VOTF

[Weeorphan]

Dear Theodred:

Your apology is accepted for forgetting that Christ promised to indwell those who love Him with a pure heart, and to teach privately all things hidden from the worldly wise. We forgive you for forgetting that priests don’t have a monoply on “the Mind of Christ”, and certainly no monopoly on the difficult path to sainthood that might produce ‘Another Christ’.
Your screaming ‘HOW DARE YOU’, reminds us of the movie ‘Brother Sun, Sister Moon’, when St Francis dared to recite Scripture to the Pope surrounded by his gilded, pompous retinue. The arrogant, stuff-shirt Cardinals surrounding the Pope uttered the same words, ‘How dare you?’. Only the Pope saw the sanctity of the barefoot, ragtag men kneeling before him. At one point he said to St.Francis,'You shame us all", kneeling down to kiss his muddy feet. Perhaps you shout angrily for shame and gulit. Perhaps you don’t yet have the spriritual stature to understand our reprimand. For that also we forgive you.
.

 

[fix]

VOTF? Those old lefty dissenters still think they are in communion with the Church?

 

[johnq]

Aberrant Groups or Movements

Voice of the Faithful: When Wolves Dress Like Sheep by Deal W. Hudson** **
Fidelity of “Voice of the Faithful” Questioned by National Catholic Register Staff **
No Voice at Voice of the Faithful by Greg Byrnes**

 

[katherine2]

Aberrant Groups or Movements

Voice of the Faithful: When Wolves Dress Like Sheep by Deal W. Hudson
Fidelity of “Voice of the Faithful” Questioned by National Catholic Register Staff
No Voice at Voice of the Faithful by** Greg Byrnes**

Yes, we are aware that aberrant people like Deal Hudson make attacks on VOTF. Maybe we don’t need any more examples of the venom certain elements throw at VOTF until someone has given us an explaination for the McCarthyistic attack on VOTF that Exporter shared with us.

They alway persecute the prophets, you know.

 

[aridite]

katherine2:

You are not reading carefully, dearie.

Huh? CNN was pretty thorough.

“dearie” “sweetheart” ?!? Does anyone else find katherine2’s sexism offensive?

 

[Fiat]

Maybe we don’t need any more examples of the venom certain elements throw at VOTF until someone has given us an explaination for the McCarthyistic attack on VOTF that Exporter shared with us.

I suspect that VOTF is being “attacked” because VOTF has in some way threatened the status quo for some people. I think it’s absurd to paint a broad stroke across VOTF labeling it as entirely “faithful” or “unfaithful,” and I acknowledge that there may well be some elements of VOTF that are healthy for the Church (even though I personally haven’t seen any). Does this mean, though, that VOTF should be exempt from criticism? Does it mean that VOTF ought not be questioned, regardless of how pointed or reactionary those questions are? Because VOTF really can’t clarify a position for itself or for anyone else, I would think VOTF would welcome this sort of criticism and attack. You know…the whole refiner’s fire, thing?! Perhaps if the “McCarthystic” attacks keep on coming, VOTF will be able to nail down a position for which it is willing to take.

Fiat

 

[fix]

I am sure many folks who are members may not know the true agenda of VOTF. Although, that would mean these folks have not taken the time to research what VOTF is.

They should be banned. Our Shepherds are often weak and give in to the dissenters, VOTF will not win in the end. Their agenda is not the agenda of the Church.

 

[fix]

“Keep the Faith, Change the Church” Francis X. Altiere 8/20/2002

Dissent is the modern crisis.

This is the chirpy little slogan that the lay Catholic group “Voice of the Faithful” have chosen as their motto. What is an honest, believing Roman Catholic to think of this? We have all been dismayed by the horrors of the priestly molestation scandal — priests abusing members of their flocks in sinful homosexual affairs while their bishops obfuscate and move them from parish to parish. This sort of corruption must be rooted out, and every abuse must be punished. But, there is always a universe of difference between an abuse and the thing abused. One must be very careful before callously embarking on a mission to “shape structural change within the Church,” as the Voice mission statement proposes to do. This clamorous group has certainly earned the distinction of being called “Voice.” We shall investigate whether or not it can honestly be called “Faithful.”

The major point that should be borne in mind when evaluating the goal of this group is that within the space of six little words — “Keep the faith, Change the Church” — they completely undermine the very essence of the Catholic faith. Is it possible to change the Church founded by Jesus Christ without undermining the Catholic faith upon which it stands? In the Nicene Creed, we profess to believe “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.” The Church, and the doctrines associated with her, itself constitutes an article of faith. The primacy of the Roman pontiff, the infallibility of the Church, the sacramental role of the ordained priesthood: these are all aspects of the Church, but they are also doctrines of the Faith. One destroys the Faith (as Satan has always tried to do) if one tries to “change” these doctrines. Voice, then, has no grounds on which to suggest that we can or should “change the Church” while at the same time “keeping the faith.” There are implicit in the mission of Voice denials of Church-related doctrines that amount to a rejection of the very Catholic faith that these “lay activists” claim to defend. The scandalous behavior of some of our shepherds has been shameful, but it is absolutely nauseating that pseudo-Catholic dissidents are taking advantage of this tragedy to forward their own agenda. They base their questionable new doctrines on a spurious reading of the Second Vatican Council, while ignoring completely the clear infallible pronouncements of two thousand years of Christianity. If the members of Voice wish to remain “faithful,” they would be well-advised to consider that a person who rejects even one solemn doctrine of the Catholic faith is not a Catholic at all. In the very simple words of the Baltimore Catechism, “if any Catholic denies only one article of faith, though he believes all the rest, he ceases to be a Catholic, and is cut off from the Church” (Explanation to Q. 129; 1945 edition, p. 142).

The Catholic Church Cannot Change

Those who are infected by that [modernist] spirit develop a keen dislike for all that savours of antiquity and become eager searchers after novelties in everything: in the way in which they carry out religious functions, in the ruling of Catholic institutions, and even in private exercises of piety. Therefore it is our will that the law of our forefathers should still be held sacred: “Let there be no innovation; keep to what has been handed down.” (Pope Benedict XV, Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, §25)

Heretics have always denied the divine origin of the Catholic Church. Thus it was that Martin Luther and other early Protestants wanted to reform the Church herself and not just the abuses of her pastors. “Catholic” dissenters today want to do the same thing. But, nothing could be more arrogant than this, for “unless the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it” (Ps. 126:1). Our Lord has already built Himself a house — this “house of God, which is the Church,” as St. Paul phrases it (I Tim. 3:15). It is the height of blasphemy to suggest that the Lord Christ failed in establishing His Church or, per impossible, that He established it so poorly that sinful shepherds would manage to corrupt the very essence of the Church.

faithfulvoice.com

 

[Theodred]

Weeorphan:

Dear Theodred:

Your apology is accepted for forgetting that Christ promised to indwell those who love Him with a pure heart, and to teach privately all things hidden from the worldly wise. We forgive you for forgetting that priests don’t have a monoply on “the Mind of Christ”, and certainly no monopoly on the difficult path to sainthood that might produce ‘Another Christ’.
Your screaming ‘HOW DARE YOU’, reminds us of the movie ‘Brother Sun, Sister Moon’, when St Francis dared to recite Scripture to the Pope surrounded by his gilded, pompous retinue. The arrogant, stuff-shirt Cardinals surrounding the Pope uttered the same words, ‘How dare you?’. Only the Pope saw the sanctity of the barefoot, ragtag men kneeling before him. At one point he said to St.Francis,'You shame us all", kneeling down to kiss his muddy feet. Perhaps you shout angrily for shame and gulit. Perhaps you don’t yet have the spriritual stature to understand our reprimand. For that also we forgive you.
.

Wow… I had no idea you were such a saint!! I humbly retract all my criticisms of what you said weeorphan…

Obviously if such a saint as you say that all the clergy are such criminals as you portray them, then it must be so!

Please, forgive me… I’m kissing your feet, ohhhh great one.

 

[Theodred]

“Many” or “vast majority” doesn’t really matter. There is a distinction between faithful lay Catholics living out their responsibilities they have as Catholics and people a bishop has hired for what the bishop judges as a secular competence. On th eone hand you have lay people living out their faith. On the other hand, you have laywers, doctors etc. who may not even be Catholic. Even if they are Catholic and even if they charitablly give the bishop a break on their usually fee, it is still the equivalent of a plumber coming over to fix the pipes at the Chancery.

You see, Katherine. This is exactly the problem. You don’t think that a plumber is fulfilling her vocation by being a plumber. You apparently think that in order for the laity to be fulfilling their “lay vocation” they have be doing something directly related the visible Church. That is far from what the Church has always taught.

We are to offer every moment of our lives to Christ. If the plumber does that, then she serves her bishop, the Church and God just as much, and perhaps more, as that psychologist who is hired by the diocese to screen seminarians.

The laity’s first and foremost responsibility is to the secular world, to spread the Word of God to a world in great need of God’s consolulation. If 22% of the US’s population were faithful, fervent, Catholic lay people, then the world would be a much better place, and perhaps there wouldn’t be so many abusers finding themselves in our Catholic seminaries.

As long as you keep missing this point, you are going to keep missing the underlying causes of child abuse in the Church. Sure, you will have the lay people taking action, but the action they take won’t be any different from what they were doing before. What kind of progress is that?

 

[katherine2]

aridite:

Huh? CNN was pretty thorough.

you’re too focused on politics and not on people. read the post again.

 

[Fiat]

Dear Theodred:

Thank you for the beautiful post! I agree with you entirely!

Your brother,
Fiat

 

[katherine2]

Fiat:

I suspect that VOTF is being “attacked” because VOTF has in some way threatened the status quo for some people.

I suspect you are right.

Does this mean, though, that VOTF should be exempt from criticism?
Fiat

I don’t think they should be exempt from criticism. But to be constructive, the criticism needs to be based on facts and on consistent principles.

I would welcome a critical discussion on VOTF’s stated goals, objectives and proposals. I have had a hard time getting anyone to that point of the discussion. Certainly baseless acusations don’t do anything but cause a distraction from a meaningful discussion.

 

[katherine2]

“Keep the Faith, Change the Church” Francis X. Altiere 8/20/2002

I find it difficult to see how Mr. Altiere is simply ignorant rather than deliberately malicious in his article. Of course the Church – the Community of the people of God – changes in many ways. Changes in discipline, changes in pastoral approaches, changes in style, chnages in activities occur.

Yes, the primacy of the Roman pontiff, the infallibility of the Church, the sacramental role of the ordained priesthood: these are all aspects of the Church, and they are also doctrines of the Faith. And yes, one destroys the Faith (as Satan has always tried to do) if one tries to “change” these doctrines.

But are these the only features of the Church? Is the Church nothing more than these three? No. An informed Catholic writer would know that.

 

[katherine2]

Théodred:

You see, Katherine. This is exactly the problem. You don’t think that a plumber is fulfilling her vocation by being a plumber.

She can be. But if she is not Catholic, she is hardly fullfilling her vocation as a faithful lay Catholic.

 

[aridite]

katherine2, I still don’t get your point about the voting trends in the last election, but that’s pretty off topic.

Back to VOTF

katherine2:

I don’t think they should be exempt from criticism. But to be constructive, the criticism needs to be based on facts and on consistent principles.

I’m not offering constructive criticism. I’m not trying to improve VOTF. I’m airing suspicions and saying why I don’t trust VOTF, which suspicions I know you respect and believe I am entitled to. But I have explained to death why VOTF has done nothing to earn my trust, and many things to shake it.

katherine2:

I would welcome a critical discussion on VOTF’s stated goals, objectives and proposals. I have had a hard time getting anyone to that point of the discussion. Certainly baseless acusations don’t do anything but cause a distraction from a meaningful discussion.

Its just that VOTF’s stated goal and objectives are so vacuous and thin, that they don’t bear discussion. Have they made proposals? Pray, present one for discussion. The only concrete relevant proposal on this thread (besides an oath of fidelity) was Weeorphan’s proposal that Pastoral/Finance committee have veto power over the expenditures of a parish’s pastor. I think I showed that that would effectively entail control over doctrinal/pastoral issues, which would change Church structure to such an extent that it we no longer kept the same faith.

 

[katherine2]

aridite:

I’m not offering constructive criticism. I’m not trying to improve VOTF. I’m airing suspicions and saying why I don’t trust VOTF, which suspicions I know you respect and believe I am entitled to. But I have explained to death why VOTF has done nothing to earn my trust, and many things to shake it.

I understand. You have suspicions and you dont’ feel trust. My counsel would be to go with you gut and abstain from any support for VOTF. Others will follow their gut and support VOTF. Nothing wrong with any of that. If I’m out late at night and don’t feel save, I move out of the area quickly. I don’t make accusations against the neighborhood I’m in, but I don’t stay there either.

 

[fix]

katherine2:
I find it difficult to see how Mr. Altiere is simply ignorant rather than deliberately malicious in his article. Of course the Church – the Community of the people of God – changes in many ways. Changes in discipline, changes in pastoral approaches, changes in style, chnages in activities occur.

Yes, the primacy of the Roman pontiff, the infallibility of the Church, the sacramental role of the ordained priesthood: these are all aspects of the Church, and they are also doctrines of the Faith. And yes, one destroys the Faith (as Satan has always tried to do) if one tries to “change” these doctrines.

But are these the only features of the Church? Is the Church nothing more than these three? No. An informed Catholic writer would know that.
Are you claiming VOTF is not top heavy with heterodox, dissenters who tend toward heretical views?

Faithfulvoice.com does a good job chronicling those traitors in the Church who want to foist their secular agenda on other Catholics. I try to be faithful and VOTF in no way represents me or millions of other Catholics who love the Church. In fact, they represent the opposite of faithful.

 

[katherine2]

fix:

Faithfulvoice.com does a good job chronicling those traitors in the Church… .

the chronicling of the critics of VOTF has been somewhere between flimsy to non-existant.

Not one critic of VOTF has the guts to defend the McCarthyistic rant Exporter posted. Every accusation against VOTF when examined thurns out to be untrue, unprincipled or opinion. Some of its critics have expressed heresy in their claim that VOTF is heretical.

 

[fix]

katherine2:

the chronicling of the critics of VOTF has been somewhere between flimsy to non-existant.

Not one critic of VOTF has the guts to defend the McCarthyistic rant Exporter posted. Every accusation against VOTF when examined thurns out to be untrue, unprincipled or opinion. Some of its critics have expressed heresy in their claim that VOTF is heretical.

What rant?

VOTF has been shown to be the heretical group they are many times in many places. They try to obfuscate so as to not to appear disloyal to the average Catholic, but a closer look at the Who’s Who of the group reveals their agenda and it is a very transparent agenda at that.

Go sell your stuff to someone else. I know what they are.