Conservative Catholic Churches? (Roanoke, Salem: live, floor, retired)

[mccamp]

Originally Posted by Eeeee22895

Crabacke,
Two things that shocked me when I moved here. 1) The Catholic Churches were not as conservative as what I grew up with. I am talking about strong stands affirming life. My friend was talking about meeting with the leaders of the area Catholic church youth groups. They were planning a rally following the "Life-Chain" event in Roanoke. My friend's church wanted a pro-life theme, and some of the other churches didn't like the anti-abortion aspect of that theme. That was truly amazing and appalling to my friend. 2) The local paper, the Roanoke Times, is about as far-left as any paper in the country. Not surprisingly, the wife of a former Times editorial page editor was in charge of the youth group from one of the churches that opposed the pro-life theme.

This surprises me. St. Andrew's Church in Roanoke has made strong statements regarding Pro-Life and Anti-Abortion.

I have no idea what Life Chain event is, but maybe the focus of the event was not abortion or euthanasia and they were looking to be more inclusive about all aspects of life -- like anti-bullying, violence, abuse, etc.

Most Catholic CHurches across the country have adopted the principles of Vatican II. Those principles are not as conservatives as they were before. It took decades for some churches to catch one. (The Church in my hometown in the Bible Belt just recently adopted more of the Vatican II suggestions for Mass. Had to. The Pastor was well past 70, was forced to retire, and a younger priest was brought in. The younger priest was taught Vatican II.)

Go anywhere, visit any Diocese in the US and you'll find relaxed Masses. They've reached out to be more inclusive. I think that's what we may be seeing. It's not Roanoke Catholic Churches, per se. It's the entire Catholic Church.

The Roanoke Times may lean to the left a bit, but it's not the most left-leaning paper in the country. In my opinion, it doesn't even come close. Take a gander at the Boston Globe, the St. Louis Post Dispatch, the Chicago Tribune, Washington Post, etc. I consider the Roanoke Times a moderate paper.

I agree it is a shock when you move to Roanoke. You expect this total Bible Belt ultra conservative city. And instead, you find a progressive spirit and a younger energy. It took us by surprise, too.

[Sonorio]

I actually toured all the Catholic churches up here in the city of Rochester and found quite a variety of attitudes, behaviors, and operating procedures. I wonder whether it's that way there as well.

There was one place that was so snottily liberal I wanted to run home and shower and discard my clothing after the Mass.

S

[Eeeee22895]

McCamp.

The life-chain is an event is an event which celebrates life, but its focus is always on eliminating abortion. It is an annual event at the intersection of Orange and Williamson Rds. The youth leaders from some churches didn't want the youth rally which followed immediately at Roanoke Catholic to have any connection at all with a pro-life message. I didn't hear the reasoning, but the woman who related the story to me believed they were opposed to the anti-abortion message. I'm not saying it was the official view of the church or priests; just some youth leaders.

As far as the Roanoke Times goes, it may be smaller, but I find it more liberal than any of the big-city papers. The big papers offer their liberal views with tact most of the time, and mix in a few nonpolitical editorials. But it's almost like the local paper wants to prove it is worthy of its leftist mettle by out-shouting and out-extreming the big boys, without any measure of thoughtfulness or consistency. In short, the editors here aren't exactly the cream of the intellectual crop. They're more like bantam roosters.

[mccamp]

I'm a member of St. Andrew's and they make strong statements against abortion all the time. I wouldn't belong to the church if was anything less, actually.

I hope your friend misunderstood--or the person speaking about the life chain event was a complete idiot and didn't know how to communicate.

But I can assure you: St. Andrew's is ardently pro-life.

[Eeeee22895]

Again, no church official offered such opinions; they were from youth leaders.

[PaperTrail]

Originally Posted by Eeeee22895

In short, the editors here aren't exactly the cream of the intellectual crop. They're more like bantam roosters.

Sigh....

So how many TRT editors do you actually know? I'd be pretty comfortable pitting some of their backgrounds/educations/intellects against those in other fields in the region (and beyond).

You brought up the editorials in your post. Just to clarify, are you calling the paper "liberal" (which is what it sounds like) or are you calling the editorial page(s) "liberal"? Those are two very distinct entities there.

[mccamp]

PaperTrail,

I agree with you. I've met a good portion of the editors, and they are a smart bunch. I also agree with the the editorial/opinion page vs the news coverage. I think they're middle of the road, but I guess it's all in someone's perspective..

E..2895 -- In the case of St. Andrew's, the youth leaders are EMPLOYED by the church and the diocese of Richmond. I think your friend my have misunderstood. Those folks would have lost their jobs in a heartbeat if their message was pro-abortion in the least. (It could have been parents of the youth, or someone not associated with St. Andrew's. I know the folks at St. Andrew's. I know how they're run. And I can promise you, any official employed by St. Andrew's would have been shown the door pronto.)

I don't doubt that your friend heard something, I just don't think it came from an employee of St. Andrew's.

[PaperTrail]

Originally Posted by mccamp

PaperTrail,

I agree with you. I've met a good portion of the editors, and they are a smart bunch.

And at least one of the higher-ups I know is a member of St. Andrew's...just don't tell the editorial board

[Eeeee22895]

Originally Posted by PaperTrail

Sigh....

So how many TRT editors do you actually know? I'd be pretty comfortable pitting some of their backgrounds/educations/intellects against those in other fields in the region (and beyond).

You brought up the editorials in your post. Just to clarify, are you calling the paper "liberal" (which is what it sounds like) or are you calling the editorial page(s) "liberal"? Those are two very distinct entities there.

All you have to do is read their blog as I have and you will see how far-left whacko they are. I've conversed that way with each on many occasions, and have just concluded they aren't very bright. But they weren't hired because they were smart; they were hired because they were liberal ideologues. Their experiences are working on the editorial staff of other leftwing newspapers. Probably have journalism degrees if that. I know the lead editor was a high school dropout before he went to school later. They are inconsistent with their stances depending on the party talked about, they constantly make contradictory posts, and have an amazing ability to infer something from a survey or chart that can't be inferred.

[Eeeee22895]

Originally Posted by mccamp

PaperTrail,

I agree with you. I've met a good portion of the editors, and they are a smart bunch. I also agree with the the editorial/opinion page vs the news coverage. I think they're middle of the road, but I guess it's all in someone's perspective..

E..2895 -- In the case of St. Andrew's, the youth leaders are EMPLOYED by the church and the diocese of Richmond. I think your friend my have misunderstood. Those folks would have lost their jobs in a heartbeat if their message was pro-abortion in the least. (It could have been parents of the youth, or someone not associated with St. Andrew's. I know the folks at St. Andrew's. I know how they're run. And I can promise you, any official employed by St. Andrew's would have been shown the door pronto.)

I don't doubt that your friend heard something, I just don't think it came from an employee of St. Andrew's.

Sorry to be blunt, but if you think the RT editors are middle of the road, you clearly haven't read them. Can you name any issue in which they've taken any position other than the far left one? Be it taxes, big government, abortion, birth control, gun control, or religion? I've read their blog religiously (ironic pun) for a couple of years. They are flat out off the charts left.

As for the youth leaders, I am sure most churches do not pay them. Perhaps St. Andrews is an exception. My friend didn't mishear, although I don't know if St. Andrews was one of the ones she was talking about. As I said, they didn't come right out and say "We support abortion." What they said was that they didn't like the youth rally having an anti-abortion message. My friend inferred the reason why they said that. You can agree with her or not.

I think we've beaten this dead horse enough, don't you?