Somehow I missed the second coming by a few days (not surprised, in my current state).
I believe they are Messianic Jews.
A little too rocky I'll admit. The eastern tinge offsets that a bit though.
Well, having interacted with Fr. R, and knowing his personal history, this isn't the most difficult time of his life, but a rerun of a previous incident of bad judgement with different causes.
My thoughts were expressed after an examination of conscience. His pride led the way to this destination.
Ah, interesting. A victim of what - this was his own doing?
So, the bishop victimized Fr. R? An "editorial" problem by a parish pastor IS a big deal. This is more than just malapropism. For all his failings, he is VERY articulate. He said exactly what he thought, in the manner he thought it.
Have you interacted with Fr. R or attended his sermons? (Some are available online.) He likes being edgy. Its part of his schtick. There is a place for that - we can all be challenged in our faith. (Hence, this thread.)
But his callous statement of his unvarnished truth was just wrong in scope and language, and calls to question his judgment in shepherding others in faith.
hahaha
No, my friend Nits are there to be picked.
My point is that I think your reflexive defense on this specific matter might be too reflexive. That is, there is more to this narrative than the blog post.
Sorry, I'm having trouble keeping up. What teaching did his message contradict?
Each of us is called to be a healer and a peacemaker by virtue of our baptism.
With the aid of Holy Scripture, Catholic social teaching, and sacred tradition, this is an open invitation to journey toward reconciliation.
Well, the maggots and parasites part seems contrary to "judge not...."
But, let's look at what Bishop Doherty said....
https://d2y1pz2y630308.cloudfront.n...ement regarding the death of George Floyd.jpg
Fr. R's blog didn't really do any of that, eh?
But, what can people do? Oh, wait, there's a US Conference of Catholic Bishops list!
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...m/upload/action-steps-to-eradicate-racism.pdf
I don't see "write an offensively overbroad blog post" among them.
At the end of the day, Fr. R had hatred in his heart for the people protesting against social injustice. He did not love them. He did not love his own parishioners participating in BLM. Or, perhaps worse, the people who avoid St. Elizabeth Seton because of his judgmental views - he certainly didn't love them.
Thanks. That helps. The "judge not" point is a good one. His choice of words is very similar to what Christ Himself used. Fr. R. used "maggots and parasites." Off the top of my head, Christ used "swine" and "brood of vipers" (and I'm sure there are others). St. Paul gets even more harsh when he tells people to go cut their balls off. Fr. R. is in good company with his choice of words.
But we can all see what he wrote. Borrowing your point about language, those descriptions were used to reflect hatred, or if not hatred then extreme contempt bordering on hatred.We do not make judgment on souls, but we make judgments of actions every day. Even you just made a judgment by stating that Fr. R. had hatred in his heart instead of love (you may well be right, but only God knows what's in his heart).
Further, rebuking sinners is a spiritual work of mercy. Our clergy have been generally slacking on this for decades (an act of judgment on my part), which is why Fr. R.'s statement sounds out of place. Out of the norm, yes. Wrong, no. Worthy of suspension, most certainly not.
Sirach 26:5 said:Of three things my heart is frightened,
and of a fourth I am in great fear:
Slander in the city, the gathering of a mob,
and false accusation—all these are worse than death.
But not in his choice of targets.
If Fr. R is among those seeking social justice, tagging his allies as "snakes in the garden" is wrong.
But we can all see what he wrote. Borrowing your point about language, those descriptions were used to reflect hatred, or if not hatred then extreme contempt bordering on hatred.
Wrong and worthy of suspension in the case of misplaced rebuke. You are defending his rebuke directed at the slim minority of current activists engaged in violence. I'm defending the vast majority of social justice activists that he wrongfully accused.
Our Protestant brethren may not recognize this, but....
But not in his choice of targets.
If Fr. R is among those seeking social justice, tagging his allies as "snakes in the garden" is wrong.
But we can all see what he wrote. Borrowing your point about language, those descriptions were used to reflect hatred, or if not hatred then extreme contempt bordering on hatred.
Wrong and worthy of suspension in the case of misplaced rebuke. You are defending his rebuke directed at the slim minority of current activists engaged in violence. I'm defending the vast majority of social justice activists that he wrongfully accused.
Our Protestant brethren may not recognize this, but....
Ironic how many of those apply to the Fr. R situation (though not just to Fr. R.) Something like that might've helped him focus that blog post.
I'm not sure if you're saying that BLM, Antifa, and their nefarious acolytes are his allies or that some who joined the aforementioned entities with good intentions are his allies. Could you clarify?
I'm also not sure if you meant what you vast majority sentence says. You didn't mean that the BLM, Antifa, and their nefarious acolytes comprise the majority of social justice activists, did you?
Lex, If you are going to be the apologist for "BLM, ANTIFA and their 'NEFARIOUS' acolytes" you must present the case of all of the good they are doing.
The division and destruction is all that most of us can see.
It is pretty difficult to look past the (I would say dark cloud, but you would probably say "That is racist".) bad to see the silver lining. Please enlighten (also racist) us.
Within our parish, it is a practical response of providing free or low cost food, clothing, temporary shelter for those in need, medical care and educational opportunities.So, this follows on to that post, but is worthy of its own.
What is the (conservative) Christian response to the inequality?
Obviously the mainstream liberals have their thoughts, but I'm not interested in that.
And, if I was in the 1960's with the hindsight I have now, the solution would be quite a bit more obvious.
But now, today? Inequality (note, I'm not using the term racist, as explicit bias is eas(ier) to condemn and deal with) isn't so easy to acknowledge, and there's no clear goal to get to.
Does that make sense?