Unfortunately polarization has entered the Church just as it has in American politics. Everyone wants to draw lines in the sand. Us vs Them! And just as unfortunate is the unwillingness to try to discern the truth of any given issue affecting the Church in our current age. It is a different time now what with the internet, and the 24 hour news cycle. At the very least Mr. Arroyo does try to put news events into their context. His interviews are fair, to me, and he does a good job of getting to the point.
I have a serious question, though.
EWTN itself seems very sensible, and neither here nor there in the mix with church politics.
Sooooo… WHY is The World Over (Raymond’s show) still on?
Why hasn’t anyone up at EWTN talked to him about his approach? What’s going on???
Or is EWTN more likely to agree with Raymond’s approach anyway?
You mean, they should not take a stand? Here is a little bit of realism from the Bible:
“I know your works; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either cold or hot. So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.” (Revelation 3:15-16)
What do you want to know when you watch an interview ? What the interviewer thinks or what the person you are interviewing does?
The last one I watched was the interview with Cardinal Kasper. Much was said about him and I wanted to know what he thought,not was Arroyo thought about C Kasper .
He became even rude. This Cardinal ,as a foreigner,needed some extra time to convey his ideas. And he is of age.
Well, one couldn t get to know what he wanted to say. Just that Arroyo had to make evident that he and his group already knew that they didn t like him.
What is the point? Who is the audience?
That was the last one… Interruption after interruption. No,thanks. Unbearable.
You can watch EWTN online. They have Fr Groeschel’s new show called"Sunday Best With Fr Groeschel’s."
“RA is VERY decisive. It seems you must be anti-Francis to actually like him.”
I like Raymond Arroyo. And I am definitely not “anti-Francis.”
I am truly disappointed in my fellow countryman Cardinal Napier. He has posted some strange tweets of late, including one attacking the Traditional Latin Mass. I respectfully wish to note that as an Afrikaner convert growing up in a conservative rural area that I have firsthand experience what true rabid anti-Catholicism looks like (before I even converted), and Raymond Arroyo does not come even remotely close.
Furthermore if his Eminence wants to see real animosity towards the Pope and the current Church leadership he need only visit the comment section of lifesitenews.com.
I believe that many of the typical viewers of EWTN would agree with Arroyo’s decisive tone. Many or even most on CAF seem to.
I certainly don’t- just pointing it out.
Boston Catholic TV, though smaller than EWTN is much better in my book. They steer well clear of political controversy and never voice decisive tones.
Arroyo’s commentary comes close to that of Lifesite and Breitbart conserving the Holy Father.
I would make a poll about it, but I believe it’s against forum rules to talk about someone specifically.
You may be an exception to the rule. Because I don’t see why someone who favored Pope Francis would want to watch Raymond, when it seems every time he’s on my radio or TV, there is some anti-Francis talking point.
I’m adding, what call it a “Papal Posse”? A posse is a group that band together to find an outlaw. To me it seems not respectful.
Why not, “Papal Panel?”
Papal posse is much more exciting.
I see similarities between Arroyo and Michael Voris
I think Arroyo has slowly been coming around to the dim reality that something is not right in the Church. For many years I would say Arroyo has been hesitant to engage in the type of coverage that Voris and ChurchMilitant have been doing.
However, you can easlily go back and see that people such as Voris have been calling out the corruption for several years. Voris has been heavily criticized and accused of being divisive and uncharitable, however much of what he was saying has now come to light. I think for those, like Arroyo, it has become impossible to remain silent and no longer beneficial to constantly be in the position of having to defend this Papacy and it’s lack of action in dealing with the abuse.
I think you are right, and he is not the only one who has changed his his thinking over the past 5+ years. Fr. Z, another person heavily criticized by some on the left, was the same way at first; in the first few years of Pope Francis’ papacy, he was usually trying to reassure readers of his blog that whenever the Pope would say or do something questionable, that it was just the media taking him out of context, or surely he really meant this, or his wording was unclear but it probably means this, etc. But recently (within the past 1-2 years) he’s dropped this line of thinking as it has become apparent that this pattern was not going away and this kind of stuff was happening too often for it to be one big coincidence after another. I think Arroyo is the same way; after reporting on these incidents and attacks on doctrine from within the Church for five years straight with no sign of things slowing down, it becomes exasperating when you’ve spent your life trying to defend Church teachings and now bishops and priests are being given the green light by the Vatican to disregard long held practices and beliefs (e.g., Protestants being allowed to received communion in Germany).
Unless they lose viewers, or fundamentally disagree with RA, why would they remove him? You don’t like him; lots of us do.
I believe that is the case.
Arroyo isn’t going anywhere.
Lots of EWTN viewers may like him. (Though I have no way of knowing this)
But loads of faithful Catholics don’t favor constant criticism of the Pope, and coziness towards Trump.
RA is a Fox News contributor, after all.
Why remove him? For disparaging the Holy Father and creating division. A prominent African cardinal even noticed this. It’s not that hidden!
I just checked the list of Fox news contributors, and Arroyo is not listed. Neither is he listed among the countless celebrities that contribute to FOX. So, please cite the source of your information.
Furthermore, even if he was a FOX contributor, this does not disqualify him from expressing opinions.
And how do you make the connection between “criticism of the Pope” and “coziness toward Trump”?
He’s frequently on Laura Ingraham’s program.
The fact that he is associated with Fox News and that bothers you tells me everything I need to know.