New insights on Father Thomas Rosica’s vision for the Catholic Church

LifeSiteNews has just done a great piece on Fr. Thomas Rosica’s recent interview of excommunicated dissenter Gregory Baum.  Socon or Bust first broke the story a couple of weeks ago.   

The words that came out of Fr. Rosica’s mouth during that interview shed the clearest insights to date on what the CEO of Salt and Light envisions for the Catholic Church.

First off, he said the following to Gregory Baum, the excommunicated ex-priest who endorses contraception, same-sex “marriage” and fornication:

“I’ve certainly admired very much your theology, your writings but also your love of the Church, your love of Christ, and you helped to keep alive not only the spirit of the Second Vatican council, but also the authentic teaching of the Council.” (Source)

A key facet of Baum’s theology has been to portray Vatican II as an abrupt rupture from the past, almost like a revolution, on matters related to moral doctrine and the authority of the Holy Father. For Baum, Vatican II was like a giant Reset button that granted leeway to cast aside 2000 years of consistent moral teaching and embrace the moral standards of modern society. Not surprisingly, all faithful bishops and the Popes have fought hard to dispel this distorted theology for the last 50 years. Pope Benedict has been particularly vocal on this matter. But Baum has obstinately persisted in fighting to keep alive his version of the “spirit of the Second Vatican council.” So it’s very telling when Fr. Rosica applauds Baum by saying “you helped to keep alive not only the spirit of the Second Vatican council, but also the authentic teaching of the Council.” What does that say about Fr. Rosica’s views on what Vatican II really meant?

Then there’s this tidbit:

During the interview, Fr. Rosica also sets up a dichotomy between what he calls those like Baum, who in his terms engage in “great theological search”, and those he calls “crusaders of orthodoxy.”

Baum’s idea of “great theological search” at the Council was to be free from Magisterial authority to be able to approve behaviours like contraception, same-sex “marriage” and fornication. That’s why, for example, he dissented from Humanae Vitae and was a catalyst in the adoption of the disastrous Winnipeg Statement in 1968. He also discouraged Marian devotion. Look, a Catholic theologian cannot take these positions without making some serious theological and logical blunders. Over the last 2000 years, many men and women like Baum have tried to make a theological case for these moral depravities, but they have all been debunked by the Saints and Doctors of the Church. Why? Because ultimately these attempts are merely rationalizations of sinful inclinations rather than honest reflection. So what does it tell us about Fr. Rosica when he lauds Baum as having engaged in “great theological search?” And who would those “crusaders of orthodoxy” be, if not the faithful bishops and the Popes?

This interview has provided some new insights into Fr. Rosica’s thinking. It’s not a pretty picture.

While it’s true that Baum has done tremendous damage to the Church in his life, I’m personally not too worried about him doing much more damage going forward. He doesn’t have the same popularity as he once did and he’s not as active. Besides, let’s be frank: the man is quite old and doesn’t have too many years left.

What is most disturbing here is that Fr. Rosica appears to be fanning the flame of Baum’s old views so that they don’t die out.

11 thoughts on “New insights on Father Thomas Rosica’s vision for the Catholic Church

  1. John, check out this video of Ralph Martin. He says Catholics figured that Vatican II changed everything! this is a recent video and he is now in Rome with a chance to address the bishops on the new evangelization. Good stuff.

  2. Something about him always struck me as odd and the more and more I read about his antics, the more I see how he truly typifies “Can-Church”. When he called those who tried to expose D & P as partners in abortion providing as “taliban Catholics” that was the last straw for me.

    We still to pray fervently for these priests which continue to lead so many into error.

  3. I never cared much for Fr. Rosica and so neither Salt and Light TV. I knew Fr. Rosica was off the track but who am I to do anything when the Bishops are not.

    Time will always prove a person right or wrong.

  4. Have you ever thought of praying for Fr. Rosica and Mr. Baum. There is way too much criticism of Priests and Bishops and Religious on so many Catholic blogs and videos. It has to stop. We are causing division and not loving those who God has called to this special vocation. This is God the Father speaking to St. Catherine of Siena….perhaps we could listen and pay attention…….

    …[Because] of their virtue and because of their sacramental dignity you ought to love them. And you ought to hate the sins of those who live evil lives. But you may not for all that set ourselves up as their judges; this is not my will because they are my Christ’s, and you ought to love and reverence the authority I have given them.

    • #1 – Yes, I have prayed for both of them.

      #2 – There is criticism – not because of their lifestyles – but because they are teaching error and causing unspeakable corruption and harm to the Church.

      Would you rather us be quiet and let the scandalous error and betrayal go unchallenged?

      There is not too much criticism. There is too LITTLE criticism. There is too much corruption.

    • The following exerpts are from the book “The Devil’s Final Battle”, by Father Paul Kramerand concern or Obligation:

      On Duty to Justice and Charity to Speak Out.

      This is not the Catholic way.( referring to being passive in the midst or error and outrageous abuses in The Church )

      That is not what the laity and faithful clergy did during the Arian crisis, and it is not what we should do today. Our silence and acquiescence in the face of this ongoing disaster would first of all, be an injustice to the Church and a betrayal of our solemn duty in justice as confirmed Catholics, as soldiers of Christ.

      Then too, there is our obligation to charity toward our fellow Catholics, including our Superiors in the hierachy.We have a duty in charity to our superiors to oppose what is happening in the church, even if that means taking the extraordinary step of having to rebuke our own superiors in public.

      As St. Thomas Aqunas taught: “if the faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate, even publicly,” Why is it both just and charitable for a subject to rebuke his prelate, even publicly, in such cases? St. Thomas here observed that the public rebuke of a prelate would seem to savor a presumptuous pride, but there is no presumption in thinking
      oneself better in some respect, because, in this life, no man is without some fault. We must also remember that when a man reproves his prelate charitably, it does not follow that he thinks himself any better, but merely that he offers his help to one who, being in a higher position among you, is therefore in greater danger, as St. Augustine observes in his Rule
      quoted above. Of course, there is also danger to our fellow Catholics–the gravest possible danger–from the currentcourse of destructive innovatioin being followed by certain members of the Vatican apparatus, who have turned their backs not only on the Message of Fatima but on the Church’s salvific dogma and mission.
      The teaching of Saint Thomas on the duty to rebuke our superiors when their actions threaten harm toi the faith reflects the unanimous teaching of the Saints and Doc of the Church. As St. Robert Bellarmine, Doctor of the Church, taught in his work on the Roman Pontiff, even the Pope mau be rebuked and resisted if he treatens harm to the Church. “Just as it
      licit to resist the Pontiff that aggesesses the body, it is licitto resist the one who aggresses souls orwho disturbs civil order, or, above all, who attempts to destroy the Church. I say that it is licit to resisit him by not doing what he orders and by preventing his will from being executed; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish, or depose him, soince these acts are
      proper to a superior.”

      Likewise, the eminent Sixteenth Century theoligian Francisco Suarez (whoim Pope Paul V praised as Docotr eximius et Pius, i.e. “Exceptional and Pious Doctor”) taught as follows:

      And in this second way the Pope could be schismatic, if he were unwilling to be in normal union with the wholle body of the Church, as would occur idf he attempted to excommunicate
      the whole Church, or, as both Cajetan and Torquemada observe, if he wished to overturn the rites of the Church bases on Apostolic Tradition…If{ the Pope}, gives an order contrary to right customs, he should not be obeyed; if he attempts to do something manifestly opposed to justice and the common good, it will be lawful to resist him; iif he attacks by force, by force can he be repelled, with a moderation appropriate to a just defense.

      If even the Pope may legitamately be resisted when he takes actions that would hasrm the Church, all the more so the prelates mentioned in the preceeding pages. Quite simply, as Pope St. Felix lll declared”Not to oppose error is to approve it; and not to defend truth is to surpress it.” Members of the laity and lower-ranking clergy are not exempt from that injunction. All the members of the Church are subject to it..

      We thus have a duty to speak concerning what these prelates have done or failed to do. We have a duty to bring to the Pope’s attention what we believe in conscience is a well-founded allegation that they have caused, and imminently will cause, grave harm to the Church and the world by a veritable conspiracy against the Message of Fatima, which conspiracy includes their goal to”revive” the message in order to conform it to the worldly wisdom of men who think they can “update” the Church and reconcile Her to “the modern world.” We have a duty to petition the Holy Father for redress of this injustice against Our Lady of Fatima and Her Message to the Church and all mankind.

      Indeed this entire book is effectively a petition to the Holy Father, over and above theformal Petition set forth in Chapter 19 (Likewise Antonnio Socci’s book, The Fourth Secret of Fatima, which also accuses the Vatican Secretary of State of a cover-up of the Third Secret, and of thwarting the Consecration of Russia (to Mary’s Immaculate Heart, in the real sense, and that to which She requested, and has NOT taken place), served as a petition of sorts to the Holy Father, who (and David this is where I correct myself, as ikt was about Socci’s book, to tha Pope Benedict responded to with thanks and favor, NOT Father Paul Kramer’s book The Devil’s Final Battle, which is all quoted in my email, thus far))not only
      has read Sicci’s book, but, as he has reported (see Chapter 16 of The Devil’s Final Battle), the pope sent him a personnal letter “concerning my book,thanking me for the sentiments
      which have suggested it. Let no one say, therefore, that this book exceeds or abuses the right of the faithful to communicate to each other, and to members of the hierarchy, including the Soverieign Pontiff, their concerns about legitimate grievances in the Church– a Natural right codified in the Church’s code of Canon Law.

  5. Anne, yes I pray for priests and bishops everyday, especially the dissenting ones.

    If you read the writings of any Saint or Doctor of the Church, they will speak vociferously about the need to openly condemn errors, heresies and dissent because they lead so many souls to hell. I, for one, won’t stand by silently and let that happen.

  6. Never forget this: it was a disordered reverence for priests and bishops that perpetuated the child sex-abuse scandals. We mustn’t forget that they’re human.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Solve : *
21 × 22 =