Cardinal Dolan Fails to Mention Christ at Inauguration Prayer
It's not enough today to be merely correct by using a prayer legitimate in itself. It is not enough to be minimally orthodox. In fact, as we can see from history, it does a lot of damage to state something true in its most minimal fashion. One question to ask: has anything changed regarding how we pray between the Old Covenant and the Christian dispensation? Let's start with the constant injunction in the New Testament, principally coming from Christ Himself in His instructions to us, to pray *all* things in His holy Name. The prayer, well spoken during its length, came to an abrupt and awkward end. No one knew when to say Amen except after.

Does his Eminence think to gain by being diplomatic? It's a failed experiment. Church leaders have hidden our Lord and our distinctiveness as much as possible, pushing the limits of what remains "legitimate." See Amoris Laetitia.

I think what formerbuddhist said captures the problem. How can one admit on the one hand that there's nothing wrong with what Cdl. Dolan said and on the other hand say, "Dolan is just being a good American and toning down his prayers to be vaguely Deist with a an Old Testament twist"?

Where is conviction if it is kept hidden and private?

Words make a difference, and as Cromwell says in A Man for All Seasons, sometimes silence can speak.

Messages In This Thread
Re: Cardinal Dolan Fails to Mention Christ at Inauguration Prayer - by richgr - 01-25-2017, 12:13 AM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)