Press for full article: REPOST: Interviewing Liturgical Leaders: Archimandrite Robert Taft, S.J.As I was reading the above article reposted by Praytell, I didn't realize that the comment section was a repost also. As usual, and at one time, but no more, the comment section at Praytell was far more interesting to read than the main post.
As I was reading the comments, I thought to myself, maybe Praytell had reverted to their older comment policy that allowed for a diversity of voices rather than the gestapo approach to a single ideology they currently have.
And I saw old commenters there making such great sense and thought, wow, Praytell is finally getting it and allowing for voices of reason in their comment section.
Of course there were plenty of the silly progressive comments that are laughable. But that's the other side to open mindedness, allowing for the silly and the sound.
Then I saw my archnemesis at Praytell,Bill deHaas, perhaps one of the nastiest commenters there, who himself it appears more recently has had his wings clipped or is outright banned like me, posting a comment that linked a video I had posted in 2014. He was a voracious reader of my blog. I hope he hasn't died unrepentant of his silly views of the Church and liturgy. He has to be a bit older than me but an unconverted silly progressive. I was silly one time too, but I underwent authentic renewal and conversion. But I digress.
Then I finally realized what I was reading were comments from 2014, not today. But it is a great study in how praytell became so narrow minded today.
Bill deHaas says:
Deacon – here you go….video of Cassian Folsom:
Sorry, not impressed. Reminded me of watching EWTN’s Faith 2.0 which has nothing to do with faith but lots to do with minor rules, interpretations, etc.
Folsom…..everything is distilled (via careful picking and choosing various quotes to make his case) to *norms*. Fairly clear that the gospel imperatives are not *norms* but a call to conversion; love, relationships, invitation. Really does sound like a version of someone confusing law with faith. Isn’t the faith invite about Jesus Christ (not rules?)
From any serious analysis of faith development, Folsom appeals and articulates a faith development around stage 3 or 4 (if you are using R. Fowler’s study). This is typically the faith stage of someone who is in 7th or 8th grade and whose understanding of religion is based upon fear, pleasing a vengeful God, etc.
Can’t say that Taft’s interview outlined norms – if anything, his ecumenism and understanding of the Eastern half of our church are marks of a faith development that is more like stages 6 or 7.