Blogging -vs- Publishing

As I understand it the Church, rightfully, seeks to control what is published to prevent the injection of unorthodox teachings. Thus the need for the imprimatur etc. in publications. As I understand it that means neither clergy or laity can publish things relating to the Faith without approval at some level.

How does blogging for Catholics fit in here ? Particularly blogging about ones personal faith, ones thoughts and observations, things one reads about the faith, reasons why one has reached conclusions etc.

I am seriously considering joining the Church. The answer to this wouldn’t impact my decision one way or the other. But I was curious how the blogosphere and the approval for publication concepts work out in the real world.

Thanks!

I don’t think it is correct to say the church tries to control the publishing of materials that are heretical or unorthodox. There are, unfortunatly, plenty of books published that contain heresy and dissent. Catholic authors are not obligated to submit their work for a imprimatur and nihil obstat, but many do.

Historically the Church did, as I understand it, prevent the publication of heretical works and corrupted scripture translations. And to my view it did so rightly and correctly.

Now as I understand things the Church still doesn’t want good Catholics publishing works on their own without at least some review by the Church, to ensure that people can have a source of known orthodox teaching to read from.

I was just curious about personal catholic’s blogs where one expounds how one understands things and believes things. The blogosphere is a great form of witness/evangelism. I just wondered what the Church view was. It sounds like as long as you aren’t attacking the Church or saying grossly unorthodox things they there are no issues.

Sorry if the question sounds silly. I’d rather ask silly questions and get set straight than have silly ideas forever.

Thanks!

On the internet, I personally see a fine line between personal thoughts and opinions and teaching. On a forum where you might respond to specific questions, you can pick and choose what to respond to. On a blog, people might misunderstand your intentions so you should put in a line like: These are just my personal thoughts. To me, a blog is like an open diary, but you never know who is looking.

I suggest consulting with a local priest. Discuss it with him. I hope this works out for you.

Peace,
Ed

Historically, this was more common and but obviously things were published or there wouldn’t have been a need for the Index. But even the Index is no more.

Now as I understand things the Church still doesn’t want good Catholics publishing works on their own without at least some review by the Church, to ensure that people can have a source of known orthodox teaching to read from.

Again, I don’t think this is really true. I just check a couple books of mine by orthodox Catholic authors and some have the imprimatur and nihil obstat but some don’t. I remember reading about Scott Hahn waiting to get a imprimatur or nihil obstat for a particular book and got it just in time for printing, but the book was going to print with or without it.

Because of publisher deadlines and how time consuming getting them seems to be, I think the necessity of an imprimatur or nihil obstat would mean a lot of good Catholic books would take too long to get to the faithful.

I was just curious about personal catholic’s blogs where one expounds how one understands things and believes things. The blogosphere is a great form of witness/evangelism. I just wondered what the Church view was. It sounds like as long as you aren’t attacking the Church or saying grossly unorthodox things they there are no issues.

This is why I’m careful who I read or what I read the blogger for. I always try to use discernment when I read. If I like a Catholic author/apologist I want to read their perspective on wider variety of topics; it’s like sitting around the dinner table with them especially if they have the comments open because others including me can contribute to the conversation. Catholic bloggers who are not published or are anonymous I’m more careful about investing too much time until I know more about them.

I also get information from a variety of sources. The Bible, Catechism, Canon Law etc are at the top and blogs and forums are at the bottom. Blogs and forums should not contradict the former but should unpack them making them more accessible.

Sorry if the question sounds silly. I’d rather ask silly questions and get set straight than have silly ideas forever.

Not a silly question at all. I know there has been discussion about this in the past because of condern regarding the number of books, even magazines and newspapers with dissenting authors. If I find thim I will link to them.

Keep in mind this can work the other way too. I think certain Bishops in the USCCB wanted to take over Mother Angelica’s network for their own purposes. They don’t like everyone Mother and EWTN has said and thought they should have control of the network. EWTN would be a very different network with the USCCB at the helm (it would be non-existant - the USCCB did try to launch their own network but it failed. See?:D)

Thanks!

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.