Take your pick:
I can’t go through the entire site. Do you have an article that said anti-Trump Catholics are bad Catholics? I just see a bunch of articles with the phrase “anti-Trump” in various contexts.
You’ll have to do your own research. I was kind enough to provide you with plenty of sources.
God cannot arise a holy people out of the ashes unless there are first ashes.
It could be just a case of utter frustration with this issue and how the church has handled it. It’s been going on all of my life, and there’s no signs of it getting better.
I don’t think the church hierarchy has fully recognized the depth of the problem or how they are aiding and abetting it. They seem to think having the faithful fast and pray will fix it.
As Raymond Arroyo pointed out, there is no structure within the church for removing church hierarchy that refuse to deal with the problem. And, the initial quell with the Pennsylvania report and Vigano’s letter has died down already. There may be more bombshell moments, but, they too, will die down. I think the church’s senior leadership is counting on that.
All we have is our voices. If this outrages you as much as it does me, continue to speak… no matter how unpopular you become on this forum.
Progressivism must have no place in our Church.
No you haven’t. You provided links with the phrase “anti-Trump” with a 7-second Google search. Your claim that CM maligned anti-Trump Catholics as bad Catholics is unsubstantiated.
“Bad” is a personal judgment call. Actions can be judged as bad, which is not the same as calling someone bad.
Perhaps you meant something like CM thinks anti-Trump Catholics support agendas contrary to what the Church teaches.
Could they simply not be reporting the truth, albeit with a little sensationalism? You will not get this information anywhere else. Not the mainstream media, not the vatican or any other ‘traditional’ Catholic news outlets. Goodness gracious horrific sex abuse was being covered up, a gay lobby does exist, a lot of unclear directives from the vatican about marriage, divorce, judgement, hell and capital punishment and many other indiscretions. I’m not convinced that we should be shooting the messenger.
Because trying to hold someone accountable, when there clearly is no independent agency in the vatican is such a bad thing?
One extreme is ok but the other is not?!
I’m of the opinion that we need fewer “conservatives” and fewer “progressives” in favor of more faithful Catholics.
Not in front of the church. Not behind the church. With the church.
Emeritus Pope Benedict XVI would disagree.
According to Pope Benedict XVI in his book, Values in A Time Of Upheaval, wrote that when seeing something as wrong and desiring to change it for the better, requires a progressive mindset. The conservative mindset is to keep the status quo.
With regards to the LSN and The Church Militant, they’re attached to a romanticized ideology of what the Church was and should return to, and they will attack anyone or thing which challenges that mindset.
Pope Francis is a threat to that ideology as Jesus was a threat to the Jewish hierarchy ideology of His time.
I rather appreciate both outlets of Catholic reporting, though I follow Church Militant much closer.
They have been pretty careful for awhile in regards to the Holy Father. For instance, I don’t know what you mean by the word “attack” – that’s too vague.
Recently, they have been calling for his resignation in the wake of the sex abuse crisis that has broken out and how he has lately been handling it. It is licit and it hasn’t been done any any sort of uncouth or disrespectful way.
They have never questioned his theology because they know they have no authority to do that.
You don’t have to agree with them, but it is still licit.
I’m not taking a stance of defending all that Church Militant and LifeSite News write, but accusing them of deciding to leave the Church and follow sedevacantist paths is way over the top.
I may not agree with all of what Michael Voris says, but he seems to me to be a faithful, devoted Catholic who loves the Church and Church Militant do not attack the pope. As for LifeSite News, they may go a bit over the top at times, but they do raise issues directly which is sometimes useful, they do not appear to be anything near sedevacantist.
I think we need to be very careful in declaring outlets as having sedevacantist tendencies.
The Church does appear to be in a crisis at the moment and it is not the time to entrench ourselves in camps and attack those who have different opinions and approaches. I think things need to be addressed and not shied away from, I don’t think now is the time for factionalism.
And a tradition that was entirely his to change.
You don’t have to like it, but it is well within his rights to do so.
I am saddened that “ChurchMilitant.com” uses the title they have. As you know, God’s church is comprised of the The Church Triumphant [those in Heaven] Church Militant [those of us on earth] and the church suffering [those in purgatory. CM.com diminishes the real Church Militant, those of us still on earth by it’s toxic rants.
Don’t get me wrong, the “modernists” that Pope Pius X warned us about have done harm to the church, just as much as those on the far right do. All of this from a casual observer, and I say casual, because I ignore both extremes. I have faith that God will take care of the Church. If I have a part to play in that care, I pray that God will show me that way.
There is not a huge difference between H20 [water] and H202 [poison / hydrogen peroxide]
The CM.com folk have taken some legitimate concerns and ideas, and turned them into poison, at least to this casual observer. I don’t see a lot of humility there. I see no balance, just bitterness and a lot of “__________ is going to hell.”
Tradition means, literally, “that which is passed on.” It does not belong to the pope. It is not “his.” The pope is a steward. He has the duty to pass on the Faith, not modify it as he wills.
I don’t think they have a strategy other than placing pressure for the Truth to come out.
If you read the John Jay report, the sex abuse scandal IS primarily homosexual in nature.
80% of victims are male and the vast majority of them are post puberty teens. So what you had in a lot of these cases was a young homosexual priest groping, having sexual relations with, or worse raping a teenage boy.
Most of it was homosexual statutory rape, homosexual rape, and/or homosexually orientated sexual harassment.
YES, there was pedophilia too, but that’s not the majority of the cases because pedophilia only applies to young children before puberty, not to minors who have already gone thought puberty.
NOW: sexual relations with minors is wrong, but it’s not pedophilia when having sexual relations with a 16 year old - it’s statutory rape & or just plain rape - with a clinical names of “ephebophilia” and “Pederasty”
And NONE of the AG reports are even scratching the surface on the Seminarians who are being sexually abused. 99% of seminarians are legal adults, so they COMPLETELY fall outside of the realm of pedophilia and statutory rape.
The majority of the allegations against McCarrick is the abuse he had with seminarians. But no one cared until there was 1 allegation of sexual relations with a minor. But the VAST majority of his sexual abuse was against seminarians.
McCarrick’s sexual abuse against seminarians isn’t the work of a pedophile. It’s the work of a homosexual who was abusing his power.
There are MANY who are saying that as evil as pedophila and statutory rape are; there is a much bigger scandal that we have barely scratched the surface of regarding the sexual assault & harassment of seminarians. There are reports of countless men who claimed to have been pressured out of the seminary by homosexual clergy and/or older homosexual seminarians - often by continued sexual harassment or by lies to the vocations director.
In closing: I don’t think Lifesite News & Church Militant have a strategy other than push for the Truth to come out, regardless of the consequences - because the Church will go on, even if she only has 1 priest and bishop. And there are MANY faithful Catholics who always disagreed with both of these groups that now feel the same way.
The washing of the feet on Holy Thursday is a discipline.
Being the supreme law-giver, the Pope can modify any discipline he wants, when he wants.
Period. End of discussion.
You and all the others who want to argue that fact are being far from “traditional”.
I couldn’t agree more. The extremes, the fringes of any group are dangerous. Sadly, the same goes with our news outlets. It is never as good as some report, and never as bad as others. It is easy for them to manipulate the thinking of large masses of people.
It is ALL SICK and depraved and against what any Catholic clergy no matter how high up in the Church is. It’s cannot be covered up any longer and it must be dealt with and dealt with SERIOUSLY and with justice.
What do you want to hear? They’re infiltrating the Vatican and taking him hostage. Happy?