Wow! I've just made a new kind of blogroll! I've been called intolerant, but interesting. But I'm in good company. Alongside Salve Regina on Winnipeg Catholic's list of intolerant but interesting blogs are my esteemed friends and colleagues Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, of Human Life International from Spirit and Life Blog and Father Joe and Simon Peter.
Thank you, Winnipeg Catholic. I am honoured to be listed among such good, traditional Catholics.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.JPG)
Posts
19 comments:
Thanks for stopping by! And you're right, intolerant might be too strong a word for father Joe's blog in particular. I don't think he has anything calling people buggerites or calling for burning things down in his blog. Which is why one would think you wuld moderate those sorts of comments.
But then, most conservatives refuse to link blogs that they disagree with, they're often not capable of reading opposing material and then defending their point of view; or in the case of ultramontane orthodox, that of the church.
he lives in the states and is a winnipeg Catholic? err, ok. i didn't like seeing that
"intolerant but intersting"
line in his blog. it sends the wrong message. don't like it, but i guess he's entitled to his opinion.
oh, it says now: "conservatives i often disagree with". okayy......
Hi PG,
I created a separate blog entry regarding my question about the incarnation and how it relates to Chastity. I would appreciate input from you and your readers.
http://reform-catholic.blogspot.com/
paramedicgirl said...
WC, it was in the comment box that people said the things you took issue with (the flaming torch and the word "buggerite", which by the way, happens to be in the Bible.) And in all fairness, I published your comments that I happen to disagree with, just to keep the conversation fair on both sides. I am unable to take any words or text out of a comment. I either have to publish the whole comment or reject it. And I did reject several of the more graphic ones, yours included.
AS far as linking to blogs, I only link to the ones I enjoy and read on a daily basis.
Fair enough, and yes, I do accept the feedback that 'intolerant' is likely unfair. So it now reads as Marilene notes. Yes I live in the states, 'Winnipeg' comes fmo the Winnipeg Statement of the Canadian Bishops. It is a fairly liberl statement. Canadian Roman Catholics are theoretically under the authority of the Canadian Bishps, and the pope is of course a first among equals. Ultramontane/ultraorthodox catholics who I presume would reject the Winnipeg Statement are in a sense a bit of a contradiction, if they even know what the Winnipeg Statement is.
The word 'buggerite' does not seem to be in the New American Bible that we are supposed to use as Catholics, at least when I search for it at www.usccb.org.
WC, most trad Catholics use the Douay Rheims Bible. We prefer the unadulterated language.
And yes, I do know all about the Winnipeg statement and the "Tragedy in Winnipeg." I did a post on it called "Betraying the Truth." I am not surprised that you have aligned yourself with the position of the dissenters.
Hmmm. Well, I don't know who said we are supposed to use the heretical NAB, or, rather, the NAB full version with heretical notes, commentaries and introduction.
I know, no one.
Hey, how come I didn't make it? I must be doing something wrong!
Well Fr. Joe just posted an image making fun of a jew at the wailing wall right next to posts demanding the retention of the call to conversion being left in the tridentine. I find that rather ill conceived, he may need to go back on the 'intolerant' list.
I think the notion of using the word buggerite in the bible is somewhat funny on a monty python sort of level. But it really sounds pretty intolerant when discussing homosexuality, which is a situation where we are specifically called by the catechism to be gentle and kind.
The NAB is used in the mass. I thought that made it pretty official-like. And the US conference of bishops pushes it pretty hard, and I consider myself to be under their pastoral authority in such matters, because, well... that's pretty much how obedience works. You can't just randomly choose a priest or bishop to be obedient to, last I heard.
Some of you folks sound like big-time dissenters when it comes to brass tacks. For god's sake, you probably cross your mind, lips, and heart every week in mass listening to a gospel you consider to be a heretical translation!
Simon-Peter, you for one are in the states in the diocese of Raliegh and under the pastoral authority of Bishop Burbridge if I recall correctly, and as such you have no business calling the NAB heretical and calling yourself ultramontane at the same time. Your Bishop is pretty active in the USCCB website and half the priests in your diocese due the online sermons every day.
Can't we use softer words than heretical? How about 'not as good'?
WC, we are traditional Catholics here. We do not agree with the liberalism that has swept the Church in the last forty years. We hold true to the teachings of the Magisterium, even if certain bishops have not. You do not have to follow your bishop into heresy. If your bishop tells Catholics that birth control is OK, you are obliged to follow the teachings of the Church, rather than allow your bishop to lead you into error.
That is a primacy of conscience argument. One can just as easily argue that they should not follow the pope into error as the Canadian Bishops Conference! We're not just talking about one Bishop here, but an entire nation's worth of bishops.
Lol. A dissenter by another name (traditionalist) is still a dissenter.
Welcome to the fold. Primacy of conscience is a good thing isn't it?
WC, when someone knows the true teachings of the Church, it is very obvious if a bishop has dissented from the Magisterium. You can hide behind primary of conscience all you want to deny the sanctity of life, but I will stick with the teachings of the Church. BTW, bishops are not infallible. They can and do lead their flocks into error on occasion. When you know this to be the case, you should not follow them into sin. There is a proper avenue for correcting a dissenting bishop.
By having an intolerant list, he proves he is intolerant of orthodox Catholics.
It's like the relativist whose absolutely sure that no one can be sure. But he's sure about that.
Dave
Bah, get a grip. Most conservative sites are hear-no-evil see no evil and don't even want to discuss things. I don't see a lot of progressive links on conservative blogs.
And anyway, that's why I changed it to "Conservatives I often disagree with". I'm pondering "Conservatives I Respectfully Disagree With".
PG, I see that you censor my comment on 'Cafeteria Orthodoxy', and on Cardinal Leger, along with the link to Cardinal Leger. Could it be that your conscience is tickling you just a tiny bit at calling a man as holy as Cardinal Leger an anti-life heretic?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_Leger
Catholics need to learn to respectfully disagree with one another without charges of heresy and listening to satan, and whatever else.
WC, I haven't censored any of your comments on this post. The thing is, you have left so many of them, and I haven't had time to read them all yet. I'm not going to publish them blindly, and when I get time to read them and reply to them, then they can be published. The type of comments you leave require a response, and I am a working gal. If I get time in between ambulance calls in the next 24 hours, you will see them up.
BTW, WC, there is another blog that is very deserving of your blogroll. Check out my good buddies, the Catholic Cavemen.They are sure to please. They are my hands, down all time favourite rad trad blog!
Post a Comment