Comments on: Richard Rohr on the Emerging Church

By: JAY CARRIGAN

JAY CARRIGAN — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 15:48:05 +0000

In response to Mark F:
Conservative Catholics are doing the same thing with the Vatican Council that all of us Catholics have done for so many years with Scripture. We interpret it according to the litereary form we are most accustomed to in the chuch, the legalistic literary form.

For the first time, an ecumenical council took as pastoral approach, similar to the gospels, and did not end with “let them be damned”. Conserbatives have not known what to think about that so they have supplied their own “anathemas” and are frustrated by non-legalistic talk about the “spirit” of the council. The spirit of the council is like the forest that can’t be seen because of all the missing anathema trees.

By: Judi

Judi — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 22:50:33 +0000

The post-modern emergent church movement is in most (not all) ways, incompatible with Christianity. The post-modern emergent church movement uses the term “conversation” a lot. It is simply a “conversation” about God. To be a part of that movement requires NOTHING of people. Fr. Richard Rohr does have “a horse in that race” because in many ways, he seems to have beliefs that are more like the protestants than the Catholics. The information about him is readily available from his website. Judge for yourself. As for the Emergent movement, it is for people who are babies in Christ. Some of them might grow up, (let us pray for that), but others will stay babies to their potential eternal detriment. As a person who was involved in that movement for a short while, you can see I am not impressed by any of it.

By: Bob B

Bob B — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:01:58 +0000

Well, I work in the Church, am a Secular Franciscan, am a lifelong Catholic and an “observer” of Richard Rohr. I do think that some of his stuff is “edgey” but so was Jesus. The black and white for me does lie in the Magisterium and I’m not sure Rohr doesn’t toe the line and cross over from time to time. With that being said I do believe in the Emerging Church perhaps not in the sense it’s meant by others but the Church is a living breathing organism and is the body of Christ.

I’ve been in Ministry for 22 years and the Church is changing, emerging. There is a renewal in the Traditions of the Liturgy and an expansion into the outer fringe. I see it as a creative tension although many see it as a threat. I believe it’s not an issue of “either or” but rather “both and”, the determining factor of course faithfulness to the teachings of the Church. We have an awful lot of room under the umbrella of the Catholic Faith. Take for example the Charismatic movement and the Byzantine Rite. Put the 2 side by side and you wouldn’t even know they’re both Catholic. Jesus’ prayer is that all may be one, and it is still our prayer today in the Liturgy. Many Protestants are migrating back to the Traditions of the Catholic Church. Just surf the web at different prayer movements like Lectio Divina and Contemplative Prayer. We have Liturgy in the venacular, Liturgy for Hispanics, Native Americans and others that include cultural norms in the Liturgy, so why not celebrate the Latin Rite it’s our heritage, why not include some of the old Traditions in a new way. We need to be solid in who we are as Catholics and then dialogue with other denominations about our commonalities and build on them. This is true Eucmenism. We are a living and breathing Church, we can’t help but act it. After all I do know the Person in charge quite well and regardless of what many think and unlike some of the higher ups in the banking industry he’s not going to let us run it into the ground and give us a $150 million bonus for doing it.

By: Liz

Liz — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 16:25:51 +0000

I had to go to wikipedia to find the letter Rohr wrote to his detractors. I don’t know if this will come up as a link. If not, just copy and paste into your browser.

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

By: Liz

Liz — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:57:48 +0000

I do have to add that my previous post is only based on my own experience/reading/listening.

It is very much a possibility that others could have additional information that would change my opinion.

One thing about Richard Rohr, he is a lightening rod and does tend to generate strong emotions on both side.

By: Liz

Liz — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:48:29 +0000

I hate to make this all about Richard Rohr instead of the Emerging Church, but…

I think you’re right, Bob, in some of your assessments of Rohr’s beliefs, but I’m unsure about others.

For instance, I know that Rohr is sympathetic to homosexuals but not so sure that extends to the practice of homosexuality. This would be very much in keeping with the Catholic Church’s teaching.

I also think he is in favor of ordaining women, but that opinion alone wouldn’t put him outside the church.

I’m less certain about your statement about his belief about the Real Presence, simply because I’ve heard him say that he believes in the Real Presence and also because both his bishop and the Vatican have affirmed him as in keeping with church teachings. That would have been impossible if he was teaching against the Real Presence.

There was a letter on the CAC website that specifically addressed many of the concerns you have stated. I can’t find it right now…I’ll keep looking and see if I can locate it.

By: Bob

Bob — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:24:28 +0000

I’ve had a couple of conversations with Fr. Rohr’s organization and listened to a couple of his CD sets. Good wisdom for living is shared. If you Google his name you will find writings that are critical of what he is doing. I left the Roman Catholic faith for Evangelicalism due to a priest that wouldn’t affirm even the Nicean Creed. I know Rohr is sympathetic and affirms practicing homosexuality. His male initiation probably has about 15% practicing homo-sexuals. He although is anti-abortion and against pre-marital sexual intercourse he would deny the blood attonment, Original Sin, demonic oppression, male priesthood, all roads lead to God, Real Presense as understood by the recent Catechism. He practices the ecumenical Thomist Mass. He is syphthic to the teaching of Crosan,Borg and Spong. I guess my issue with Roman Catholicism is why his superiors still allow him to carry on. I know his superiors have confronted him in the past. Rohr uses Catholicism for his base to draw folks to likes of EckhartTolle and Oprah. There is no real Christianity in his teachings.

By: Liz

Liz — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 18:32:43 +0000

I really don’t get the post about Fr. Rohr being stuck in a permanent homosexual adolescence. I’m not quite sure how you would get that from the posted video clip.

If anything, I’ve always found Fr. Rohr to be very intelligent and thought provoking. And able to hear differing points of view without devolving into defensiveness.

The whole homosexual aspect really has me puzzled. I’ve read Fr. Rohr’s book on male initiation and been to a one-day seminar with him on the subject. There was nothing the slightest bit homosexual in any part of either. In fact, if anything, he leans (much like all initiation rites for men) towards what could be called the macho…though I don’t think he’d term it that way. He’s very adamant that men need to be pushed to the physical edge in order to have a truly meaningful initiation into adulthood. He bases this belief on his own extensive anthropological research. From the reaction that I witnessed on the part of the men at the seminar, I’d say they agreed with him.

And while the seminar was focused on men’s spiritual work, Richard Rohr had nothing but respect and openness for the women present. Actually, I’ve never seen him have anything but respect and openness for everyone. Course, I’m not watching him all day every day.

As for any questions about his orthodoxy, I’d suggest that he is quite orthodox. But I’m not thinking preVatican II. I’m thinking Early Church Fathers.

By: Carl McColman

Carl McColman — Sun, 25 Jan 2009 01:03:27 +0000

No offense, Mark, but you come across as seriously paranoid, not to mention homophobic. Since when has Rohr been promoting a “homosexual church”? I certainly don’t see that in any of the books or tapes of his that I’ve read or heard. I don’t know enough about his male initiation rituals to comment on whether they are “pagan” or not, but even if they are, I’d like to point you to a definition of paganism that was published in Attwater’s Catholic Dictionary in 1958 (i.e., pre-Vatican II): “In paganism, especially before the Christian revelation, the Church has always recognized the existence of natural goodness and truth, the seeds of which the Fathers declare are to be found everywhere. All that is wise and true in the philosophies of antiquity, of Plato, of Plotinus, especially of Aristotle, has been incorporated into the Catholic system; all that is good and beautiful in their literature, arts and culture, whether of Hellas or Honolulu, is welcome to the Catholic mind.” In other words, Catholicism welcomes the natural goodness of the pagan world, which would extend even to pagan-inspired rituals of initiation.

Mark, I would suggest that your hostility toward homosexuality, paganism, and, apparently, Richard Rohr may be unconsciously driven not be your fidelity to Catholicism so much as by a deep-seated fear of the feminine and/or a fear that God is angry and that you must earn his favor. That, incidentally, is a “pagan” notion that unfortunately is rampant within Catholicism and other forms of Christianity today, and which Jesus attacked head-on with his message of radical grace and unconditional forgiveness. Of course, I don’t know you, so I could be way off-base. But given the tenor of your comment, I would suggest that you take a closer look at your hidden assumptions about who God is and what it means to relate to him.

By: Mark F

Mark F — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 21:45:21 +0000

This man has some valid observations but his thinking his also hopelessly muddled too. As many of us do, he seems to be taking his own experiences with Church orthodoxy and basing his whole ministry on them. Sure, we enter the faith at a certain level and at that level ritual seems appealing. But Fr. Rohr seems to be stuck in the state of permanent (and homosexual) adolescence. We do not need new rituals. We do not need pagan and homosexual therapies. These pagan rituals are about a mile wide and an inch deep. I should know; I tried them myself. The sacrifice of Christ in the Eucharist, his love for us sinners, and our love for our fellow man in Christ, and the sacrament of confession – these are the rituals to practice over and over again, each time in prayer for the Holy Spirit to enlighten us more. We need to deepen our own understanding of the Church’s timeless rituals. Fr. Rohr complains about a false romanticism of the pre-Vatican II Church, but he’s the one with the false romanticism for what Vatican II said and did. Notice he does not refer to the actual documents of Vatican II, but to the “spirit” of it, i.e., his own imaginings of tearing down the Church and creating a new, pagan and homosexual church in its place. What this generation needs is not more of Fr. Rohr and the neo-pagan, anti-Christian Joseph Campbell, but more of Alphonsus Ligouri, Louis de Montfort, John Bosco, Therese of Lisiuex, and Maximillian Kolbe.