The anti-Catholicism of the "National Catholic Reporter"

[heyheyhey]

In my opinion, the NCR (different from the National Catholic Register and from the Catholic World Report) appears to be classic type of a wolf in sheep's clothing. It is the most anti-Catholic weekly publication that I know, and yet it continues pretending to be "Catholic." The evidence of NCR's anti-Catholic and anti-Christian agenda is somewhat camouflaged, so let it be dug up and brought to daylight in this thread.

- Why, and who cares? Under normal circumstances I couldn't care less, but very many American priests and religious read the NCR, and it has poisonously influenced a generation or two of priests. When we see the sorry state of affairs in our Church we should know, for our own protection, where the devil dwells. Many screwy things (most of all the disdain for the Teaching Magisterium) originated and/or have been, or continue to be, sponsored by the NCR.

There is only one FReeper, as far as I know, vigorously defending the NCR, so he is rare and dear - let's be respectful to him.

[drstevej]

***It did, though, from Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger.***

Well the old Nihil Obstat ain't what it ought to be. Glad these bishops don't do maintenance checks on airplanes!

[sinkspur]

As you would also recall, the CCC already had "revisions" on a few items.

I quoted from the latest "revision."

Ordinary Magisterium is only as good as they adhere to constant teachings of the Church, especially on theological items specifically pronounced by Councils.

But, since no Council has made a definitive pronouncement on the fate of unbaptized infants, the Ordinary Magisterium will not be in error, whatever it says.

In all fairness, while "speculation" is allowed, they should be more careful and make mention of it whenever applicable.

The statement from the Catholic Catechism is clearly obscure, since there is no definitive teaching about the fate of unbaptized infants.

[m4629]

The difference is, Ratzy knows what the Church teaches and what speculation is.

You don't, sinky.

[sinkspur]

I already made my point.

And it's clearly that you don't know what you're talking about.

[ninenot]

Jaime Cardinal Sin was a Filipino. I think in his later years he was a bit dotty. Yours is not the first story I've seen which would indicate that was the case.

[sinkspur]

The difference is, Ratzy knows what the Church teaches and what speculation is.

Why did he give a nihil obstat to speculation?

[drstevej]

Post em, I'm lazy when it comes to searchin Catholic documents.

[m4629]

sinky, perhaps it never occured to you that you really look ridiculous not knowing piles of solid catechisms prior to this "different style CCC", in addition to not know what those previous Councils taught.

Oh, then again, pardon me, Your Kumbaya Church is only 40 years old. :-D

[ninenot]

Methinks Augustine, in his early years, was a bit more Baptist than Calvinist, eh wot?

[sinkspur]

sinky, perhaps it never occured to you that you really look ridiculous not knowing piles of solid catechisms prior to this "different style CCC", in addition to not know what those previous Councils taught.

More prepostery.

If you know what those Councils taught, why can't you spit it out?

[drstevej]

***Methinks Augustine, in his early years, was a bit more Baptist than Calvinist, eh wot?***

No problem, John the Baptist was a Calvinist too.

[m4629]

Good doc, I'll do it in another thread, some other time, promise.

I already accomplished exposing sinky as one who doesn't know catholic teachings for the specific purpose in this thread. Don't want to go off topic. Besides, I want him to take the time and perhaps learn something, like the last time he had the learn how he was wrong about Ecclesia Supplet (another thread), the hard way.

[drstevej]

OK, but tell Ratzy to clean up that speculation stuff or I'm quitting his fanclub.

http://www.ratzingerfanclub.com/

[sinkspur]

I already accomplished exposing sinky as one who doesn't know catholic teachings for the specific purpose in this thread. Don't want to go off topic.

Physician, heal thyself.

[m4629]

Right on, good chap. :-D

[drstevej]

But I won't give up my www.ratzingerfanclub.com Papist hat!

[sinkspur]

If the Catholic Catechism, issued by John Paul II, with a nihil obstat from Cardinal Ratzinger, doesn't contain Catholic teaching on the fate of unbaptized infants, does that mean we can't trust anything else that's in it?

Are you calling JP II a proponent of falsehoods?

[m4629]

Give it up sinky. We all know your M.O.

Besides, I owe it to our friendly protty brothers to let them know you don't know what is Church Teaching and what is Speculation, so they don't be confused next time they confront you with Real Teachings that you can't explain or claim "you never heard of it". :-D

Spend some time on the real stuff, like Trent, instead of that NCR trash, you might learn something, like our real catholics do.

[sinkspur]

I spend time with the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Is that an erroneous Catechism?

Since you've posted nothing to back up your contention about the Church's teaching regarding unbaptized infants, my assumption (and any reasonable person's assumption) has to be that you can't.

[Phx_RC]

Hey sinky, whats this 100,000 circulation number?
A lot of modernist optimism, thats what it is!

"According to reports, the [NCR] paper's circulation dropped to about 35,000 [after the Condemnation] before rebounding. Today [4/25/03] it stands at around 50,000 subscribers in more than 90 countries, a level that it has maintained for years."
...As reported in the NCR 4/25/2003 by Tom Roberts in the obituary he wrote about "Robert Hoyt, NCR founder, dies at 81".

As the number of good holy bishops increases, the further the NCR circulation numbers will decrease. When Mahoney goes the decrease will accelerate.