respectfully, I don’t believe we need to follow the line of thought that there are people with a blood lust to throw people out of the window. I would suggest that in the spirit of mercy, we would like Bishop Strickland to return to the faith, and if he has issues that can be supported by the facts, then he should bring it up with the bi…
respectfully, I don’t believe we need to follow the line of thought that there are people with a blood lust to throw people out of the window. I would suggest that in the spirit of mercy, we would like Bishop Strickland to return to the faith, and if he has issues that can be supported by the facts, then he should bring it up with the bishops and the proper channels. His demonstration in the public media to gain attention for himself, justifying his opinions, regardless of whether they have some truth or not shows more to his character of being separated from the faithful. I wish someone close to him, would bring him to proper dialogue or psychological therapy to help him reconsider his approach to generating so much emotional laced accusations against the faithful. If he has a case, he should layout the facts instead of talking trash against the bishops.
Note: when someone excommunicate himself from the Catholic Church, it’s because their behavior is not ordered to the truth of its teachings. Excommunication is meant to draw the individual into repentance in an effort to return them back to the faith. The person does it to themselves and if necessary, the church recognizes it and makes an announcement. It appears likely that he has already moved in the direction of schism. His words over the years and his seemingly arrogant approach to judging others unworthy to be in the church does not help support his case.
I agree with you. To clarify my comment, I am just identifying a attitudinal tendency I have encountered where, instead of the measured and corrective response born of charity and implemented through the proper channels as you describe, discourse has tended to leap quickly to the "get him outta here" kind of attitude, often bandying around language of schism and heresy in a way that obfuscates the truth rather than clarifies it--and often carries a tone of glee, a sort of "heh heh now s/he's got it coming". Both in cases where heresy and/or schism are actually present, and in cases where it is not, this kind of discourse seems to impede a just and charitable response. Does that make sense?
I want to be clear that I am not attempting to justify +Strickland's behaviors or deflect concern away from his direction of action. I'm sort of zooming out and looking at the way American Catholic culture talks about difficult situations like this one.
respectfully, I don’t believe we need to follow the line of thought that there are people with a blood lust to throw people out of the window. I would suggest that in the spirit of mercy, we would like Bishop Strickland to return to the faith, and if he has issues that can be supported by the facts, then he should bring it up with the bishops and the proper channels. His demonstration in the public media to gain attention for himself, justifying his opinions, regardless of whether they have some truth or not shows more to his character of being separated from the faithful. I wish someone close to him, would bring him to proper dialogue or psychological therapy to help him reconsider his approach to generating so much emotional laced accusations against the faithful. If he has a case, he should layout the facts instead of talking trash against the bishops.
Note: when someone excommunicate himself from the Catholic Church, it’s because their behavior is not ordered to the truth of its teachings. Excommunication is meant to draw the individual into repentance in an effort to return them back to the faith. The person does it to themselves and if necessary, the church recognizes it and makes an announcement. It appears likely that he has already moved in the direction of schism. His words over the years and his seemingly arrogant approach to judging others unworthy to be in the church does not help support his case.
I agree with you. To clarify my comment, I am just identifying a attitudinal tendency I have encountered where, instead of the measured and corrective response born of charity and implemented through the proper channels as you describe, discourse has tended to leap quickly to the "get him outta here" kind of attitude, often bandying around language of schism and heresy in a way that obfuscates the truth rather than clarifies it--and often carries a tone of glee, a sort of "heh heh now s/he's got it coming". Both in cases where heresy and/or schism are actually present, and in cases where it is not, this kind of discourse seems to impede a just and charitable response. Does that make sense?
I want to be clear that I am not attempting to justify +Strickland's behaviors or deflect concern away from his direction of action. I'm sort of zooming out and looking at the way American Catholic culture talks about difficult situations like this one.