Over the past few months I have received comments on my blog consisting of whole articles from other sources or posts from other blogs. Some of these were rather bizarre and I simply deleted and did not publish them. Several others I did publish, even though the combox is not intended as a place for posting such lengthy pieces.This past week I have received several more lengthy (not bizarre) submissions consisting of articles from journals and magazines and posts from other blogs. This has led me to make the following decision.
The comboxes are for the comments of my readers - not for the posting of other material. Readers are, however, always welcome to post a hyper-link or URL to another source and, providing that such a source is appropriate (i.e., not bizarre), I'll be pleased to publish such a link or address in the context of a reader's comment.
Here are the links for material in two recently submitted but not published comments: Catholic Key and Deacon's Bench.
Pelosi
Image above from Displays2Go
-ConcordPastor
I followed the links. What I came away with from these articles is that two organizations you have linked to, CP, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, and VOTF, are in direct conflict with the bishops!
ReplyDeleteApparently, the Archdiocese of Chicago will not allow Catholics in Alliance to distribute materials in churches. (This group's website is up on your sidebar as a favored site.)
VOTF has advocated women's ordination. They have been taken to task for this at Deacon's Bench.
I would urge your readers to visit and read for themselves.
I also often link to the Boston Globe and the New York Times, both of which organizations are frequently in conflict with the bishops.
ReplyDeleteIt was a reader in a combox (on my post of Pope Benedict's prayer intention for September) who provided the link to VOTF in posing an off-topic question about clergy sexual abuse - not about the ordination of women.
I, too, would urge readers to visit and read the CACG site to see for themselves the mission of this organization. For those in a hurry, click their menu for "About Us" and then go to FAQ's.
Father Fleming,
ReplyDeleteOn April 10 you posted an article about the CACG, endorsing it before putting it in a privileged and permanent position on your site. Quite different from a pointer to a news report, I think.
I suspect readers come here for spiritual direction and comment, not just news. You are not a reporter, but a pastor. Therefore, questioning whether the sites you promote adhere to Catholic doctrine is appropriate. If any sites are in conflict with church leaders -- and the Cardinal of Chicago counts here! -- that is a fact people ought to know.
Since you have turned your virtual pulpit over to VOTF in the recent past, and since you permitted the thread "hijacking" on the Pope post, then pointing out that group's conflicts with the Church also seems appropriate. (The VOTF defied our own Cardinal Sean when they hosted Bishop Robinson in Dedham.)
Finally, Father, knowing that Cardinal George has problems with the alliance, do you still think it's a good idea to link to it?
Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteYou say that I "have turned my virtual pulpit over to VOTF in the recent past." In the 1,068 posts on my blog only two have been about VOTF, plus the recent comment-link. I don't see this as "turning over" my my blog to this group.
I was previously unaware of Cardinal George's response to CACG in the Archdiocese of Chicago but the current thread and the links provided offer everyone here a path to that information.
What I appreciate about CACG is their effort to draw attention to the breadth of Catholic social teaching which is often ignored or even unknown because Catholic moral teaching is so often presumed by so many to deal only with issues relating to sexuality.
Father,
ReplyDeleteYou presented parishioners and readers with a VOTF petition, directing them to that group's website, on April 9 of this year. On October 21 of last year you ran a Globe piece regarding VOTF, followed by a lengthy comment/essay by Pat Gomez, a national VOTF leader. In addition, you gave Pat Gomez a whole guest column May 5 to write on her "Dream" of how the papal visit *should have been* -- and if I'm not mistaken, her views didn't differ much from those of her organization.
CACG may be a worthy group, but if they're wrong on the most basic of rights, the right to life, then why should we take their other advice seriously?
Especially as you presented the CACG voter guide along with two America articles on abortion, one by Obama's most prominent "pro-life" supporter?
anonymous: this is a "blog" where concordpastor expresses his thoughts and ideas. People comment on those thoughts and ideas. It is not intended to be like a courtroom where the writer of the blog is put on the stand. The commentators are to express opinions; not to judge, question, and attack what is written here. I feel that is what you are doing in your comments.
ReplyDelete- Anonymous mentions the two posts I referred to in my comment above. The VOTF petition is neither extremist nor outside the boundaries of Church teaching.
ReplyDeleteIt was a decision of Cardinal Law that VOTF groups formed prior to October 2002 could continue to meet on parish property while those formed after that time could not. (A curious decision, but nonetheless the one we live with in Boston.) The VOTF group which meets in my parish was formed prior to October 2002.
If Anonymous is suggesting it, I do not intend to bar VOTF members from commenting on my blog.
- From the CCAG site:
"Is Catholics in Alliance pro-life?
"Yes. Catholics in Alliance works in particular to promote greater awareness of the Catholic social tradition’s principle on the dignity of human life. Our Catholic faith and the Catholic social tradition affirm that all life is sacred, and that every person has essential worth and dignity. We believe that as a society, we must care for all life -- whether young or old, guilty or innocent, born or unborn. We work to promote the essential conditions for a culture of life – a culture that upholds the dignity of the human person over greed, materialism, and the politics of division."
Some may read that paragraphas getting it "wrong on the most basic of rights, the right to life." I do not.
- I directed attention to the Kavanaugh and Kmiec essays in America because these were written by serious authors to whom many listen. I included the links to the USCCB and CACG to provide a Catholic context for considering the articles. (Of course, links to the Bible, the Holy See and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are always on the sidebar for the same purpose.)
I believe we learn when we consider opposing viewpoints. If nothing else, such consideration sharpens our understanding and the articulation of our own position.
Those who are reluctant to enter the arena of discourse may eventually find themselves outside the sphere of influence.
Catholics need to know and understand what Douglas Kmiec is saying. And they need to know and understand what John Kavanaugh is saying. And they need to understand the differences between the two and the implications of the differences as they enter public discourse on abortion at home, at work and in their community. Certainly they need such knowledge as they prepare to vote.
- And with those comments, I conclude my participation in this thread.
I fear that most Catholics cannot clearly articulate the reasons for their Church's position on abortion to start with. (That's the generous assumption about Nancy Pelosi.) Given that state of affairs, Catholics *do not* need to know what Douglas Kmiec is saying. As someone who has cast his lot with Obama, he has chosen to give cover to a man who voted to approve denying medical care to infants born alive after botched abortions.
ReplyDeleteLet's not confuse the issue or the people.