Still Running Off at the Keyboard

But as a Catholic priest, instead of attempting to renew these Sacraments and
the rituals surrounding them, Fr. Rohr has taken it upon himself to create new
rituals that he believes will speak to the men of today. In fact, the appendix
of Adam’s Return gives the outline of a sample rite for men. The sponsoring of
such rituals for men is one of the main activities of his Center for Action and
Contemplation in Albuquerque, NM and men from around the States pay hundreds of dollars to “find themselves” there. For most Catholics, the problem with these
male initiation rites should be the fact that they draw from and resemble
various pagan rites of initiation. Sure, they might bring about a renewed sense
of consciousness, but I do not think from reading and hearing what Fr. Rohr has
to say about them that they could be called Christian or much less Catholic.

Although I am no expert on the thought of Duns Scotus, I feel quite certain that Fr. Rohr’s claim does not represent the thinking of the “Subtle Doctor” nor the Franciscan School. Fr. Rohr is correct in saying that Scotus put a great emphasis on the Incarnation as an act of divine love, however to claim that he said that the Cross was not necessary for redemption would make Scotus to hold a heretical position; however, from reading the above paragraph, it is apparent that Fr. Rohr holds such a position.

Fr. Rohr’s support of homosexual advocacy groups such as Soulforce (and thus his implicit support of homosexual activity), is a radical contradiction to the apparent importance he places on sexual difference in his Male Spirituality talk, since homosexual activity is the ultimate denial of sexual difference. As the Catechism states, “Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved” (CCC 2357). “They do not proceed from an genuine sexual complementarity” clearly states that homosexual activity runs counter to the God-given meaning of sexual difference.

My ultimate problem with Fr. Rohr’s presentation of his so-called “Male Spirituality” is this. He can call this spirituality and the beliefs that inform it anything he wants, but he should not call it “Catholic.” He claimed at his talk that it is in the “larger Christian and Catholic tradition” not the 1950’s tradition that some might envisage. However I do not believe that you can call referring to God as Mother, advocating homosexual unions, denying the spiritual reality of original sin, and denying the necessity of the Cross for redemption as residing with the “Catholic” or even any “Christian” tradition. This is at least disingenuous and at most heretical on his part, especially coming from a validly ordained priest.

That is just a sample. There is much more in the weblog which anyone interested in Fr. Rohr's theology would do well to read. Fr. Sibley is intending to publish his comments on Fr. Rohr's theology.

That brings me to the current issue of the Cleveland Diocesan publication, the Universe Bulletin.

I don't subscribe. I used to subscribe, but got so bored with it that I didn't renew. However, last Sunday at church issues of the current Bulletin were provided for the taking, so I took one. This issue has a lot of material on the Popes, naturally. It also has an article by Dennis Sadowski, Editor titled "God's radical grace: Franciscan guides people inwardly to seek hope in a divided world". The Franciscan is Fr. Richard Rohr.

Sadowski opens the article with an Editor's note:

Author, retreat director and inspirational speaker Franciscan
Father Richard Rohr visited the Cleveland Diocese in March to speak at the
Center for Pastoral Leadership as well as at a program sponsored by John Carroll
University's Cardinal Suenens Center at Gesu Church. Father Rohr spent
75-minutes with the UB discussing his work and his vision for a just
world.

According to the article, Fr. Rohr was ordained in 1970, and served in the Cincinnati diocese where he "helped establish the New Jerusalem Community there. New Jerusalem offered people a chance to be more deeply involved in the work of justice while building a caring Christian community."

The article tells us that "The idea of seeking radical grace guides the work of the center....By radical he means that it is 'at the root' that God's grace is moving people toward the revelation of justice."

It continues

The Franciscan cautions people about staking out the moral high ground and then feeling superior to others. He says that has become the norm among many Christians--Catholics and Protestants alike--who have turned to strict dogma and highly structured formulae to find the way to salvation.

The idea of radical grace often frightens those who prefer to follow strict rules and behaviors, he says.

In other words, Fr. Rohr doesn't think adhering to Dogma and strict rules is the way to go. Instead he would prefer...what, exactly? Judging by what Fr. Sibley has stated, what he prefers is do-it-yourself theology.

The picture of Fr. Rohr in the UB shows an older, balding, bespecktacled man in a dark colored shirt. One would not be able to identify this man with the priesthood from the picture.

Curiosity sent me to the Suenens Center. Their website could use some updating. They are focused on "Renewal." What sort of renewal are they going to get with Fr. Richard Rohr?

They are focused on ecumenism, and on the charisms. As Cardinal Suenens is quoted as saying in this issue of their newsletter "The Spirit must always free the Church from its narrowness..." That seems to be what Fr. Richard Rohr means by his radical grace.

But we Catholics are about rules. We believe there is such a thing as truth and that the truth doesn't change. We believe that creating theology out of whole cloth is not the Catholic way. We believe that theology must be consistent with the long Tradition of the Church going back to the apostles. So where is our Bishop when an heretical theologian is brought into the Cardinal Suenens Center to give a talk? Is he clarifying the errors presented so that the flock will not be led astray? No, he doesn't seem to be. Is he designating a reporter for the Diocesan newspaper to write an article that clarifies the errors presented? No, he doesn't seem to be. Is he remaining silent when a reporter sings the praises of an heretical theologian in the Diocesan publication? Yes, one would get the impression that he is. Could it then be assumed that perhaps he agrees with Fr. Richard Rohr? You be the judge.

The Newsletter of the Cardinal Suenens Center presents the panel of speakers for the "Affective Conversion As Theme for the Third Conference for Seminary Personnel" which was scheduled for July 11-15, 2004. Fr. Richard Rohr was on that panel as well. Is it any wonder, then, that the Cleveland seminary spawned Fr. Donald Cozzens expose? Once seminary personnel are given the go ahead to ditch doctrine and pursue radical grace, there are no barriers to where this "grace" will lead.

Why also, one wonders, would the Cardinal Suenens Center want to entertain the words of an heretical speaker? Don't the Charismatics pride themselves in their adherence to doctrine? Or is it perhaps that they pride themselves in adhering to whatever theology someone ordained gives them, without asking questions? After all, if you commune with the Spirit, as apparently Richard Rohr believes that he does, anything is acceptable, even heresy.


Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!