Replies

Having actually read the linked article, there is only one line which speaks to the issue of the historical accuracy of the Gospels.

Not to stick up for this guy, since I don't know his record at all, I do think his comment may have been an acknowledgement that the Gospels were not written contemporaneously with the life of Jesus Christ, but some time after. Perhaps his wording was inartful.

That said, I asked my priest if he had seen the Passion at the special clergy screening held last night. He said he did, and he really didn't like it that much. He criticized it for not being true to the Gospels, while on the other hand criticizing it for depicting Christ falling five times "when he only fell three times". Well, duh! Technically, he did not fall at all if we look only to the Gospels, but you'd think a Catholic priest would recognize the inclusion of the Stations of the Cross!

I think the guy leans liberal, like many priests of his generation. I think the best priests are really old, really young or foreign! Those who went to the seminaries in the 70s and 80s were done a huge disservice, as were those of us who grew up Catholic in the 70s and 80s.

"I think the guy leans liberal, like many priests of his generation. I think the best priests are really old, really young or foreign! Those who went to the seminaries in the 70s and 80s were done a huge disservice, as were those of us who grew up Catholic in the 70s and 80s."

I've noted this myself, and have heard many others say it. You're right. There was a specific generation of Catholics that were indeed quite corrupted in their teachings. They're about middle age now. Both the truly older priests and the young ones seem to be far far wiser and have a greater grasp of doctrine than that one rather twisted generation.

Qwinn

Those who went to the seminaries in the 70s and 80s were done a huge disservice,

Based on some of the talks that a deacon at our parish has given, I'm thinking that there are some semineries that are still doing great disservice.

Not to stick up for this guy, since I don't know his record at all, I do think his comment may have been an acknowledgement that the Gospels were not written contemporaneously with the life of Jesus Christ, but some time after. Perhaps his wording was inartful.

Sorry, but this is an exact quote from the Bishop, and it sounds very well thought out so I don't think he can claim to have mispoken:

"While the primary source material of the film is attributed to the four gospels, these sacred books are not historical accounts of the historical events that they narrate. They are theological reflections upon the events that form the core of Christian faith and belief."

Face it, the guy's just a friggin' coward who refuses to defend the truth.