My dad and step-mom (both Episcopalian) have been talking about Fr. Richard Rohr, OFM and how wonderful his Center for Action and Contemplation is. His wife regularly attends retreats at the Center located in Albuquerque, NM, and has invited me. I, being a tad skeptical, looked up Fr. Rohr. In the process, I ran across this page on the "Our Lady's Warriors" web site.

http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/dissent/disspeop.htm 

It has an amazing list of those so-called Catholics who dissent from the truth of the Catholic Church. Some of the names on this list will be very familiar. I found the information being contained in a central location to be a great tool for discerning whether a particular publication or speaker should be avoided (some are very subtle, and easily push error). Fr. Rohr was not listed in all the categories that he probably belongs in (like promoting homosexual lifestyles), but he was definately on the list.

I thought this might be of use to our community.

You know, noelfitz, I considered whether posting this link was wise or not. As a relatively "new" Catholic, it is often difficult to discern which publications, web sites, speakers, authors, etc. offer food for the soul, or are potentially hazardous. I saw many names on this list of people who have made the speaker circuit in my area, and was glad to find a place where I could at least consider the authenticity of the person's Catholic position. I think we can all agree that there are many in the clergy whose public works are indeed heretical. You've certainly heard the commentary by some on this site about the lack of diligence on the part of some bishops to shepherd their flocks where this kind of dissent occurs. This resource is well researched, and presents those among Catholic leaders who present outspoken views that are in opposition to Church teaching. If they were pondering issues that were not dogma, and presenting opposing views, they would certainly not be singled out. But these are individuals who by their public positions on topics such as abortion, homosexual unions and women priests have brought upon themselves the stigma of "dissenter".  These are men and women for whom the Catholic community needs to pray.  

I do not believe that the people at "Our Lady's Warriors" consider themselves an authority higher than the Church, Pope or bishops. They are speaking out truthfully. Yes, it is the responsibility of the Churchto officially "condemn" these people, and in some cases, she already has. But that does not prevent them from continuing to write or speak (or vote) in opposition to Church teaching.

I am glad to see my parents seeking out tools to improve their prayer life, but upon deeper research, I cannot encourage them where Fr. Rohr is concerned. It is quite clear to me that he is heretical, and possibly downright dangerous. This priest advocates homosexual relationships, uses "new age" meditation and other forms of unorthodox "worship". He deserves a place on the "dissenters" list.  

"The Catholic Church frames the Christian life as one in which you must exercise virtue—not because virtue saves you, but because that's the way God's grace gets manifested." Dr. Francis J. Beckwith

To: work in progress

Your initial skepticism is right on. Stay away. Richard Rohr is bad news. 

To michaelme:

Thanks for your response. Could OLW offer better documentation to support their claims? Probably, but all anyone has to do is google any of the people or organizations on their list to find all the info they need.

You wrote: "As for fear of suffering, I don’t think that St.s Pio, Joan of Arc, or numerous others who suffered from over-zealous or erroneously motivated ecclesial (ecclesiastical?) authority would agree that anonymity is always appropriate."

They probably didn't have kids that have to attend diocesan run CCD classes in order to receive their sacraments. It is one thing to be a martyr for you faith it is entirely another to offer up your children and family. :) 

I am grateful to WIP and all who contributed to this discussion. 

I agree with much of the views expressed. 

The Church very rarely defines infallible doctrines, however the views of priests, bishops and cardinals should be considered with respect.  As an ordinary Catholic I do not think I am qualified to decide that Cardinal Mahony, Bishop Walsh or Fr Rahner  dissent from the Truth as handed down from Jesus Christ, Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, the Divine Word, http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/dissent/disspeop.htm

However I certainly would not be influenced by an anonymous website listing names of well known Catholics without any evidence.

Of course some on the list have views contrary to Catholic views, which the Church has noted.

 The Church, especially through the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, is well able to defend itself.  There is no need for an anonymous group of Warriors to list, without evidence, those it considers a danger to the Faith.

According to the Vatican website, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was founded in 1542 by Pope Paul III with the Constitution "Licet ab initio," and was originally called the Sacred Congregation of the Universal Inquisition. It was charged with the obligation of defending the Church from heresy.Pope St. Pius X in 1908 changed the name to the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office. It received its current name in 1965 with Pope Paul VI. Today, according to Article 48 of the Apostolic Constitution on the Roman Curia, "Pastor Bonus", promulgated by the Holy Father John Paul II on June 28, 1988, "the duty proper to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is to promote and safeguard the doctrine on the faith and morals throughout the Catholic world: for this reason everything which in any way touches such matter falls within its competence."The congregation is now headed by Archbishop William Levada, formerly of San Francisco, US.http://www.ratzingerfanclub.com/cdf.html

Tom More wrote:

It means that there are too many priests, bishops and theologians who teach in error, either intentionally or unintentionally. Catholics should not be lead astray by wolves in sheep clothing; they should be exposed for what they are.

It is not for me to decide if a priest, bishop or theologian teaches in error.  I do not have the professional background to make such a judgment.

The Catholic Church claims it speaks with authority, hence if a member of the clergy or Catholic theologian in good standing with the Church expresses a view, I will listen to it with respect.       

God bless,


NoelFitz.
_________________________________________________
In necessariis, unitas; in dubiis, libertas; in omnibus, caritas.
_________________________________________________

How does one know if the Church has admonished one of its own for teaching in error?

In Christ,

There, now you have a couple of little Abe Lincolns from me... Remember, the Sun is always shining!

Michaelme

You wrote:

you have the mind to critically evaluate something, seek out guidance, and then form a well-reasoned opinion.

I wrote:

The Catholic Church claims it speaks with authority, hence if a member of the clergy or Catholic theologian in good standing with the Church expresses a view, I will listen to it with respect.       

Thus I might not agree with everything expressed by a priest, bishop, cardinal, or even a contributor to this Round Table. However (I hope) I would listen to them with respect and try to see their viewpoint.

David

You wrote:

The quick answer is the www. How does one know anything nowadays?  Also from general information.  

 Sr. Joan (Chittister) has clashed with the Church authorities on several occasions. She attended the first Women's Ordination Worldwide Conference of June 30, 2000 as one of two nuns told by the Vatican not to do so. In another instance, Sister Joan rejected the Church's strictures against the 23 nuns who ran an advertisement in the New York Times attacking the Church's teaching on abortion.   

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_Chittister 

God bless,


NoelFitz.
_________________________________________________
In necessariis, unitas; in dubiis, libertas; in omnibus, caritas.
_________________________________________________

Noel,

I understand the www, but I was looking for something official from the Vatican - kind of like The Index.

In Christ,

There, now you have a couple of little Abe Lincolns from me...

Remember, the Sun is always shining!

Noel,

I see that as well. The faithful with a sound catechesis and an ardent desire to "be watchful" can do as you suggest and listen or read respectfully while understanding the error being promulgated.

Understanding that a priest brings to the faithful what no other person on the planet can, that is my Lord and Saviour in the Body and Blood, I submit that it would take an awful lot for me to hold contempt for the same.

I would only ask this, what are 1 billion 99 milion poorly catechized, with mal-formed consciences no less, Catholics to do when a priest of God, or consecrated woman goes against Church teaching and declares something false which is true, or sows doubt and confusion? 

For example, the Church states that we are to respect life in all its stages from conception to natural death. The Church{as well as CE} can not or does not endorse political candidates, simply giving the faithful a basis for making a sound, moral decision. It is imperative that the faithful, each to their talents, make serious inquiry to ascertain the validity of a candidates moral makeup. In doing such, we act as one body, in unison with the teaching authority of the Church.

In short, although I agree with other posts that have expressed concern about the anonymity of the site, I must agree that there is a need for inquiry into ones postion if one is want to offer such that goes outside the realm of Church teaching.

In Christ,

There, now you have a couple of little Abe Lincolns from me...

Remember, the Sun is always shining!

Cardinal Mahony surrounds himself with dissenters, pro-homosexuals and homosexuals who abuse teenagers (to the tune of $660 million).

The following link is an interview by someone who wanted to know why he allowed a pro-homosexual priest (Timothy Radcliffe) to speak at a diocesan event and promote the movie "Brokeback Mountain."

http://www.calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=af451e42-5a85-48e1-bf4d-852f443c705a 

Mahony also ordained an openly gay, avowed homosexual as a deacon for the diocese. The following link shows some of Deacon Eric Stoltz's views as they pertain to homosexuality

ttp://romancatholicblog.typepad.com/roman_catholic_blog/2006/07/cardinal_mahony.html 

He also allows a "rainbow" fish symbol on the diocesan website to represent gay and lesbian catholics and is supportive of the "Rainbow Sash" movement.

Noel wrote, "I wonder what others in this Round-Table think of Cardinal Mahony?"

As do I, preferably someone from His Eminence's diocese.

You also wrote, "Jesus also surrounded Himself with unsavory folk, even socializing with prostitutes."

To which I must say, Jesus sought them out, or vice versa, and then required of them to sin no more.

In Christ,

There, now you have a couple of little Abe Lincolns from me...

Remember, the Sun is always shining!

Noel,

Of course, the woman is one such sinner. Who, then, did Jesus encounter who was unsavory, or a prostitute, that He did not admonish? In other words, where does Jesus meet with such and do nothing?

In Christ,

There, now you have a couple of little Abe Lincolns from me...

Remember, the Sun is always shining!

David 

I regret all this discussion, as it is going against one of my mini-resolutions for 2008 – not to be too picky (pedantic). It is also wandering from the initial point made in this topic.  

However as the question is being discussed I will continue. 

I wrote:

Jesus also surrounded Himself with unsavory folk, even socializing with prostitutes.

I may not have been strictly correct, as there seems no direct evidence that Jesus really did socialize with prostitutes, it is only implied. 

When the Pharisees saw this, they said to his disciples, “Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?  (NRSV, Mt 9:11).

There are similar references in Mk and Lk.

The only relevant mention of prostitutes is in the following:

(")Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said, “The first.” Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you.  For John came to you in the way of righteousness and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him; and even after you saw it, you did not change your minds and believe him (Mt 21:31,32).  

You ask: 

where does Jesus meet with such and do nothing? 

So there is no evidence that Jesus met with prostitutes and did nothing or that he met with them and did something. 

God bless,


NoelFitz.
_________________________________________________
In necessariis, unitas; in dubiis, libertas; in omnibus, caritas.
_________________________________________________