Posted on 03/31/2011 11:20:56 AM PDT by verdugo
Preface
With the death of Pope John Paul II and the election of his successor, Benedict XVI, a new era has begun in the history of the Roman Catholic Church. But the crisis that has wracked the Church since the Second Vatican Council (1962 1965) goes on, even if the faithful hope that during the present pontificate measures will at last be taken to bring the crisis to an end.
Over the past forty years a growing number of Catholics have come to recognize what is manifest: that the postconciliar crisis began with, and has resulted from, a host of previously unheard of ecclesial innovations, imposed in the name of the Council, which have provoked confusion and disorder and led to a massive turning away from the Faith an apostasy in the Catholic Church.
The theme of this book is that the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN) both exemplifies and promotes these ruinous novelties, and thus has contributed to the crisis itself. It is the author's burden to demonstrate that with the departure of its foundress, Mother Angelica, from a leadership role, EWTN has taken a sharp turn toward what Pope St. Pius X condemned as the heresy of Modernism, as it attempts to combine Catholicism with rock and roll, show business and the worst novelties of the era after Vatican 11.
While EWTN was once a sign of hope for a Catholic restoration, it has become instead a major factor in the Modernist innovation of the Church since the Council: a mixture of truth and error, orthodoxy and heresy, the sacred and the profane. EWTN now functions as an organ of what is aptly dubbed "New Church" a kind of faux church that exists parasitically within the host organism, which is the unchanged and unchangeable Roman Catholic Church of all time. The author will show that the unprecedented emergence of "New Church" is the very essence of the postconciliar crisis, and that this development was predicted in the Third Secret of Fatima, as Pope Pius XII indicated in a stunning prophecy that figures largely in this book.
The author also shows that even as EWTN promotes all manner of destructive ecclesial innovation, EWTN also presents itself as the standard of authentic Catholicism and calls for the shunning of Catholics who defend the perennial Faith without alteration. EWTN is thus not merely a passive adopter of novelty, but an active promoter of ecclesial revolution.
For these reasons, the author concludes, EWTN a worldwide television, radio and Internet presence must now be considered one of the foremost agents of Modernist apostasy in the Church and a positive danger to the welfare of souls, despite certain good elements in its programming. Thus, it is not Catholics who defend the perennial Faith who must be shunned, but rather EWTN and the rest of the "New Church" establishment, which has been leading the Church toward ruin over the past forty years of ecclesial decay and decline.
Should anyone take the trouble to respond to this book, let him begin here, where the author stresses that he does not intend to suggest that any of the EWTN directors or celebrities mentioned critically in the following pages are all necessarily subjectively guilty of apostasy, Modernism, formal heresy or any other deliberate offense against the Faith. Such guilt is a matter of Divine Judgment, and the personal piety and sincerity of individuals is not in question here. Words, however, have their objective meanings, and deeds their objective consequences. It is the duty of every Catholic to oppose words and deeds that undermine the Faith, give scandal, disturb the good order of the Church and endanger the welfare of soulsespecially when those words and deeds are televised throughout the world to audiences of millions of Catholics and non Catholics by a lay run organization that has absolutely no authority in the Church, yet creates the impression that it represents the best of what the Church is. The honest critic must confront the evidence presented in the following pages, rather than turn the matter into an outraged defense of the alleged subjective motives of this or that person. Let the critic address what a person is shown to have said or done, not what he "meant" to say or do according to some hidden intention elaborated after the fact. Nor should anyone who might wish to respond to this book waste his time demonstrating that certain elements of what EWTN presents are soundly Catholic. That this is so is not only stipulated at the beginning of the book, but is in fact the crux of the problem with EWTN: that it combines things of the Faith with things inimical to the Faith, thus attacking the integrity of what Pope St. Pius X called "the Catholic name." The combination of the orthodox with the heterodox is the essence of Modernism. As Pius X declared in condemning the writings of the Modernists: "Hence in their books you find some things which might well be expressed by a Catholic, but in the next page you find other things which might have been dictated by a rationalist." Let the critic, therefore, address the evidence of things inimical to the Faith, rather than attempting to prove what is not in dispute.
Those who direct EWTN may believe they are doing a service to the Church and that they have the right to engage in their public mission. It is the author's conviction, however, that if they consider attentively the evidence of what they are promoting, they will no longer have the refuge of good faith. Having taken upon themselves a public religious mission, those responsible for EWTN become subject to public criticism from fellow Catholics who, out of their own sense of duty, oppose what EWTN is doing. And it is an act of charity, not unkindness, to oppose errors from whatever source that threaten the integrity of the Faith and therefore the welfare of souls. It is in this spirit of fraternal correction, however forcefully expressed, that this book was written.
January 6, 2006 Feast of the Epiphany
This is hogwash to me.
I’ll admit it ain’t what it used to be. To say it’s gone bad is absurd, but it has gone a little milquetoast.
Strange how one can write so much without really saying anything.
EWTN = Good.
Here is Amazon’s entry for the book. But, I would note that it was published 5 years ago, and nothing in the above blurb supports the allegations. It is simply an indictment without support.
Right, wrong, who knows? No attempt was made to support either side. So it fails. Make the case or you are just posting gossipy crap either way. Doesn’t anyone think anymore?
>> and the worst novelties of the era after Vatican 11. <<
In fairness, Vatican 11 wasn’t nearly as bad as Vatican 4, 9 or 10. The Liturgical “Snuggies” almost LOOK kinda throw-back to medieval monks. That said, wine is mass; beer is strictly for football. On the other hand, if you’re going to have a woman for a pope, Pope Bristol is almost as kick-ass as her mom was a President Palin.
How does someone know that they do not know?
From Page 8 of book:
It must be stipulated at the outset that even after the victory of Modernist prelates over Mother Angelica, EWTN still retains certain elements of good Catholic programming. Yet it is the very presence of these good elements that poses a spiritual hazard for EWTN “fans,” who are induced by what is good in the content to expose themselves to numerous elements that undermine the Faith.
Here it is necessary to address a threshold objection that will certainly be raised to any suggestion that EWTN is less than the “gold standard” of Roman Catholicism today. The objection goes something like this: “Why criticize EWTN, when EWTN is the most Catholic thing out there?” Let me reply immediately that Catholics, as confirmed soldiers of Christ, have a duty before God not to settle for “the most Catholic thing out there,” but rather to demand the Catholic Faith in all its integrity from anyone who undertakes to present the Faith to the public. If “the most Catholic thing out there” turns out, upon close examination, to be a mixture of truth and error, orthodoxy and heresy, tradition and appalling novelty, the sacred and the profane and I will show here that this is exactly what EWTN has become then one must avoid “the most Catholic thing out there” like the plague, because one’s faith will tend inevitably to be undermined by exposure to this heterodox mixture. It is just such a mixture that has provoked chaos and defection from the Faith since the clearly disastrous and totally unprecedented “updating” of the Church that began at Vatican II.
I am not denying that many Catholics have managed to preserve their faith and to practice it with great piety even in the midst of the changes. That individual Catholics have kept the Faith, however, is not the point in contention here. The point of this discussion is to demonstrate that, in both theory and practice, what now passes for “the most Catholic thing out there” or what is called a “ conservative implementation” of Vatican II is, objectively speaking, a massive departure from the perennial Faith. The unprecedented and supposedly “officially approved” innovations stemming from the Council, all of which EWTN promotes and defends today, have (as I discuss further below) provoked enormous damage to the life of the Church as a whole.
>> How does someone know that they do not know?<<
Which brings us to my favorite all time political quote, from Donald Rumsfeld: “Reports that say that something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”
I will be posting the different chapters of the book over the next month or so, as time permits.
Those with eyes to see, let them see.
>> The point of this discussion is to demonstrate that, in both theory and practice, what now passes for “the most Catholic thing out there” or what is called a “ conservative implementation” of Vatican II is, objectively speaking, a massive departure from the perennial Faith. <<
Having a hard time seeing how this assertion is anything but sedevacantist. And it makes me wonder what “GONE bad” means, since Mother Angelica always embraced what Vatican II actually promulgated, even as she resisted heroically the false claims of what was supposedly “in the spirit of Vatican II.”
verdugo:
So lets get this straight, are you suggesting the EWTN say that they reject Vatican II outright? I don’t think they are going to do that nor should they.
Again, Lumen Gentium is a solid document although I think the word “subsistit” vs. “est” is the one that SSPX folks question. If one understands that the “True Church” in the fullest sense of Apostolic Tradition, which was handed on from Christ, is found in the Catholic Church in communion with the Bishop of Rome, then there is nothing that contradicts EENS. Clearly, the Orthodox Church have maintained valid Sacraments sense the schism of 1054 and that was believed prior to Vatican II.
Now, if you want to challenge the implementation of Vatican II, I am all on board and have been for over 20 years.
On another note, even Pope Benedict in his book “Principles of Catholic Theology” clearly notes that some Councils have in the course of history proved to be a “waste of time”. It is possible that Vatican II may be one of those Councils but in the mean time, however history judges Vatican II, I think we need to correct the misapplication of it which Pope Benedict has clearly stated that it was his view that is exactly what happened.
You posted it, support it. Ferrara is a lawyer. OK, so what? “..it is his business to support his allegations, and convince the jury.’ Oh really? Is he a trial lawyer? Civil? Criminal? What? Some lawyers never see the inside of the courtroom.
Also, every lawyer I ever met was a stellar person. I'm sure this guy is the same. But, how about a little bio on him? Or do you take things without looking at the motives?
“Rest assured that he does.” Ok, support it. How does he support his allegations? Would you be so generous as to supply a specific example so we know this isn't just gas?
“I will be posting the different chapters of the book over the next month or so, as time permits.”
Well, gee. That would be great. Then we would have more than just a smear to look at. Why not provide some support now? If you have an accusation, be specific. Make it. Otherwise it is just libel.
Will you be posting the full chapters in violation of Copyright laws or only summaries? Or will you have permission to reprint them? Since the book is listed on Amazon as 5 years old, is there a newer version? Is EWTN the same as it was then? How so or not so.
It isn't this topic. It can be any topic. THINK MAN, THINK.
Old-news Remnant retread stuff. I’m sorry I wasted the time it took to click on this article.
I haven’t read the book, but the main points as summarized above ring true to me. I am not a Catholic, but I used to find some inspiration and comfort watching the various programs on EWTN. I don’t find their current style satisfying at all.
TC
EWTN: A Network Gone Bad
By Christopher Ferrara
Copyright 2006, ISBN: 0-9663046-7-5
CONTENTS
PREFACE vii
OVERVIEW
The Banishment of Mother Angelica 1
PART I
The Modernist Crisis in the Church
CHAPTER 1
The Silent Apostasy 19
CHAPTER 2
A Great Facade of Novelty 28
CHAPTER 3
The Scope of the Crisis 32
CHAPTER 4
What Does it Mean to Be a Catholic? 41
CHAPTER 5
Modernism: The Synthesis of All Heresies 45
PART II
EWTN’s Role As Promoter of Modernism
CHAPTER 6
EWTN’s “Moderate” Modernism 53
CHAPTER 7
EWTN’s Promotion of Liturgical Destruction 56
CHAPTER 8
Abandoning the Dogma “No Salvation Outside the Church” 70
CHAPTER 9
Abandoning the Return of the Dissidents to Rome 85
CHAPTER 10
Promoting the Return of the Judaizers 117
CHAPTER 11
Promoting Paganism and Sacrilege 151
CHAPTER 12
Quasi Idolatry of the Pope’s Person 158
CHAPTER 13
Promoting Destruction of the Traditional Rosary 164
CHAPTER 14
Promoting Sexual Gnosticism and the NFP Cult 174
CHAPTER 15
“Cool” Catholicism 204
CHAPTER 16
The Assault on Fatima 209
PART III
Summing Up
CHAPTER 17
Did They Love You, John Paul II? 235
CHAPTER 18
What the Evidence Shows 245
CHAPTER 19
What Should We Do? 253
Index 263
So what? What is this? Is this all you have in response? I DON'T CARE IF YOU ARE RIGHT. I DON'T CARE IF YOU ARE WRONG! SUPPORT YOUR ARGUMENT!
(The preceding all caps was brought to you by a sentient being trying to reach a sponge. I'm not normally an emotional punctuation user.)
Heh.
YOUR CAPITALS CRACKED MY SCREEN!
I know this sort of drivel is a waste of time, but the occasional bagging of a sedavacantist is too much for me to resist reading the thread.
This one is pretty lame, however.
Best regards.
Didn’t you post this same thread a few days ago?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.