Fr Gruner status

I’m not sure if this the right place to post this but I understand Fr Gruner had his priestly faculties suspended by the Vatican a number of years ago. Can anyone explain what he did to have that happen? A couple of friends of mine think he’s the greatest thing since sliced bread and buy into his nonsence. I’d like to have something to come back at them with. Thanks

Father Gruner has had a bishop incardinate him, so he not suspended.

Do you mind sharing some examples of his “nonsense”? I find him very sober and sincere in getting Our Lady of Fatima’s message out.

yeah he puts on the fatima crusader. in one of their issues of that magazine, they hardcore BASHED ewtn. like, bashed it up and down. basically saying ewtn has lost all of its catholicity and is moving away from anything positive for catholicism. was a terrible article and i quickly asked them to take me off their list. yet they ignored me and i received something from them today.
he’s among the “russia isnt consecrated” bunch and i think (dont quote me as fact) also among the “the third secret wasnt revealed” bunch too.
i dunno, i dont know much, but leave ewtn alone! lol

Ah, Mother Angelica herself was one of the first to express that conclusion.

All of those opinions are not in themselves wrong.

He is entitled to hold them.

Personally I dont like a lot of the programming on EWTN, aside from a few particular shows.

Yes he is supended and the following article says how and by whom.

Father Nicolas Gruner Suspended

Just because he does not believe he is suspended does not make it so.

This is another example of why I find it absolutely bizzare that Catholics who desperately want to hold fast to the ancient traditions and expressions of the Church are labeled “rad-trads” and are seen as disobedient, while progressive groups like the Charismatic Renewal are given full sanction and approval by the Church and EWTN. Pre VII Popes would have shut that movement down in a heartbeat, and if Mother Angelica wasn’t ill and could still run things, I guarantee you, she would not approve of the Charismatic programming on her network. Would anyone here ever dare label her an “armchair Pope”? I doubt it!

I don’t agree with everything Fr. Gruner says, or how he says it, but people treat this man like he’s the devil incarnate and practically worship people like Scott Hahn for his amazing theological “insight” and “discoveries”.

I hear ya…I agree. Also…look at the SSPX…let me first off say that I am not affiliated with them in any way, shape, or form…but I understand their plight…but they are treated like Donatists or the Arians…meanwhile the Othodox are welcomed with open arms, etc…they invite Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. to celebrate Mass in Rome…yet they continue to snub the SSPX.

I apologize for the tone of my previous post. I’m having a bad morning. I’m still on the fence about many traditionalist/progressive debates. But I’m just dumbfounded as to why these people who preferred things pre-VII are constantly ridiculed by EWTN as being traitors.

Don’t apologize…I thought the tone was accurate and honest…and I believe it is shared by a great number of Catholics…including myself. I am dumbfounded too. John Paul II talked about the two Lungs of the Church…how we need both of them to breath fully and properly…but right now, the Western Lung needs attention, because there are a lot of devout and holy Catholic bretherern of ours, who are being excluded due to their traditional convictions.

EWTN is not God. It is perfectly acceptable to disagree with EWTN’s openly (at times) charismatic tone or even to attack if for straying from Traditional Catholicism. As someone else said, if Mother Angelica was running things still, there would not be any charismatic programming on there. Also it is perfectly acceptable to question whether the third secert was released or if Russia was not consecreted yet. These things are not magisterial, we are not even bound to beleive in Our Lady of Fatima. (With that note, I do indeed beleive in Our Lady of Fatima :smiley: )

I would guess that the reason he is opposed is because he has basically said the Church heirarchy has lied to us. If the heirarchy would lie about something that is not necessary for salvation (private revelation) then what else would they lie about? I would venture to guess that this is the reason he is opposed.

A lone Raven

They are surely being excluded for ignoring the authority of the pope? Not because of their ‘traditional convictions’. Archbishop Lefebvre consecrated bishops in defiance of the Holy Father, thus performing a ‘schismatic act’: that is why his group has been excommunicated. Many Traditional Catholics are within the church- see FSSP, ICRSS.

heres something I found on the web. I know for a fact that the author did spend a lot of time in Fatima and dealt with Fr. Gruner.

unitypublishing.com/Newsletter/FatimaCorruption.htm

They sure as heck don’t have as good a reputation as the Orthodox and they have been denying the authority of the Pope and our Ecumenical Councils for well over a thousand years…which I am pretty sure means they have been ordaining priest and consecrating Bishops a much grander scale than the SSPX for quite some time…without the approval of Rome I might add…Like I said, I am not a member or affilliated with the SSPX in any way…but it sure as heck doesn’t seem to be any justice in this matter for them when you look at the warm welcoming Rome gives the Orthodox, the Jews, the Protestants, etc.

Such is the hypocrisy by many on these forums…

Tell me about it…it appears to me that Pat Robertson and Tim LaHaye would be more welcome to some of these peoples churches, as opposed to a fellow nostalgic Catholic who happens to prefer the TLM.

I would guess that this is because many who are orthodox, or protestant, were born into it. They are ignorant of the truth of the Catholic faith, and especially ignorant of the heirarchy of the Church and its role in life.

Those who have decided to be in schism in the last century are often not born into it, but rather choose it. I would guess this is why many feel it is better to not be ecumenical with those in schism since the 1960’s because (as I see it) they have no excuse to be in schism. They cannot claim ignorance. In addition, some of the most vicious attacks on the Church come from “traditionalist” who are schismatic.

That is my view on it at least, and judging from the position of the heirarchy, may be their view on it as well.

A lone Raven

Is it not the cause of the Church to bring all men to Christ? The Orthodox and Protestants are not in communion with the Church. We are certainly a long way off any reconciliation. But just like with the SSPX ignoring or denying the authority of the Holy Father is a major stumbling block.

That doesn’t mean they can’t be welcomed as fellow believers in Christ.

I don’t believe it’s hypocrisy to say that the Orthodox and Protestants should be welcomed to frank discussions. We need to bring them back to the fold. It takes diplomacy.

But the internal affairs of the Church are different. I’m not surprised the lefevbrists are not welcome in Rome. If they make an apology, or whatever the Holy See requires, they should be welcomed with open arms.

I’ve heard a lot of trad members say that about CAF. That traditional Catholics keep getting beat up here. Oh, well, there’s always fisheaters and angelqueen. :wink:

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.