I noted a week or so ago the sudden vendetta against Bishop Barron and Word on Fire ministry. Now we know:
I've noticed that, for all the chest pounding and warnings that you don't want to tick off the side of the issue that owns all the guns, there are few who can withstand the Left's assaults.
Of course releasing this video series may have been pre-planned before everything erupted against Bishop Barron. But I've seen people going after him and WoF for many moons now. And I don't know when this was planned or produced.
Ms. Purvis is a Catholic who drinks deeply from the well of BLM. I don't know which parts of BLM she rejects, but she accepts the premise: an inherently racist nation with white racist Americans in racist Catholic Churches who should be ashamed of themselves because white means being racist. In short, she represents that - hopefully - small but likely growing number of blacks in America who are told to stop with the forgiveness and reconciliation rubbish and get that pound of flesh.
I don't know if WoF wouldn't have published her series or not. After all, woke/cancel,BLM,#MeToo are all ingredients in the same recipe. And Bishop Barron famously went after woke (leftwing censorship). Or perhaps WoF had every intention of publishing this in order to give voice to different sides of the debate. Something Bishop Barron's tendencies make believable.
In any event, I saw that this was met with great cheers by some who had targeted WoF and Bishop Barron recently. It's not hard to imagine that, like Chik fil A or the Boy Scouts or anything the Left targets, it could be the result of inevitable surrender and retreat. Those are outcomes that, quite frankly, mark the typical results of the conflict between the traditional values of the Christian world and the new values of the secular pagan world.
Could it be the sudden departure of one of his main staff, sexual harassment accusations, the resignation of two of his highest personnel, etc?
ReplyDeleteNot hard to believe. I notice today that a person doesn't do something wrong because he's a bad person. He does it because he's part of 'that group.' A man doesn't assault a woman because he's a bad man. He assaults here because he's a man. Furthermore, a person doesn't do anything wrong, but it becomes a 'culture of' such and such'. As in this case. It isn't just someone might have done wrong, but the whole was a hypermasculine boy's club environment. You have to admit, given what we're seeing, these are not ineffective tactics.
DeleteI somehow doubt this'll appease people like Greydanus, the king of the anti-racist try-hards.
ReplyDeleteI find Deacon Greydanus, like so many who swing left, becomes more and more incoherent as the days pass by. Something about trying to bake that kosher ham recipe of secular leftwing Catholicism.
DeleteIt seems to me that the idea here is that there is a special sin, racism, inherently & uniquely attached to white people. Then the question becomes: "Was Jesus white?"
ReplyDeleteIf the answer is yes, then Jesus was a sinner & cannot save anyone.
On the other hand, since (at least) the 4th century the church has taught that "what has not been assumed, has not been healed". See St. Gregory Nazianzus.
So if the answer is no, whites cannot be saved.
How many kinds of human being are there?
When Barron first appeared on the scene, I thought, "This is what Catholicism is all about! Not just corruption and scandal!" With repeat molester eruptions, LGB etc. embraces by everyone, dodgey statements, actions and appointments by the pope, however, I begin to doubt him and others. It seems he conveniently filled a gap for the Bishops and the institutional church, to distract the faithful from business as usual. Nice try, bishop; we're onto you and your ilk!
ReplyDeleteGloria is all in for reparations to those who were never slaves as paid by those who never owned slaves. Her theology of pay the hate forward now has a sympathetic ear with Bishop Barron. As pathetic as the Pope’s secret contract with China’s Xi and his anti-Catholic CCP. 🇨🇳💀
ReplyDeleteSome background here. A WoF piece with Purvis was in the works for some time. But as its release seemed to drag out, the usual suspects started to criticize them for "silencing" her or somesuch. I haven't seen the piece, but I wonder if the delay was indeed to iron out the inconsistencies that Purvis would have included on her own.
ReplyDeleteI disagree strongly with Purvis on some things, but have also been edified by some things I've heard from her, so am willing to give this effort the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.