A reader in New York City kindly alerted me to a video he discovered on the website of one of the better known Episcopal Churches in Manhattan, Trinity Wall Street. In it, we see the December 6, 2015 appearance of Franciscan priest of the Archdiocese of Santa Fe (and noted writer and speaker) Fr. Richard Rohr. From the video’s description:
The principal Sunday liturgy at Trinity, with musical leadership provided by the renowned Trinity Choir, with regular participation by the Family Choir and Trinity Choristers. Webcast live each Sunday, and archived for on-demand viewing. Trinity Church, Broadway and Wall Street; 75 minutes. Webcast live and available for on-demand viewing.
Today’s preacher is Fr. Richard Rohr, a Franciscan priest and internationally known writer and teacher. He is the founder of the Center for Action and Contemplation in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and his books include The Naked Now, Everything Belongs, Falling Upward, and many more. His most recent book, Eager to Love, is about Franciscan spirituality and its focus on the Gospel, justice, and compassion.
I had never heard of Fr. Rohr before, but evidently his books are quite popular. They are also noteworthy for his involvement in New Age practices. This article about him on Women of Grace makes clear that he is known to be a less-than-orthodox Catholic. His Wikipedia page brings to light serious theological problems in his thinking:
He often refers to his position as being on the “edge of the inside”,[9] as a prophetic place from which to challenge and encourage the Church. In a critique of Rohr, Fr. Bryce Sibley writes that Rohr asserts that God is neither male nor female, supports the mission of homosexual advocacy groups, asserts that the Crucifixion of Jesus was not necessary for the redemption of mankind, and criticizes Catholic rituals for a lack of efficacy.[10] Rohr has been notable for his support of homosexual causes, attracting criticism from some Catholics.[11] In 1996, Rohr presided over a ceremony for a lesbian couple, which has been referred to by a commentator as a “wedding”, during one of his retreats.[12] In 1997, Rohr spoke at a symposium[13][14] of New Ways Ministry, a ministry to homosexual people which was later condemned by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for not teaching in accord with the Catholic Church’s moral teachings regarding homosexuality.[15] In 2000, Rohr publically endorsed Soulforce, an initiative to use “relentless nonviolent resistance” to encourage Christian groups to accept homosexual people.[16] In a 2003 letter to his diocese, the Archbishop of Santa Fe, Michael Sheehan, wrote that Rohr had agreed in discussions to conform to official Catholic teachings in his presentations.[17]
In his teaching on Scripture, such as in his book Things Hidden, Rohr describes the biblical record as a human account of humanity’s evolving experience with God, “the word of God in the words of people.”[18] Rohr’s book Immortal Diamond: The Search for Our True Self suggests Jesus’ death and resurrection is an archetypal pattern for the individual’s movement from “False Self” to “True Self,” from “who you think you are” to “who you are in God.”[19] Rohr’s most recent book, Eager to Love, explores the key themes of Franciscan spirituality, which he sees as a “third way” between traditional orthodoxy and heresy, a way of focusing on the Gospel, justice, and compassion.[20]
Also noteworthy is a 2003 letter written concerning Fr. Rohr by the previous Archbishop of Santa Fe, Michael J. Sheehan. In the letter, he says:
Father Rohr sometimes can be controversial and has liberal views on different aspects of the Church; but at the same time he is also quite capable of very traditional and inspiring talks. Several years ago I had to meet with him to have a frank talk, as bishop, on several matters that concerned me. He pledged that he would write articles that are faithful to the teachings of the Catholic Church and that his presentations would also carefully reflect sound Catholic teaching.
Since our discussion, Father Rohr has shown a positive response to the concerns that I raised regarding sensitivity to sound teaching. I have personally heard him give very solid presentations regarding the Catholic faith. I believe that he will be quite loyal to the Church in his presentation to the young adults at the National Conference in June.
It appears that twelve years is a long time to stay on the orthodoxy wagon.
In the video taken from Trinity Wall Street, the homily begins at about the 28-minute mark. It’s nothing spectacular one way or the other, insofar as he follows a fairly standard Social Justice Warrior (SJW) template, rambling on about the tendency of religious leaders to want to “tie God up” with limitations and “conditional clauses” and talking about how in politics and religion we like to set up “obstacles” so that refugees, the poor, people of colors, and gays can’t “pass through.” He also condemns the idea of meritocracy, setting it up as opposed to the “ocean of grace.” He makes a point of wanting to do away with the concept of “retributive justice,” and the need to replace it with “restorative justice.” There’s probably more that needs pointing out, but I couldn’t bear to listen to it too closely.
But then something else happens. At about the 1:03 time marker in the video, Fr. Rohr stands to receive “communion” within the sanctuary. He receives both bread and wine — this is all they are, since Episcopalian/Anglican orders are not valid — and then appears to receive instructions on distribution, at which point he begins to dispense the not-Eucharist to those in the congregation. To make things easier, I’ve grabbed just a short portion of the video to make his participation clear:
This is, of course, a serious violation of Church teaching. From John Paul II’s encyclical, Ecclesia De Eucharistia, #30:
The Catholic Church’s teaching on the relationship between priestly ministry and the Eucharist and her teaching on the Eucharistic Sacrifice have both been the subject in recent decades of a fruitful dialogue in the area of ecumenism. We must give thanks to the Blessed Trinity for the significant progress and convergence achieved in this regard, which lead us to hope one day for a full sharing of faith. Nonetheless, the observations of the Council concerning the Ecclesial Communities which arose in the West from the sixteenth century onwards and are separated from the Catholic Church remain fully pertinent: “The Ecclesial Communities separated from us lack that fullness of unity with us which should flow from Baptism, and we believe that especially because of the lack of the sacrament of Orders they have not preserved the genuine and total reality of the Eucharistic mystery. Nevertheless, when they commemorate the Lord’s death and resurrection in the Holy Supper, they profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and they await his coming in glory”.62
The Catholic faithful, therefore, while respecting the religious convictions of these separated brethren, must refrain from receiving the communion distributed in their celebrations, so as not to condone an ambiguity about the nature of the Eucharist and, consequently, to fail in their duty to bear clear witness to the truth. This would result in slowing the progress being made towards full visible unity. Similarly, it is unthinkable to substitute for Sunday Mass ecumenical celebrations of the word or services of common prayer with Christians from the aforementioned Ecclesial Communities, or even participation in their own liturgical services. Such celebrations and services, however praiseworthy in certain situations, prepare for the goal of full communion, including Eucharistic communion, but they cannot replace it.
The fact that the power of consecrating the Eucharist has been entrusted only to Bishops and priests does not represent any kind of belittlement of the rest of the People of God, for in the communion of the one body of Christ which is the Church this gift redounds to the benefit of all.
The encyclical cites Unitatis Redintegratio — the Second Vatican Council’s decree on Ecumenism — a document which the Catechism of the Catholic Church (#1400) also cites when it states:
Ecclesial communities derived from the Reformation and separated from the Catholic Church, “have not preserved the proper reality of the Eucharistic mystery in its fullness, especially because of the absence of the sacrament of Holy Orders.”239 It is for this reason that, for the Catholic Church, Eucharistic intercommunion with these communities is not possible. However these ecclesial communities, “when they commemorate the Lord’s death and resurrection in the Holy Supper . . . profess that it signifies life in communion with Christ and await his coming in glory.”24
This isn’t the Catechism of Trent, folks. This is one of the prohibitions that even the post-conciliar Church has preserved. There is no excuse for a Catholic priest to be doing something like this. And one can’t help but wonder if Pope Francis’s recent insinuation that Lutherans can receive Holy Communion in Catholic Churches if they first “talk to the Lord” may have emboldened Fr. Rohr to take this completely erroneous ecumenical step.
It looks like it’s time for our readers to contact Santa Fe’s new Archbishop — John C. Wester — and ask him to consider having another “frank talk, as bishop, on several matters” with Fr. Rohr, just as his predecessor did. I ask that if you do so, you do it respectfully.
The diocesan website is in rough shape, with some links going to the old Archbishop’s biography. The Archbishop has no direct contact information I could find, but his Executive Assistant’s name is listed as Dolores Cordova, who can be reached at 505-831-8100, or through this general contact form.
The Archdiocese also has a Director of Communications, listed as Celine Baca Radigan, who can be reached at 505-831-8180. She may also be reached through the same general contact form, but I found an old press release with cradigan (at) archdiocesesantafe as the contact address. I’ve not tried this address, so I don’t know if it will work.
The Archdiocesan mailing address is:
4000 Saint Joseph’s Place NW
Albuquerque, NM 87120-1741
Main Switchboard: 505.831.8100
I don’t know enough about the structure of the Order of Friars Minor to know who Fr. Rohr’s superior or provincial might be (I got as far as this before running out of time to keep digging), but if anyone knows, fill me in in the comments and I’ll update the post with that contact information as well.
At the end of the day, it’s hard to know how much effect we can have in situations like this, but respect for the Eucharist begins with the public recognition of what it is — Our Lord’s Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity — and why this reality is only found in churches with apostolic succession and valid orders. Receiving communion in a Protestant church is a lie — a lie about the sacrament, and about communion between Catholicism and other Christian denominations — and this is especially egregious for a priest to do. It must not stand.
Someone remind me what St. Edmund Campion went to Tyburn for again.
So that Richard Rohr can be part of the Anglican Mass?
Perhaps the answer is because so few Bishops went to Tyburn before him. All but one apostatized.
What is not so well known about the English bishops, is that with one exception, every single one stood firm in 1559 when Elizabeth set out to re-Protestantise the religion of England and Wales. Among them were some who had given way in 1534 under her father. Those who stood up to Elisabeth were all imprisoned for life. One of them escaped, and was the sole English bishop at the Council of Trent. He died at Rome in 1585.
I think these bishops deserve to be more kindly remembered than they are. Especially as reminders of the fact that those who fall very badly, may yet be raised again – or the way about.
But they didn’t end up at Tyburn like Edmund Campion who was executed under Elizabeth Tudor and unlike Campion they were protecting an apostate’s creed and a false pretense at Apostolic succession.
For being a rigid, unbalanced rigorist Pharisee who failed to affirm the other?
/sarcasm off
No surprise here! Rohr is a know heretic.
A Heretic, A Schismatic & Apostate!
And he expressed his delight when men on his “wilding” retreats take off their clothes. ’nuff said.
I never trusted Rohr, despite what my more Liberal Novus Ordo Catholic Friends, who advise me to stay away from this site, plus The Remnant, akacatholic.com, Catholic Family News & last but not least, churchmilitant.com, say.
I read he has them tie a ribbon around body parts they feel ashamed of. If that is not evidence of pathology then nothing is.
Here’s a link with Rohr’s own words, including, “They’ll strip and have to leap over that fire, burning their balls” and the widely quoted “The boy [man] always gets naked”.
http://www.bishop-accountability.org/news2007/09_10/2006_01_23_Abbott_PriestThe.htm
The man should be in an asylum.
The Vatican has forgotten what the saints and doctors of the Church have said about pederasty.
http://www.tldm.org/News7/homosexualitySaints.htm
EWWW!
Wasn’t it G.K. Chesterton who stated that: “All heresy starts below the belt”?
Ewww!
But he’s still a ‘priest’, so shut up and sit down.
Steve: Careful about publishing things like this. If noticed in the Vatican, they might give ideas about new appointments to important points. Remember, Rosica got a job there.
Oh, please do. Just keep confirming it for everyone who hasn’t pulled their head out of their…sand.
So did Kasper!
Heads he’ll get an appointment, Tails he’ll be appointed ?
Exactly. It’s the newest version of “Vatican roulette”: all six chambers are loaded.
Bada Bing!
Look at all the young people, Not! The liberals in the church are aging and dying off. On another note, it looked no different than reception of communion at most NO masses.
Hey, who are we to judge…(/sarcasm)
I wonder if he concelebrated? I noticed though the Episcopal lady recieved in the hand, she didn’t pick up the host with her fingers, but instead kept host in her palms and moved her hand to her mouth. Also, the people stand where the altar rail would be (I was surprised there wasn’t one because most Episcopal churches seem to have them), and stood waiting for the priest to come to them, so in that respect it wasn’t Novus Ordo.
PAPAL CRITICS THREATENED WITH EXCOMMUNICATION AS “YEAR OF MERCY” BEGINS
December 7, 2015 VOICE OF THE FAMILY
Archbishop Fisichella, President of the Pontifical Council for Promoting the New Evangelization, has stirred controversy by suggesting that some criticisms of Pope Francis might result in automatic excommunication.
Archbishop Fisichella made his remarks while explaining how Pope Francis’s new “Missionaries of Mercy” will operate. The 800 “missionaries” will have the power to absolve from penalties previously reserved to the Holy See.
In reference to Canon 1370, which imposes automatic excommunication for “physical violence” against the Roman Pontiff, Archbishop Fisichella said:
“I would say that we need to understand well ‘physical violence,’ because sometimes words, too, are rocks and stones, and therefore I believe some of these sins, too, are far more widespread than we might think.”
…
Archbishop Fischella is a “Water Carrier For The Bergoglian Revolution”, and by attempting to silence those who criticize this Papacy, for its’ lack of orthodoxy, it has been said that Revolutionaries have s Tendency to silence Truth.
You’re just a dumb-*ss conspiracy theorist, don’t ya know. [sarc]
Anybody notice the penchant these people have for messing up language, for using what I like to call “goo-goo talk”? I mean idiotic propositions like “sometimes words, too, are rocks and stones”? Hell, back in the good old days, even the dullest Catholic grammar school kid knew the adage that went “Sticks and stones can break my bones, but names will never hurt me!”
I think it is a great exaggeration to talk of a threat of excommunication. One can be unimpressed by some of the antics in Rome, and not agree with some of the critical descriptions of them. I don’t think that Abp. Fisichella’s words are the threat some people who report them think.
Wow…words are stones!
Hey, anyone know how many rabbis will be among the 800 ‘missionaries’? I want to be at the head of the line to speak with a rabbi and to bask in his tolerating elder brother attitude of mercy.
Moon Beam Ecumenism
Paging Dr. Ed Peters… is this a canonical crime?
Dr. Ed Peters —now there’s a man who can really sidestep issues with legalisms.
Utter filth!
Hopefully he does think that this service fulfills his Sunday obligation. But, hey what harm will one more mortal sin do when one is going “full heretic”. And I also hope he went to confession before the receiving/celebrating the Eucharist at the Feast of the Immaculate Conception two days later.
Bring back the Inquisition for these heretics.
Remember, a little bread and wine does no harm!
Ah…Richard Rohr, the creepy old dude who conducts “retreats” in which all the men strip naked and chill out in a sweat lodge.
“Woe to you, Scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites!”
Yes, so?
Rohr is a long time heretical priest!
So how can he still be a ‘priest’?
Good question! As I read your reply I was just reading the parable of the wheat and the weeds.
Anglican Orders are not valid? Every Bishop, Priest, and Deacon in the Anglican Communion can trace his ordination back to a Bishop who can trace his consecration back to the Apostles. What about that is not valid? The Table of the Lord is not the property of one religious corporation or another, but of all members of the Body of Christ.
When Roman Catholics start to realize that they do not have a monopoly on the Grace of God, some of us might even come back. But your attitude is bigoted, narrow minded, and just plain mean.
Guess who said this about Anglican orders: “Absolutely null and utterly void”?
Oooh! Oooh! Pick me!
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13curae.htm
You folks are forgetting about the ‘Dutch touch’. Anglicans went out of their way after Leo XIII to get some apostolic succession.
But really, is that what the Eucharist is all about? Maybe Troy’s got a point…
Even leaving aside the questions of deliberate schism, disobedience and disunity, not all Anglican bishops, priests and deacons can trace their pedigree back to the Apostles. The ordination of women has now scuppered all their claims to Catholicity.
I showed my first answer to my knowledgeable priest, and he pointed out a further complexity I hadn’t thought of. The Orthodox are also disunited from the Catholic Church, but the latter does recognise Orthodox orders as valid. I need to delve a little more into this fascinating subject.
As to your rhetorical question: what is the Eucharist all about? It has to be more than each individual thinks about it – basically the Anglican position, which disbars no baptised believer. The objective truth inherent in it is too important to shrug off in that way. Not only must the consecration be effected by a true priest of the apostolic Church, but the truth of His real presence and its sacrificial action needs upholding.
http://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=953
There’s the information about Pope Leo’s decision
Sigh. It’s obviously not just about apostolic succession as you technically describe. The English monarchy ‘nationalised’ the Church hierarchy and property within the realm and severed incorporation within the universal Catholic church. Those bishops who went along with that excommunicated themselves, and thenceforward had no apostolic anointing to pass on. The situation actually rather resembles the Chinese ‘Three Self church’, likewise a nationalised version of the Church, including originally valid Catholic bishops who continued in post. Would you argue then that the bishops and priests they have since ordained are valid Catholics?
I’m not being mean here, least of all narrow minded. I’m just rooting the present carefully in the truth of the past. Yours is somewhat wishful thinking.
During a period when I was being drawn towards the Church from many decades in Pentecostal / Evangelical circles, I took a great interest in Richard Rohr, and his books played a part in what God was doing in me.
I certainly know he includes unorthodox ideas – I knew then, and any reader will know that. He is a keen student of other, non-Christian, mystical traditions. There will always be such spiritual adventurers, and we should defend their liberty to be such, and keep an ear open for the nuggets of prophetic truth which come amongst the dodgy stuff. Prophets are needed, and equally need the leash of church discipline! But we silence – or mock – them at our peril.
Of course, he’s way out of line, endorsing an Episcopal communion in that way. Sadly, it’s rife in some Catholic circles. It upsets me personally, because I was only recently received into the Church, in my latter years, and now live obediently with the pain of the divided Church cutting right through my immediate family and marriage. Rohr sets a terrible example here, breeding great confusion.
Priesthood filled with Heretics now.
It’s easy to see who his god is. Our Lord and Savior said something about ”the road to Heaven being narrow”, but this man wants it to be a ”highway” to his god. Kind of Jorge Mario Bergoglio referring to Jesus’ Church as to ”his personal church”. Also, Our God, according to the Teachings of Jesus, is Our Father, not a mother. So, I guess again, who his god may be.
The Pope NEVER said that the Catholic Church is “my personal church.” He said “It’s my Church.” I can say that. You can say that.
I think this Pope is the worst Pope in about 300 years, give or take. But when you start mis-quoting him in such an egregious way–“my personal church”–you are venting spleen and lapsing into bitter slander.
No, I could never say that Jesus’ Church is ”my church” I’d leave that for you and Jorge. I’d say instead that is the Church I go to or, that’s the Church I belong to.
Nevertheless, what I said is far more accurate than your ”the bishops get $90 billions to help immigrants and 80% of them vote pro abortion”(if not exactly, a close enough paraphrasing). Wow. Can you support that with facts or that is just pure hate??
As an added fact: Those immigrants can’t vote as you and I can (and I hope you do)
He was either racking up frequent flyer miles or running up a hotel bill – says here he was at St Francis in NYC on Dec 8 http://www.stfrancisnyc.org/2015/11/roh/