L.A. archdiocesan newspaper publishes anti-Catholic column by Protestant pastor
What a disgrace.
The December 12, 2008, issue of The Tidings, Cardinal Roger Mahony's L.A. archdiocesan newspaper, has a column, "Let's cut to the chase, shall we?" (click on this post's title), by Tom Ehrich, a "writer, church consultant and Episcopal priest."
The column's specific anti-Catholic part is here:
"A church truly concerned about 'historic Christian teaching' would look at Christian history -- the gap between Jesus' circles of inclusion and the early Church's hierarchy and exclusion; the gap between Jesus' call for peace and Church-sponsored wars; the gap between Jesus' humility and prelates' pride --- and conclude that, yes, perhaps it's time to take a fresh look at what they claim and what they are."
But the rest of the column reeks of hostility to Catholicism, too -- hostility to Catholic, and derivative Protestant, doctrine on sexual morality, especially the part against sodomy.
Ehrich's gripe is that "the tiny Episcopal Diocese of Quincy, Ill., recently voted to secede from the national Episcopal Church for being too liberal." He can't stand "Its stern refusals -- No to women as priests, No to homosexuals, No to theological diversity [sic] ..."
I've inserted "sic" after Ehrich's term "theological diversity," because the correct term, obviously, is "heresy." We should hope and pray that the Episcopalians of Quincy, Illinois, are on their way back home to Rome, to the One, True, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
But back to Ehrich. He writes:
"If a church wanted to walk the walk of Jesus as Savior, it wouldn't be debating sexuality. It would be helping people to deal with economic deprivation and to correct the values that led to this morass. It would promote community and sacrifice."
Ehrich also pens this truth-bending, misleading bilge:
"Jesus, of course, said nothing about homosexuality, ordination rules or church structures. An estimated two-thirds of his teachings concerned wealth and property and our need to be more generous and sacrificial."
That is "the chase" we're supposed to "cut to." Just drop all that inconvenient stuff about purity and having a clean heart, and instead live by the Democrat Party platform.
Ehrich also writes:
"A truly evangelical church would embrace all of Scripture and not just cherry-pick the few verses that confirm a cultural stance on homosexuality."
Notice the lies that recognizing sodomy as sinful is "cultural," not a matter of morality, and is a "stance," not a teaching.
Um, Tom -- and you, too, The Tidings -- don't you remember the times Jesus told us to have a clean heart and avoid lust? Was, and is, Jesus not saying that to everyone? Was He exempting homosexuals from being chaste?
And why did Jesus found the Catholic Church? And name Peter its first head? And set up a hierarchy, His Apostles, and call only men to be among them? And create the Sacrament of Holy Orders and ordain only men?
No wonder that Ehrich wrote this to the State Journal-Register of Springfield, Illinois, on June 15, 2008:
"Instead of crowd-stirring detours into religious ideology and supposed 'values' issues like abortion and same-sex marriage that have nothing to do with Christian values but merely agitate some Christians, candidates would address world stature lost to torture chambers, ham-fisted anti-diplomacy and bullying unmasked as weakness."
Time to clean house at The Tidings. Does Cardinal Mahony see no need to?
The December 12, 2008, issue of The Tidings, Cardinal Roger Mahony's L.A. archdiocesan newspaper, has a column, "Let's cut to the chase, shall we?" (click on this post's title), by Tom Ehrich, a "writer, church consultant and Episcopal priest."
The column's specific anti-Catholic part is here:
"A church truly concerned about 'historic Christian teaching' would look at Christian history -- the gap between Jesus' circles of inclusion and the early Church's hierarchy and exclusion; the gap between Jesus' call for peace and Church-sponsored wars; the gap between Jesus' humility and prelates' pride --- and conclude that, yes, perhaps it's time to take a fresh look at what they claim and what they are."
But the rest of the column reeks of hostility to Catholicism, too -- hostility to Catholic, and derivative Protestant, doctrine on sexual morality, especially the part against sodomy.
Ehrich's gripe is that "the tiny Episcopal Diocese of Quincy, Ill., recently voted to secede from the national Episcopal Church for being too liberal." He can't stand "Its stern refusals -- No to women as priests, No to homosexuals, No to theological diversity [sic] ..."
I've inserted "sic" after Ehrich's term "theological diversity," because the correct term, obviously, is "heresy." We should hope and pray that the Episcopalians of Quincy, Illinois, are on their way back home to Rome, to the One, True, Catholic and Apostolic Church.
But back to Ehrich. He writes:
"If a church wanted to walk the walk of Jesus as Savior, it wouldn't be debating sexuality. It would be helping people to deal with economic deprivation and to correct the values that led to this morass. It would promote community and sacrifice."
Ehrich also pens this truth-bending, misleading bilge:
"Jesus, of course, said nothing about homosexuality, ordination rules or church structures. An estimated two-thirds of his teachings concerned wealth and property and our need to be more generous and sacrificial."
That is "the chase" we're supposed to "cut to." Just drop all that inconvenient stuff about purity and having a clean heart, and instead live by the Democrat Party platform.
Ehrich also writes:
"A truly evangelical church would embrace all of Scripture and not just cherry-pick the few verses that confirm a cultural stance on homosexuality."
Notice the lies that recognizing sodomy as sinful is "cultural," not a matter of morality, and is a "stance," not a teaching.
Um, Tom -- and you, too, The Tidings -- don't you remember the times Jesus told us to have a clean heart and avoid lust? Was, and is, Jesus not saying that to everyone? Was He exempting homosexuals from being chaste?
And why did Jesus found the Catholic Church? And name Peter its first head? And set up a hierarchy, His Apostles, and call only men to be among them? And create the Sacrament of Holy Orders and ordain only men?
No wonder that Ehrich wrote this to the State Journal-Register of Springfield, Illinois, on June 15, 2008:
"Instead of crowd-stirring detours into religious ideology and supposed 'values' issues like abortion and same-sex marriage that have nothing to do with Christian values but merely agitate some Christians, candidates would address world stature lost to torture chambers, ham-fisted anti-diplomacy and bullying unmasked as weakness."
Time to clean house at The Tidings. Does Cardinal Mahony see no need to?
posted by Quintero at 9:40 PM
15 Comments:
We're going to have to wait till 2011 in order for the paper to get cleaned up...Any studier of the actual history that took place knows that the Muslims were the aggressors in the Crusades. As for his argument that the Church should be doing more with poverty, I can't name one organization that does MORE for those in poverty than the Catholic Church.
This column is a new low for the Tidings. How does such a blatant piece of anti-Catholic, heretical trash get approved for publication in the Archdiocesan official newspaper? It does indeed disgrace the Archdiocese and the Church, and the Tidings' editor should lose his job over it. Mahony should author a column in the next issue refuting the heresies in the column; that's what a responsible shepherd would do.
Had Jesus said anything about homosexuality, ordination rules or church structure, would Ehrich dismiss such sayings as polemical forgeries placed on Jesus' lips by the early
Christian community?
In Ehrich's view, would a truly evangelical church embrace Jesus' position on divorce or lump it together with other time- and culturally-bound mores of a bygone era?
Anyhow, there is a subtle irony in Ehrich's article, in a passage not quoted in your blog entry:
"A church that truly accepted the authority of Scripture ... would know that the more ancient Israel became effete and self-focused, the more God welcomed invading Assyrians and Chaldeans" (http://www.the-tidings.com/2008/121208/ehrich.htm>).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't God welcome the invading Assyrians and Chaldeans precisely because of what Ehrich terms "theological diversity"?
Cardinal Mahoney isn't going to do anything at all.
You're assuming that Cardinal Mahony disagrees with the column.
The city of Los Angeles never saw his face or heard a peep from him during the the entire "gay marriage" fiasco. As the local news showed one heart-warming story after another, he was NOT THERE to represent the Church, or to give any moral support to the People of God.
He is good pals with the allegedly Catholic mayor, who still can't stop bragging about how many gay couples he has married.
He marched down the aisle behind the Rainbow Jesus Fish banner to celebrate the lesbian and gay ministry, which he founded. (He's very proud of that.) He allowed the cathedral to host an artist best known for his erotic gay statues.
I need to be shown some evidence that Mahony is anything other than thrilled to publish that column in the Tidings. I can't imagine why an openly heretical bishop would "author a column refuting the heresies." What sense does that make?
..."theological diversity"...i.e. heresy; Yes God chastised Isreal for this. Is He doing it again?
There is no hope for L.A. until Cardinal Mahony's retirement. Rumor is that he was in Rome last month looking for a co-adjutor. May the Holy Spirit guide the pope in his decisions about L.A. This is make it or break it time. We need a true, Catholic shepherd in LA. We have suffered much too long under the unfortunate rule of the current archbishop.
Three more years! Three more years!
I actually interviewed for the editor's position there oh, about 7 years ago -- glad I didn't get it.
Of course, there aren't too many other diocesan papers that, I came to discover, welcome for long a pro-Catholic point of view.
Does it ever end?:
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2008/12/17/catholics-sell-school-comply-with-sharia-law/
Dear Sawyer,
Yes, it sure is a new low. Thanks for writing.
Dear Anonymous 5:54 p.m.,
Thanks for your really excellent points. You're so right that the liberals refuse to accept anything that goes against their wants.
You're also right that God punished the ancient Israelites because of their "effete and self-focused" heresies (and vices). Today's "effete" liberals are away too "self-focused" to recognize themselves in the mirror.
Dear Tito Edwards,
If the past is any predictor, you are right.
Dear Anonymous 3:11 p.m.,
Thanks for writing about your personal experience. Yes, you might not have lasted!
Some diocesan newspapers are very orthodox and pro-life, but, as you say, others are not pro-Catholic.
Not everyone realizes that too many Catholic liberals are not pro-Catholic. They do little except undermine and criticize the Church and lend aid and comfort to the Church's enemies.
Dear Dave,
Thanks for the link to an article about a Catholic school in Rhode Island being sold to Moslems and then the Catholics having a dinner to celebrate the sale.
What a sign of our times.
Post a Comment
<< Home