Posted on 08/05/2020 6:18:11 AM PDT by ebb tide
When he is not busy denying Adam was a literal figure, claiming there is reasonable hope no souls are in Hell, and assuring Ben Shapiro that Christ is merely the priveleged route to salvation, it seems Bishop Robert Barron likes to spend his free time attacking Traditional Catholics.
In an August 3 National Catholic Distorter piece, author Christopher White informs us that Barron hosted an invite-only Zoom meeting on July 29. Was this meeting to discuss Pope Francis troubling July 26 tweet that, on the memorial of Saints Joachim and Anne, referred to them as Jesus grandparents in quotation marks?
Was it to discuss what should be done about Vatican II and the New Mass as they continue to speed up the decline and fall of the Faith around the globe?
Was it to finally condemn the promotion of the pagan Pachamama idol at the Amazon synod?
Was it to firmly state the perennial Catholic teaching on the impossibility of women deacons, since Francis recently started yet another working group to study the issue after his first one didnt give him what he wanted? No.
Instead, Barrons secret meeting, which included such liberal and Neo-Catholic news organizations as America Media, Catholic News Agency, Catholic News Service, Crux and Our Sunday Visitor, was called to address, disturbing trends in the online Catholic world," including the rise of "radical Traditionalist" movements that are often marked by personal attacks and vitriolic commentary.
The article defines "Rad trads" as young Catholics who prefer traditional liturgy, including the Latin Mass, and subscribe to more conservative political beliefs and religious practices. The horror! Brandon Vogt, the content director for Barrons Word on Fire Catholic Ministries, which could be more aptly named Church on Fire ministries, stated, All of these are major pastoral issues, which is why I proposed to Bishop Barron, in his capacity as bishop, to host a meeting with various Catholic media leaders to discuss these items."
Note that to Vogt and Barron, the influence of the so-called radical Traditionalist (or rad-trad) movements online (those who prefer the Latin Mass and subscribe to more conservative beliefs) is a pastoral issue worthy of devoting a secret meeting with Catholic media outlets about in order to address. Yes, it seems that if we simply root out all of those pesky young women who insist on wearing chapel veils as well as those rigid young men who wear suits to their Latin Masses, and who believe everything the Catholic Church taught for 2,000 years we can get on to singing a new church into being.
It seems that Bishop Barrons anger began to be stirred with the response to his July 7 article. Catholics were enraged at the lack of the bishops protection of statues of Fr. Junipero Serra which were allowed to be defaced by left-wing rioters and the weak episcopal reaction to the vandalism and sacrilege. In the face of this outrage, Barron penned a tone deaf piece on his blog which defended a prior tweet of his which stated that it was not the bishops job to defend the statues, but the laitys job.
As anyone with any Catholic sense could have predicted, this didnt sit too well with Barrons critics. The group Restoring the Faith responded with the following meme:
Bishop Barron, instead of apologizing for his insensitivity and wrongheadedness on this issue, proceeded to issue a 7 minute video stating that he preferred dealing with atheists than his Catholic critics. He decried the calumny directed towards him over his article by armies of commenters and internet provocateurs calling him spineless, gutless, and cowardly. Barron complained he had to assign three of his co-workers at Word on Fire, full time, for four days, removing poisonous comments in response to his article whose time could have been better spent on evangelical pursuits. Since Barron has stated he has reasonable hope no souls are in Hell and sees Christ as merely the privileged route of salvation, one truly wonders what evangelical pursuits those three staff members would have been conducting.
Barron then goes on longing for the days when critics would have to physically mail in their written criticisms and be at the mercy of an editor as to whether they were even heard. Barron then softly asks if he may, as a spiritual father, issue a kind of pastoral cry of the heart before then abruptly yelling at the camera Cut it out! He then refers to the reaction to his article, not the bishops inaction in protecting Fr. Serras statues from the mobs, as a moral outrage and a mortal sin.
Apparently some of the critics who got under the Bishops skin must have been Traditional Catholics, as soon after, on July 22 he went after them in a video and several Twitter posts focused on them. For example Barron states, Since the Churchs tradition includes the Second Vatican Council, it's therefore impossible to repudiate Vatican II and claim to be a faithful traditionalist. There's nothing traditional about rejecting an ecumenical council. This is, of course, a false catch-22, for if one accepts the parts of Vatican II which contradict prior Tradition then the entire concept of Tradition is made meaningless.
Barrons video from July 28 is entitled, Should Bishops Allow Priests to Offer Mass in Latin? Apparently, Bishop Barron has spent so much time making videos and blogging over the last 13 years, he missed the Motu Proprio, Summorum Pontificum, which allows any priest to say the Latin Mass without his bishops permission.
In a July 29 video entitled What Went Wrong After Vatican II? Barron ignores the obvious answer, Vatican II itself, and instead, amusingly lists the fruits of Vatican II: poor liturgical implementations of the great Council, the rise of secularism, and the emergence of a hyper-individualistic culture have left many Catholics detached from the transcendent.
Barrons statement lamenting the poor liturgical implementations of the great Council is an amusing irony considering that Bishop Barron proudly participates in the Los Angeles Religious Education Congress (REC) (should be spelled WRECK) which has featured year after year of Masses chock full of sacrilege, irreverence, terrible knock off Disney music, not to mention plain poor taste. Please see how long you can make it through the following two hour 2020 REC Mass (featuring disgraced Cardinal Mahoney and Bp. Barron concelebrating) before tapping out.
Also, in a July 30 tweet Barron says we cannot hate the culture... Then on August 3 he tweeted that, Racism is deep within our cultural DNA. Thus, according to Barron we cannot hate our racist culture. Once the rabid left puts these tweets together, you can expect them to destroy any future statues of Bp. Barron that any church would be unfortunate enough to erect.
It is not clear what the result, if any, will be from Barrons secret emergency meeting regarding the existential threats of Trads expressing their opinions online. The Distorter article mentions that Barron previously proposed the following to National Catholic Register earlier this year, he suggested that bishops may want to consider introducing "something like a mandatum for those who claim to teach the Catholic faith online, whereby a bishop affirms that the person is teaching within the full communion of the Church."
In addition, the Distorter reported that, Vogt said the meeting was not hosted in coordination with the Communications Committee of the U.S. bishops nor with the Committee on Evangelization and Catechesis, of which Barron is the chair.
Thus, it is not out of the realm of possibility that Barron was floating his proposal to several Catholic media outlets he deems friendly to him and who may stand to benefit from receiving such a mandatum from his friends at the USCCB as they attempt to marginalize Traditional Catholic publications by not granting such a mandatum to them. The irony is that Bishop Baron would now have to deny his mandatum to the writings of Bishop Schneider and Abp. Vigano who have both leveled very articulate and biting criticisms of Vatican II.
In the final analysis, whatever action Bishop Barron takes will be too little too late. What he and other Neo-Catholic commentators fail to realize is that the latest round of criticism from even princes of the Church against Vatican II is no mere flare up that can be put out with a mandatum. Instead it is the crest of a wave of indignation and righteous and just indignation that has formed over the course of fifty years. During that time faithful Catholics have seen every sign of a once vibrant Catholic life and culture destroyed with their own eyes by Vatican II and its innovating disciples.
As St. Pius X used to say, Basta! Enough!
Ping
Would not have happened if the church hadn’t let into the clergy so many perverts and miscreants.
Its difficult to know just what to call Bishop Barron. Neo-heretical. Neo-gentile. Post-modern Catholic. Neo-Satanist. I’m at a loss. Certainly, Christian doesn’t fit.
Would not have happened if the church hadnt let into the clergy so many perverts and miscreants
_____________________________________
Exactly right!!! I have heard for some time how seminaries were infested with homosexuals.
The Church allowed it and then hid their crimes.
The Church needs washed of all these miscreants, and replaced with righteous men, alas our wonderful Pope, /s won’t see it.
I should clarify it was not all homosexuals who committed sins/crimes against others.
How about Modernist?
Isn’t the real story: Traditional Catholics Attack Bishop Barron?
Paul had to write (in Galatians) about those sneaking in. It is often the MO of those who are not content to sit in pews whilst being unrepentant.
For comparison consider the heresies of modernist theology that had been stealthily moving into various congregations early in the 20th century. Among these we find one fellow by the name of Fosdick who apparently had thought hed done enough in the congregation hed been preaching to to pave the way for outright drawing the lot to follow him anywhere and so he gave a sermon asking shall the fundamentalists win.
But instead he not only lost his job he alerted lots of folks to the modernist 5th column that had snuck in already ... and so there were split congregations and the liberal churches became a thing.
It appears that modernists (and communists) were perhaps able to easily hide themselves within the wood work of the hierarchy. But theres still a piper to pay and those who refuse to retain knowledge of the Lord may come under the terms of Romans 1:18-32.
The spread of the lavender mafia may be a mere symptom of something much deeper, as indeed the acceptance and championing of homosexuality among liberal churches is likewise a symptom, like a canary dying in a coal mine telling the miners that the air was already bad to breath.
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/b009rpMichael.htm
...Apparently this prayer (short form to be recited by the Congregation after low Mass) was dropped as part of Vatican II.
Interesting.
Though when the angel was sent to Daniel it was because Daniel was praying to the Lord. Personally, beseeching the Lord to send His angels seems a better course of action than calling on an angel, even Michael.
"O God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, we call upon Thy holy Name, and as supplicants, we implore Thy clemency, that by the intercession of Mary, ever Virgin Immaculate and our Mother, and of the glorious St. Michael the Archangel, Thou wouldst deign to help us against Satan and all the other unclean spirits who wander about the world for the injury of the human race and the ruin of souls. Amen.
Yes,I read it.
Eventually getting around to addressing the Lord like that still spends most of the time, before and after, addressing creatures rather than the creator.
The more prayers the better.
Praying vertical is what makes a difference. talking horizontal not so much.
Believers request prayer all the time. Asking angels and saints to intercede is quite similar. Except they're already upstairs.
Not blind.
All that we need the Father has. Angels are servants for our good sent by Him, not independent actors. The saints who have passed have not yet received their crowns, which happens when all the saints are assembled together, so theyve got nothing of their own to offer yet and arent servants like the angels anyway,
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.