He is probably the biggest reason I quit watching EWTN. It is truly sad how that ministry has changed since the passing of its founder.
I am over Arroyo as well. I don’t know why EWTN keeps him on.
I never thought Raymond Arroyo was a “neutral” interviewer. Rather, he seems to favor orthodoxy over heterodoxy. But so did Mother Angelica, for that matter. I recall some of her famous rants against heterodoxy that I doubt Mt. Arroyo could even muster.
He’s not slanted toward “orthodoxy”. He’s wanted to the politically right and towards sensationalist reporting at the expense of unity in the church.
He encourages a “us vs. them” mentality even towards bishops at times.
More or less he is a mouthpiece for political rightist standards.
I have never seen this. I think this is just an attempt to brand traditionalism, even rebellious traditionalism, as orthodoxy, and anyone in support of the Holy Father as heterodox. That is the dividing line. What is heterodox only begs the question.
Man, this thread is rich. There is little doubt that this is a huge crisis in the Catholic Church. It casts enormous doubt, and has damaged the credibility of the whole hierarchy. Here we have many prelates in the church, cardinals, covering for a known molester, even going so far as paying off and silencing two adult male victims of sexual molestation in 2004 and 2006, and all some can do here is criticize Arroyo and a faithful Cardinal!
You can criticize Cardinals, or you can’t. Since one can criticize the actions of a cardinal, then one can criticize the actions of a cardinal. So if your argument presents a double standard, then I will choose to disagree.
Arroyo is not a Cardinal though.
Hey, those that want to watch a particular brand of Catholicism, even though if flies in the face of the definition of “catholic” are welcome to it. If EWTN want to brand itself that way, then that is surely a valid decision. I hope they find peace with it.
I find myself asking has EWTn as a whole, become a voice for political rightism?
I do notice an undercurrent of political messaging on the network as well as thinly veiled critiques of the Holy Father.
I used to get BCTV (Boston Catholic Television) which was free of political commentary so it can be done.
Indeed, this thread is rich.
We’re really going to sit here and moan about the “particular brand of Catholicism” that EWTN presents? If we’re going to call it a “brand”, then let’s call it for what is and call it orthodox. I do not see political right leanings. I do not see hatred of Pope Francis. I’m sure this might’ve been a typo, pnewton, but EWTN does fly in the face of all those who consider themselves “catholic” with a little “C”. If you mean “catholic” to be “universal” then surely EWTN is just that, passing on the universal Catholic faith. Where is EWTN is attempting to brand “rebellious traditionalism as orthodoxy”? If one is going to make such a claim, then you need to back it up because I have NEVER seen EWTN try to brand “rebellious traditionalism” (whatever the heck you define that as) as orthodoxy.
The programming on there is solid, my children watch many of their kids shows and stories on the lives of the saints, an I know many people are edified by many of the shows on there, such as Fr. Spitzer’s Universe, Blue Collar Apologetics and Web of Faith 2.0.
But what’s really “rich” about this thread is that no one has interacted with what Cardinal Burke said in the interview.
Again, this isn’t the thread to bash EWTN because you think it has some kind of heterodox slant to it. Interact with what Cardinal Burke’s observations are. Is he right? Is he wrong? Is he misguided in his assessment of the situation? Or is he right on target?
Again, it’s so telling where people’s priorities are when they won’t discuss the content of what the person being interviewed actually said, but instead would rather go on a diatribe against an apostolate that is working for the good of souls. Let’s stop talking about the medium and talk about the message of this American cardinal.
But what’s really “rich” about this thread is that no one has interacted with what Cardinal Burke said in the interview .
Again, this isn’t the thread to bash EWTN . . .
Well stated billy15.
By the way. I too love EWTN (used to watch their programming when I had TV. Now I see occasional clips on the web).
I think Raymond Arroyo is excellent.
And Cardinal Burke is a heroic defender of the faith.
pnewton . . .
I think this is just an attempt to brand . . . anyone in support of the Holy Father as heterodox.
I am going to disagree on this one with you pnewton.
(I also love our Holy Father, have supported all his official teachings publicly, and have never felt I was being branded as “hetrodox” by EWTN for doing so.)
I was not referring to EWTN, but the statement of favoring orthodoxy over heterodoxy. That statement was an attempt to brand and separate people, as if there is some who favor being heterodoxy over being orthodox.
Is it not fair to point out the selection of guests as a means of guiding dialogue? Where is Cardinal diNardo being interviewed, as the actual president of the USCCB, Archbishop Gomez, as the vice president, as opposed to the patron of the Knights of Malta? It is no great leap to think the Church in the United States does not fit his narrative, which is why he avoids the more logical selection of guests.
Great article, thanks!
This passage is chilling:
”In recent months, I have attended a Mass at which Christ was assigned gender-neutral pronouns, and one at which the homilist proposed that he may have had biological brothers and sisters. (So much for Mary’s perpetual virginity.) At another, I was invited to join a ministry that openly rejects Christian teaching on sex."
Maybe that helps to explain why many, myself included, prefer the Tridentine Mass.
I can’t imagine any of these heresies being promoted in my FSSP parish.
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.