts and sources. Bloggers thrive on hearsay and innuendo, no facts and very often a lack of understanding of Catholic teaching and doctrine. They see something they don’t like and attack it or call it an abuse. They are are welcome to their opinion, but that is all that it is.

 

[wisdomseeker]

It is about time that someone step in to counterattack those disssenters of the Faith from spreading their poison to other Catholics. finally our Lord is stepping in to save His Church from the wolves.

 

[didymus]

At least with the news there is some assemblage of having facts and sources. Bloggers thrive on hearsay and innuendo, no facts and very often a lack of understanding of Catholic teaching and doctrine. They see something they don’t like and attack it or call it an abuse. They are are welcome to their opinion, but that is all that it is.

As far as “thriving on hearsay & innuendo”, says who? Have you read any of these blogs?
Some are quite good, thoughtful, others specialise more on getting out information/resources. And as always, most are average & some are bad – which applies to all fields of endeavor.

You see “lack of understanding of doctrine”; conservatives see dissent, liturgical abuses, disrespect for Church authority and opposition to Church teaching.
Why is only one side entitled to express its opinion?

 

[FAB]

As far as “thriving on hearsay & innuendo”, says who? Have you read any of these blogs?
Some are quite good, thoughtful, others specialise more on getting out information/resources. And as always, most are average & some are bad – which applies to all fields of endeavor.

You see “lack of understanding of doctrine”; conservatives see dissent, liturgical abuses, disrespect for Church authority and opposition to Church teaching.
Why is only one side entitled to express its opinion?

I will agree that there are some with good info. Many of them are in a form of echo chamber. Using the same information over and over from a single source and not giving any balance. Most of the so call conservative and traditionalist bloggs promote turning the clock backwards as though previous the the Second Vatican Council was some type of Golden age. The look on that time with rose colored glasses refusing to recongize the problems of those times. One issue that I have a great problem with is one you site as one of their issues, dis respect for church authority. The very fact that they promote a different time in the church is disrespectful to that aithority.
Are there issue in the church today, no doubt. The laity cetainly has a role, put as a partner to help resolve them. Remember, opposition and not working within the church to make changes brought us Martin Luther. Is that really were we want to head again.

 

[gakroeger]

I will agree that there are some with good info. Many of them are in a form of echo chamber. Using the same information over and over from a single source and not giving any balance. Most of the so call conservative and traditionalist bloggs promote turning the clock backwards as though previous the the Second Vatican Council was some type of Golden age. The look on that time with rose colored glasses refusing to recongize the problems of those times. One issue that I have a great problem with is one you site as one of their issues, dis respect for church authority. The very fact that they promote a different time in the church is disrespectful to that aithority.
Are there issue in the church today, no doubt. The laity cetainly has a role, put as a partner to help resolve them. Remember, opposition and not working within the church to make changes brought us Martin Luther. Is that really were we want to head again.

Balance? You are looking for balanced arguments? That sounds very much like the problems of relativism that plagues our country today. Those attempting to destroy the constitution and our American way of life use the very same arguments (and btw this is also why they attack the Catholic Church because it stands for one universal truth and not several versions of it). Right is right and wrong is wrong, there is no middle ground. Relativism (attempting to create middle ground (grey) between right and wrong and distorting truth) is the weapon of the devil. This is why it is so important to stand with the magisterium and follow Church teaching to the letter. This is what prevents additional schisms not create them.

 

[estesbob]

IAre there issue in the church today, no doubt. The laity cetainly has a role, put as a partner to help resolve them. Remember, opposition and not working within the church to make changes brought us Martin Luther. Is that really were we want to head again.

And what changes should the Church be working with the laity to bring about? And just what is the function of the laity as far as these changes are concerned?

 

[A_Fortiori_33]

I am curious to know what possible bearing that could have on this topic?

I asked who sent their children to Catholic schools because I was curious to know how many posters put their money where their mouth is. Just asking.

 

[estesbob]

I asked who sent their children to Catholic schools because I was curious to know how many posters put their money where their mouth is. Just asking.

You are operating under the mistaken assumption that there are Catholic schools available for Catholics to send their children to. If one lives in the Northeast or the upper Midwest it is likely there is a Catholic school nearby. However if one lived in Texas, as I did when I was raising my kids, there was not a Catholic school within 15 miles of our house. My kids got a fantastic Catholic education regardless due to the efforts of my parish and their parents. Its not a matter of putting your money where your mouth is-it’s a matter of making your Faith the center of your life and making sure your children know that and participate in that.

 

[FAB]

And what changes should the Church be working with the laity to bring about? And just what is the function of the laity as far as these changes are concerned?

The laity does have a voice in the Church, more than just to send in letters of compliant to the bishop or on blogs. On a parish level there should be liturgy committees and pastoral commisions that have a role in representing the needs and wishes of a parish. Since the Church believes in the practice of subsidiarity, this should be the focus most parisheners. On the Diocesan level there are pastoral commissions witht he ordinary, made up of the ordained and the laity which can voice cencerns directly. If the ordinary feels that there isa need to change based on imput he might get, certainly he will act on them. If it seen as large enough movement, the ordinary is the one who would address it at higher levels of the church including the bishop’s conferences.
I am not looking for any particular changes in the Church, my focus is on serving the needs of the faithful and bringing more people to the Lord.

 

[Ridgerunner]

You are operating under the mistaken assumption that there are Catholic schools available for Catholics to send their children to. If one lives in the Northeast or the upper Midwest it is likely there is a Catholic school nearby. However if one lived in Texas, as I did when I was raising my kids, there was not a Catholic school within 15 miles of our house. My kids got a fantastic Catholic education regardless due to the efforts of my parish and their parents. Its not a matter of putting your money where your mouth is-it’s a matter of making your Faith the center of your life and making sure your children know that and participate in that.

True, there are places where no Catholic schools are available. I suspect there aren’t terribly many of those places. I live in the Bible Belt (perhaps the buckle thereof) and all of my children went, and all of my grandchildren go. Still, there would be places where there are none.

But there are lots of people to whom they are available, but they don’t send their children anyway.

Certainly, a child can receive a good Catholic education at home.

But I think the question was well-intended, though perhaps it could have been better phrased.

 

[FAB]

Balance? You are looking for balanced arguments? That sounds very much like the problems of relativism that plagues our country today. Those attempting to destroy the constitution and our American way of life use the very same arguments (and btw this is also why they attack the Catholic Church because it stands for one universal truth and not several versions of it). Right is right and wrong is wrong, there is no middle ground. Relativism (attempting to create middle ground (grey) between right and wrong and distorting truth) is the weapon of the devil. This is why it is so important to stand with the magisterium and follow Church teaching to the letter. This is what prevents additional schisms not create them.

The Church can withstand the attacks from outside, It are the internal attacks, as metioned from bloggers that create decent inside the Church that I believe creates a greater issue. Yes, I agree it is important to follow the teaching of the Magisterium and your local ordinary is the primary teacher that is to be followed from that group.

 

[estesbob]

True, there are places where no Catholic schools are available. I suspect there aren’t terribly many of those places. I live in the Bible Belt (perhaps the buckle thereof) and all of my children went, and all of my grandchildren go. Still, there would be places where there are none.

But there are lots of people to whom they are available, but they don’t send their children anyway.

Certainly, a child can receive a good Catholic education at home.

But I think the question was well-intended, though perhaps it could have been better phrased.

WhereI live now there is exacly one and it is 35 miles away. I was surprisd when i moved to texas in 1978 that every parish did not have its own school-thats what I was used to in Kansas City. Where i live now is even worse.

 

[gakroeger]

The issue is that too many people are assuming that our preist and bishops are not teaching according to the magisterium and they are the ones committing the heresy.
To become a priest it is a min of 8 years of siminary in most cases. Bishops are appointed by the pope after years of service as a priest. But yet there are those with very little education in all the subjects of the church, presume they are more qualified than these men call to the Lord’s service to make comment and critique their work.
I see post after post on CAF which attacks what is precieved as abuses of the liturgy, critiques on priest and bishops, and gangs of others perfecting willing to pile on. Often time in error. The 100’s of post which rail against the Second Vatican Council, which is teaching of the magisterium, or rail against the ordinary form of the mass, all these are do not resolve issues, but only cause problems, divisions and worse doubt in minds of the faithful who often do not understand the workings of the Church.
These bloggers and other sites have their own agendas, which are out of step with the Church’s.

Now here is a bishop (now Cardinal Designate) who is preaching according to the magisterium. Hopefully some of those Catholics who got it wrong in the last election will get it right in this one…

Link to article and video

 

[uxordepp]

The laity does have a voice in the Church, more than just to send in letters of compliant to the bishop or on blogs. On a parish level there should be liturgy committees and pastoral commisions that have a role in representing the needs and wishes of a parish. Since the Church believes in the practice of subsidiarity, this should be the focus most parisheners. On the Diocesan level there are pastoral commissions witht he ordinary, made up of the ordained and the laity which can voice cencerns directly. If the ordinary feels that there isa need to change based on imput he might get, certainly he will act on them. If it seen as large enough movement, the ordinary is the one who would address it at higher levels of the church including the bishop’s conferences.
I am not looking for any particular changes in the Church, my focus is on serving the needs of the faithful and bringing more people to the Lord.

I work in a parish that has a parish/pastoral council, liturgy committee etc.

The problem is that many think one opinion is as valid as the next. In a number of the areas of the Church, opinions and ‘wishes’ have a minimal role if they have one at all.

Liturgy committees can only work if the participants are willing to learn what liturgy is, and what the Church expects. I think many of us have had enough of childish Masses, cheesy music and decorations. Dignity and reverence, whether you participate in an NO or an EF Mass are requirements. I don’t know how many times I’ve said that ‘cute’ is not a liturgical term, when responding to someone who can’t understand why Father has stopped gathering the children to the altar for the Our Father!

What I see many bloggers pleading for is Mass that is following the rubrics respectfully. THAT is what will bring people to the Lord.

 

[Annabelle_Marie]

While I certainly agree with the Gospel of this Sunday, I do not agree with your application of it to the situation discussed on this thread (statement in bold). This Gospel is teaching how humbly we must approach God. The tax collector is recognizing his faults and is sorry for them, the Pharisee is not. Almost the opposite of how you assigned the people in this discussion to the Gospel. Those not following the magisterium in this discussion have not acknowledged their sinfulness, those on the other side may or may not be acknowledging their sinfulness, but they are following Christ’s teaching in explaining the error in not following Church teaching. Hopefully, all individuals on this thread are condemning the sin and not the sinner.

Also, there seems to be a fallacy in your statement in the second paragraph (again in bold). It does not make them dissident; it makes them Christ-like? And then you state Christ was a dissident? Isn’t this contradictory? It appears to be a good argument for the bloggers we are discussing. They are dissidents like Christ?

Hmmm…or one wonders if the bloggers are like the first part of that gospel…Jesus told the story to those who were convinced of their own righteousness and dispised everyone else…

 

[tgm21234]

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/24/AR2010102401007.html