Edit: poor Los Angeles, what have you done to deserve this?
It was reported at 12 noon, that the Rector of Mundelein Seminary, Father Robert Barron, is to be appointed the Auxiliary Bishop of Los Angeles, California. Barron may not believe anyone's in Hell, but it's certain as Whispers in the Loggia suggests, that his appointment seems calculated to bank on his substantial media presence. Maybe now that Barron's an Auxiliary in Los Angeles, even fewer of its substantial Catholic population will be going to confession to avoid it?
This appointment is another evil portent of the growing the problems with this papacy and the American Church in general, but it also underscores the continuing nadir of the once promising EWTN and Catholic media in general.
Some have even long been hailing Barron as another Archbishop Fulton Sheen.
Perhaps it's payback for some enthusiastic and uncritical praise for the Socialism in Laudatio Si?
Bishop Sheen on Hell:
The comparison is ridiculous.
55 comments:
Yeah but Bishop Sheen was not of unimpeachable orthodoxy either. He was a big fan of Teilhard and even compared him to Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross!
Fr.Robert Barron and Michael Voris like most people interpret Vatican Council II with the right hand side values
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/08/frrobert-barron-and-michael-voris-like.html
Fr.Barron -except for the saints, and the Holy Family, the Church does not say anyone is in Heaven
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/11/frbarron-except-for-saints-and-holy.html
I'm well aware, not to mention his unjustifiable enthusiasm for V2.
A bishop who doesn't believe in Hell selected by a pope who makes us feel like Hell.
This a major loss for the seminary. I have witnessed first-hand the positive changes he has implemented. It's more of a worry of who Cupich will put in there.
I listened to the video, he never said that he believes no one is in hell.
Barron makes a 7 minute video about hell and never once says that it doesn't exist. You are either a deceiver or an fool.
Is Fr. Barron or one of the other two priests also appointed as auxiliaries for Los Angeles (Msgr. Joseph Brennan, LA vicar general and moderator of the curia, and Msgr. David O’Connell, pastor of an LA parish) being groomed to replace San Francisco Archbishop Cordileone, who could then be transferred to a non-entitial position in the Vatican?
Vatican Council says we really cannot have a reasonable hope that all men are saved
Vatican Council II says all need to convert into the Church and Catholics are the new people of God, the Chosen People
VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS ALL MUSLIMS, JEWS IN ROME, ITALY ARE GOING TO HELL
VATICAN COUNCIL II SAYS
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/vatican-council-ii-says.html
When did Fr.Barron say any of this ?
Someone who believes it might be empty has no business as a Bishop.
The Unitarians would love this Rotarian.
I guess I must just be missing it. I've listened to it three times and he never says he believes there is no one in hell. Could you point me to the minute and second please?
I'd wager Barron will be seen as a paragon of orthodoxy relative to whoever Cupich appoints to replace him at Mundelein.
In a Machiavellian way, I believe that this "promotion" is simply a "kick upstairs" in order to rub the shine off of his media star .
His superior in L.A. will have no intention of letting Barron steal away his thunder. Abp. Gomez will have censorship power over Barron's media messages. He will force Barron to attend those ridiculous, annual Religious Education extravaganzas and to witness first hand those truly laughable liturgical dance routines.
Barron no longer has the power to set the curriculum for seminarians, as he did at Mundelein. (This is huge.)
If I were Fr. Barron, I would not be thrilled just yet.
Archbishop Cupich gutted the undergraduate seminary leadership and has now done the same with the major seminary. He has a history of this in his prevous dioceses, so it was to be expected. A comment was made at a seminarian funciton in the spring that the only way to get Fr. Barron out was to make him a Bishop...and the rest is history.
As long as we're doing Fr. Barron's greatest hits of Modernism, how about his opinion on Adam not being a literal historical figure
http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2011/09/fr-robert-barron-denies-that-adam-was.html
Of course after 50 years of watching the collapse of vocations and dwindling numbers of Mass attending Catholics what we really need is MORE theological liberalism
Barron isn't that bad. Calm down.
Well ! We can objectively say: Fr. Barron isn't a worst theologian that Pope Francis.
So we can stay quite and a little happy about this nomination.
1. Sign your posts.
2. Don't misquote people. I didn't say he believed no one is in Hell.
3. Aside from being an aberrosexual enabler, and not believing in the historicity of the scripture, he did in fact say that it's reasonable to suppose no one is in Hell.
<>
That's reasonable, but likely?
Robber Barron writes:
If there are any human beings in hell, they are there because they absolutely insist on it. The conditional clause with which the last sentence began honors the church’s conviction that, though we must accept the possibility of hell (due to the play between divine love and human freedom), we are not committed doctrinally to saying that anyone is actually “in” such a place. We can’t see fully to the depths of anyone’s heart; only God can. Accordingly, we can’t declare with utter certitude that anyone—even Judas, even Hitler—has chosen definitively to lock the door against the divine love. Indeed, the liturgy compels us to pray for all of the dead, and since the law of prayer is the law of belief, we must hold out at least the hope that all people will be saved. Furthermore, since Christ went to the very limits of godforsakenness in order to establish solidarity even with those who are furthest from grace, we may, as Hans Urs von Balthasar insisted, reasonably hope that all will find salvation…
Reasonable, and intelligent, thanks. Sign your posts.
Perhaps it's payback for some enthusiastic and uncritical praise for the Socialism in Laudatio Si?
More likely, it's a move to clear the decks for Archbishop Cupich to install his own man - or woman - as rector at Mundelein.
Fr. Barron is a conservative neo-Balthasarian, which is problematic. Whoever replaces him will be considerably more progressive.
Indeed - what happened to seminaries in his previous assignments is illuminating.
Say what you want about Skylstad, when he was in Spokane, he had generated a pretty decent number of vocations. When he left there were over two dozen seminarians. When Cupich left, in turn, there were, I believe, four of them. And the Bishop White seminary was sunk into desuetude.
Chicago is facing a pretty bad priest shortage crunch in the next decade, so this will be illuminating to watch unfold.
Tancred, this is little known about Fr. Barron: He also subscribes to the Balthasarian notion that Christ did not know his Messianic duty until sometime later in his life where he learned it. It is in his books. This proposition has been condemned by the Church numerous times and has sever implications for Christology.
Maybe not likely, but powerful churchmen with mischief on the mind are capable of anything.
Jealousy is a powerful motivator.
I do not like to think these thoughts about those in Holy Orders, but the shocks that I have received over the past 25 years has made me a bit cynical.
Thank the Lord that he will sort it all out in His good time
The Bible mentions Hell some 18 times. Jesus repeatedly tells us about Hell. How would Balthasar or any one else know otherwise ?
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/07/the-bible-mentions-hell-some-18-times.html
Given Fr Barron's anxiety to always have his face in front of a camera he should do very well in Los Angeles (and Hollywood).
Given Fr Barron's anxiety to always have his face in front of a camera he should do very well in Los Angeles (and Hollywood).
Rock Hudson goes to disney land. Wonder who will be the next rectum of Mundelein. So sick of the used #2 tp fly bait.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beelzebub
you win the analysis prize....bingo.
Frank Heisling - Barron is already a fixture at the (train) REC! So much so many don't know.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lisahendey/2013/10/fr-robert-barron-to-keynote-at-religious-education-congress/
y Jason, thank you so much--the great thing is that Fr. Barron even made time for me afterward and we got to sit down and have a nice chat...he's not only SUPER smart, but funny, and obviously kind...hope all's well in Cambridge and wishing you a blessed Lent...
http://shirtofflame.blogspot.com/2011/03/my-trip-to-religious-education-congress.html
2012: If you haven’t seen this presentation by Fr. Robert Barron at the Los Angeles Religious Education Congress, here it is for your viewing enjoyment. - See more at: http://carsonweber.org/fr-robert-barron-on/#sthash.8VdOrENa.dpuf
Going at least back to 1999
http://www.recongress.org/reviews/tidings/TID2-12-1999.pdf
Thank you for providing this information.
That he attended and keynoted these events cements my opinion of him.
Hollywood - here I come!!
100 saints' quotes on fewness of the saved: http://saintsquotes.net/selection%20-%20fewness.html
Catholic Church knows with greatest certainty from Jesus' words that Judas is in hell.. Otherwise the Savior would have never said that it would have been better for him if he had never been born... The fact that this truth has not been dogmatically defined doesn't mean we have no clue at all...
Catholic Church knows with greatest certainty from Jesus' words that Judas is in hell.. Otherwise the Savior would have never said that it would have been better for him if he had never been born... The fact that this truth has not been dogmatically defined doesn't mean we have no clue at all...
socialism in the magisterium!?! a heretic in the chair of Peter!?! LOL I love this site.
This is what I would say too......definitely. I tremble at the thought of who Cupich will assign.
Please site your sources. I am an avid Sheen listener and reader and I have never heard or read this. I have heard him talk about the lack of reverence for Christ in the Eucharist and the failures of priests since Vat. II. Are you aware his name was put on liberal books that he did not write? He alluded to this cross several times in the last years of his life. pax
Bishop Sheen said Jesus spoke of hell 33 times in the New Testament. No one talked about hell more than our Blessed Lord.
There are many, but here a few to get started (and I say this as one who loves A. Sheen; the Truth however must be recognized and acknowledged)....
http://catholicism.org/heretic-de-chardin-dusted-off-and-celebrated-at-jesuit-college-in-rome.html
http://www.traditioninaction.org/bkreviews/A_032br_Sheen.htm
this one gives a confirmation that Sheen gave Chardin's works to his seminarians...
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column/the-wisdom-of-st-francis-de-sales-for-a-troubled-world-3215/
and this is a very good, objective analysis....
http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/f041ht_Sheen_VatII.htm
aaaaaaand this picture/post speaks a thousand words.....
http://whispersintheloggia.blogspot.com/2015/07/from-la-premiere.html
He isn't "that" bad, he is worse! Have you seen/heard this man speak? It's absolutely painful, it's like watching some SNL or Mad TV comedian making fun of a PBS documentary. This man is an intellectual fraud and it's painfully obvious that he is "acting smart" to puff himself up to being something he is not. There are professors who aren't very smart and stay humble knowing the greatness of their peers and then there are your blindingly proud and stupid sociology professors that get made fun of behind their back for being frauds.
Oh and lets not mention the litany of heresies that he espouses (e.g. Adam didn't exist, Jesus didn't know he was a Messiah until later on in his life, ad. infinitum).
Read Chapter 6 "The Origin of Man in Society" in the book Footprints in a Darkened Forest written by ++Sheen. ++Sheen says Chardin was misunderstood and compared him to St. John of the Cross.
This shouldn't be a shock. Most intellectuals of that time period read Chardin and were sympathetic to him. It was the spirit of the times, he was "trending" back then. This is similar to the intoxicating and blinding effect Vatican II had on most bishops and priests, that "spirit" of the times blinded them into thinking there was actually a new Pentecost taking place.
We shouldn't be quick to judge, each generation has it's own demons tempting the thoughts and actions of men. The Baby Boomers have rebellion due to bad parents who had PTSD from WW2 and the Millennials have tepidity resulting from over-stimulation (tv/internet/video games/porn/smart phones).
Absolutely correct. Hans Urs von Balthasar is one the dangerous theologians who contributed to the massive amount of confusion in the post-conciliar Church, for he was very involved in the study of occult practices such as Hermetism and gnosticism, including Kabbala and Tarot.
I love Robert Barron - this is why I pray for his soul. If he was an actual priest gifted with true faith, he would be a wonderful apostle of the Lord. But I cannot watch him speak for more than thirty seconds without attempting to picture him in what would seem to fit him much better than the holy garments he betrays by his very words: a nice suit and a plain tie as he works in some CIA headquarter.
Although my tone is a bit sarcastic, I care to underline that I do wonder about this person (as well as many others in today's Church). The reason why I do is simple: I refuse to believe that a sacred servant of Christ Jesus could utter so many heresies within a few minutes if not for the sake of spreading (and accelerating) the foundations of the upcoming great apostasy.
Yet again, I might be just as cynical as all those who firmly believe in the simle and eternal Truth +++
You're going really wild regarding Balthasar. He's absolutely not the kind of illuminated heretic you try to depict. He indeed held a couple of peculiar, heterodox thesis but he never was a "dangerous theologian". Ratzinger had great respect for him.
In general agree with your comment that we shouldn't judge each generation too harshly, but in regards to the acceptance of Chardin and his lunacy, no way. His stuff was/is so out-of-the-main of Catholic thought and Tradition that it shows Arius to be closer to the mark. For an orthodox prelate to embrace this man and his grievous error, is a decided black-mark, and there's no way to spin it. I'm not Sheen bashing; as stated, I love the man, but the Truth is the Truth...Chardin was egregious.....for all times. We're called to fight the demonic zeigeists, and Chardin was its poster boy for his time.
Doesn't heterodoxy, especially the obstinate kind, more dangerous in a theologian than an ordinary layman?
That whole "secular saints" business was nutty.
I use "heterodox" in a somewhat "mild" sense: holding a non-heretical opinion that does not pertain to the common accepted view on a doctrinal subject in the Church. Theologians (in the modern sense of the word) have a different job than Bishops': their wrok, which certainly involves a certain amount of originality (they are no parrot), can lead them to unfamiliar territories, which is not necessarily a bad thing. When they are truly inspired their effort can open unseen doors for the Church. Remember a certain Thomas (after his mentor Albert) brilliantly introducing Aristotle into the Church, a quite shocking affair for the Traditionalists of his time, who were die-hard Augustinists. Most of the time, however, their works are mixed bags of good and less good things. Now, what makes something dangerous? Not heterodoxy per se. But the potentially poor quality of one's work: dishonesty, fallacy, superficialilty, partiality, etc.
RE: Philippe Martin: "You're going really wild regarding Balthasar. He's absolutely not the kind of illuminated heretic you try to depict. He indeed held a couple of peculiar, heterodox thesis but he never was a "dangerous theologian". Ratzinger had great respect for him."
Dear Philippe,
what I wrote does have a reason to be, for the proofs are out in the sun. You shall know that Valentin Tomberg (1900-1973), a Russian emigre, was the "Anonymous" author of Meditations on the Tarot: A Journey into Christian Hermeticism, written in 1967, but published over a decade after his death. "Catholic" theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar wrote a foreward to the 1983 German edition, and this is included as an afterward in the 2002 English edition published by Tarcher/Penguin.
This is what he wrote:
"A thinking, praying Christian of unmistakable purity reveals to us the symbols of Christian Hermeticism in its various levels of mysticism, gnosis and magic, taking in also the Cabbala and certain elements of astrology and alchemy. These symbols are summarised in the twenty-two so-called "Major Arcana" of the Tarot cards. By way of the Major Arcana the author seeks to lead meditatively into the deeper, all-embracing wisdom of the Catholic Mystery". (p. 659)
And this attempt "is to be found nowhere in the history of philosophical, theological and Catholic thought," though some Christian thinkers, starting with Origen, did explore the writings of pagan philosophers, the "secret wisdom of the Egyptians" (i.e., the writings of Hermes Trismegistus), and Babylonian and Indian astrology in search of "veiled presentiments of the Logos" (p. 659). In the Middle Ages and Renaissance, Islamic and Jewish mystical traditions (e.g., the Kabbalah) became additional sources for reflection.
"Here the important point is that although this penetration into the secret teachings of pagan and Jewish origin was pursued in the spirit of humanism, in the hope of bringing new life into rigidified Christian theology through collecting such scattered revelation and illumination, no one for a moment doubted that despite the disparities everything could be accommodated into the true Christian faith. That Pico, in particular, did not aim at syncretism, he himself made quite clear: "I bear on my brow the name Jesus Christ and would die gladly for the faith in him. I am neither a magician nor a Jew, nor an Ishmaelite nor a heretic. It is Jesus whom I worship, and his cross I bear upon my body." The author of these Meditations could also have affirmed this oath of allegiance". (p. 661)
As you can clearly see, Mr. Balthasar was far from being a Catholic just as those who embrace his ideas ~ like Mr. Barron.
God Bless +++
What are you mouthing off about, anonymous 3:49? The WWII and VN combat vets in my family never let any PTSD affect anyone, nor any of the many VN combat vets I worked side by side with, survivors guilt though they may have had.
Individuals have demons, generations, if you can define such, are subject to a Spirit of the Age. Please reconsider your perceptual framework, or you truly won't appreciate the circus.
Have respect for Fr. Barron. Your don't agree with his few questionable statements doesn't give you the right to talk like a, well. rector, seemingly obsessive at that based on the following sentence fragment.
Learn to be decent and I'll hire you for a certain monkey cage sweeping job.
Thanks for posting this Susan.
Your statement is so to the point.
And how is it that so many priests from the Auld Sod end up in California??
Guess that concerns about blacks are no longer de rigueur, so that is why Fr. Pfleger didn't make it our there with Fr. Barron.
The worst part is that it wasn't even funny.
Post a Comment