Well, it looks like St. John the Baptist in Silver Spring wasn't the only parish to advertise Bishop Robinson's book signing, sponsored by Voice of the Faithful (VOTF).
We also have Holy Trinity in Washington DC, which advertised it in their May11th bulletin.
However, it only gets better!
It seems that VOTF has an affiliate in the Archdiocese of Washington DC. And guess where it is located?
If you guessed Holy Trinity, you go to the head of the class.
So, we actually have a dissenting organization supported by a Catholic parish in the Archdiocese. And, it has done so since 2003! What's next? A Planned Parenthood chapter?
Does not the Archbishop have authority over the parishes in his Diocese?
Is there anyone who cares about this in Hyattsville?
17 comments:
My compliments to the Archbishop for giving Holy Trinity Parish the latitude to discern an approach to church reform, NOT dissent.
Well, isn't Holy Trinity known for being um... offbeat?
VOTF--a dissident organization?? According to a study of Voice of the Faithful by D'Antonio and Pogorlec at Catholic University, one in three male members of VOTF were members of the Knights of Columbus; their Sunday Mass attendance rate was 65%, compared to the national average for all Catholics of 34%, more than 70% went to CAtholic parochial schools, 60% to Catholic high schools, and 54% TO Catholic colleges. Perhaps being a lector, or Eucharistic minister, or greeter/usher, or CCD teacher, would be a sign of being in conformity with church teachings. In all of these indicators of being active in the parish, and committed to the Church, they are twice as committed as most Catholics. So I am at a loss to know why you would write a public statement that they are dissident. According to to the dictionary, a dissident is a person who disagrees with or is different in behavior or attitude. So, is not Mass attendance an important sign of behavior that our pope's have urged on us as signs of our being faithful Catholics.
I would recommend two books that might be of help if you are serious about discovering dissident Catholics.
Voices of the Faithful: Loyal Catholics Striving for Change, by WVD'Anonio and A Pogorelc, Crossroad, 2007, and
American Catholics Today: New Realities of Their Faith and Their Church, by WVD'Antonio, JDDAvidson, D Hoge, and M Gautier, Sheed and Ward, 2007. If you can get your facts straight, people may take seriously what you say in the future.
Your comments and the use of the study is really a smoke screen. Just because there may be a high rate of attendance to Catholic parochial schools, Catholic high schools or even Catholic Colleges does not guarantee that one will be more faithful to the teachings of the Church. For example, US Senator Barbara Mikulski and MD State Senator Magdaleno, attended Catholic schools but does that mean that they are faithful to Church teachings. Maryln Praisner (MD County Council) was praised by her pastor and the Maryland Catholic Conference but was a supporter of abortion.
Second, just because you attend Church on Sunday and are a Eucharistic Minister, greeter/usher, does not guarantee you are more faithful to the Church teachings than someone who may just attend Church. You know that as well as I do. I know a number of “faithful Catholics” who attend Mass on Sunday, and do all of the things you say, but want a female priesthood or believe abortion is okay. You probably know them too. And, you may be one of them.
The one sad part is one in three members are supposedly KofC members. That is truly sad because it is an organization dedicated to supporting the Church.
Here is a good article on VOTF that I have referenced before. http://www.catholicity.com/commentary/hudson/voiceofthefaithful.html
I, too, would like to see female priests. Mortal men established the constraints on the priesthood, not Christ. And, it is mortal men AND women that will reform the hierarchy of the Catholic Church to ensure it's sustainability and better serve the pastoral needs of today's world.
Deal Hudson knows about much about VOTF as you do--Nemo dat quod non habit. Deal Hudson? Isn't he the guy that abused a female college student? Good example.
Have you ever been to a meeting? Have you read the serious books by D'Antonio and his colleagues?
If no, then that confirms my suspicion of your ignorance, which was manifest in your response!
Here is the web site that provides the scoop on Deal Huson, your authority on VOTF: http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives/004040.html.
Apparently Deal likes to hang out at college bars and assault female students. You have to be kidding when you use the work of an abuser as an authoritative source regarding VOTF. What are your other sources?
You gave me statistics based on a study of VOTF from 2004-2005 and the book was published in 2007. I did not dispute those statistics. I could not, unless I could show that the underlying methodology to collect them was bad.
What I did say was that just because someone has attended Catholic schools, or is a Eucharistic minister does not necessarily make him/her faithful to church teachings. And to prove my point, I gave you a couple of real life examples from the Washington DC area.
You have not disputed my points, only have tried to change the arguement.
You are the one that has changed the argument. You say: " I know a number of “faithful Catholics” who attend Mass on Sunday, and do all of the things you say, but want a female priesthood or believe abortion is okay." How many VOTF members, Eucharistic ministers, CCD teachers, Catholic school graduates, etc. do not pass your test of loyalty or fidelity cited above? What is the "number" to which you are referring? You either have a number or you do not know what you are talking about. Do you really have a number? What is the number. I am very curious. And as for Deal Hudson, your only authority, he is an abuser and stalker of young women. What are your other authorities? Is he the only person you have read. You are the one dodging the questions. Let me hear your numbers and the authoritative books or research papers you can cite in support of your position. To paraphrase Jerry Maguire, "Show me the numbers!"
Once again, you are changing the arguement but I expect that -- it is a typical tactic of the left.
Remember, your basic premise was the fact that here we have X% who went to Catholic schools, attended Mass, were Eucharstic Ministers,etc. and therefore, how can they dissent from Church teaching.
My arguement was that just because people have these particular traits, does not mean they do not dissent from Church teaching, on such issues as homosexual relationships, abortion, celibate priesthood, etc.
I did notice that you did not refute any of the statements made by Mr. Hudson. Attack him -- okay -- but you did not attack what he had to say. Says quite a bit about what he had to say and much more about your silence.
So, I guess if I have not been to a meeting or read any of D'Antonio's books, it suddenly wipes out my arguements. (Note taht the only author you cite is D'Antonio -- I guess reading his posting at DC Catholic makes you the expert, unless you are D'Antonio. In which case, I am quite flattered that you have posted here.)
I guess if I have not had cancer, I cannot discuss it. If I did not get hooked shooting up heroin, I can't really talk about drug abuse.
So, you don't like the article from Mr. Hudson, I will play the game for a bit and provide you with a few others.
But, let's be honest here. I could provide you with 10,000 articles and it still would not satisfy you. Short of Christ coming down and speaking to you personally, it would not matter.
So, here goes:
Faithful Voice
http://www.faithfulvoice.com/
Is it the Voice of the Faithful
http://www.catholicculture.org/library/view.cfm?id=7303&repos=1&subrepos=&searchid=246724
An Inside Look at Voice of the Faithful
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=9091192923206493007&postID=4836069295284525773
Voice of the Faithful - Site Review
http://www.catholicculture.org/reviews/view.cfm?recnum=1912&repos=2&subrepos=&searchid=246724
With that, I continue to welcome all here, including dissenters.
Just give me the numbers I asked for; that would satisfy me. You have not done so, and obviously cannot do so, and so I am confident you do not know what you are talking about, and am wasting my time in trying to get a response from you. I want to know what what serious research that has been done to support your argument. Again, Nemo dat quod non habit.
Even though you are changing the subject, I will play along. Since you are looking for numbers, how does 35,000 sound? Sound like a good number. Where did it come from? The 2006 VOTF Annual Report of how many are paid members. There is your number: 35, 000 dissidents. (Now, that number may be a little higher or lower today, but we will use it for the sake of arguement.)
Now, I presented you with other articles you ignored them. Shows that you really aren't interested.
When confronted with the fact that you only seem to quote D'Antonio et al, and no one else, you ignored it. I doubt you have even read D'Antonio et al, considering the fact that you lifted his comments word for word from DC Catholic. A comment that you chose to ignore.
It is obvious to everyone who has contacted me directly about your postings, we are shining the light of truth once again that VOTF is a dissident organization and you are doing everything you can to attack those who want to shine the light of truth. Discredit the messenger and you discredit the message.
BTW, I have to give you a bit of credit for throwing in the Latin. Did you learn it in Latin Level 2, LA LAW or maybe some movie? Nice touch but it really fails to add any substance to your arguement.
Now, run along like a good dissident and join the Episcopalians. I hear they have a couple of openings.
Well, I guess I'm going to have to change my ID... Anonymous is giving Anonymous a bad name. As for me, come on AAWDCC, you can do better than, "now run along..." That's awfully condescending for a Catholic christian. Why not cite some of the statistics as requested?
The problem with your responses is that you have presented no facts for your position, although you say that you have presented facts with this assertion: “When presented with the fact(s).” All you have presented is unsubstantiated opinions, opinions not supported by empirical data or serious study of the issues raised by Bishop Robinson and Voice of the Faithful. There is philosophical principle applicable here: What is freely asserted can be freely denied.
You assert dissent. You rush to judgment of all members of VOTF, but you do not cite one area in which members dissent from any Church teaching. What teachings of Church do members of VOTF specifically reject? Can probably say with some level of certainty that VOTF members would side with Galileo, a “dissident”; would disagree with a former church teaching that legitimated slavery (explicitly repudiated at Vatican II); would agree with the Vatican II teaching regarding religious liberty which was previously condemned by official church teaching; would agree with Pius XII (obviously a “dissident”) in rejecting the teaching previously understood to be official teaching, that outside the Catholic Church there could be no salvation; would agree with the bishops at Vatican II who changed the teaching of Pius XII that the Mystical Body of Christ was identical with the Roman Catholic Church.
With respect to the articles you presented, they were not ignored. They simply expressed unsupported opinions.
With respect to Latin, yes, I understand Latin, having studied it seriously for 4 semesters in college; and there I became persuaded that “Nemo dat quod non habit”--one does not give what one does not have, and this applies in your case. You have neither the facts to support your argument nor the ability to make a cogent argument.
With respect to your condescending remark about becoming an Episcopalian, I would have to admit that some of the most authentic Christians, based on their works of mercy and commitment to justice, I know are Episcoplians. I especially appreciate the Anglican Bishop and Scripture scholar N.T. Wright. They put many of us Catholics to shame with respect to practicing the works of mercy and the criteria on which all of us will be judged: “I was hungry, and you gave me to eat…I was naked and you clothed me’ (Mt. 25:31-46). Also, since I am a descendent of English Catholics who settled in Maryland, and since the monarchs in England could not get the Catholicism out of our family, then you and a few pedophile-enabling bishops have no possibility of ever changing my mind about the Church that has claimed our family’s allegiance and mine for centuries. So, you are out of luck with your wishful thinking.
Ball in court: An Archiocese of Wash DC Catholic.
VOTF is a dissident organization. I used to be a part of it. Like SNAP it wants the church to change on IT'S terms and how it prescribes the change. That ISN'T how it works.
"May we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion."
-Eisenhower, Dwight D.
Makes sense to me...
Post a Comment