Bishop Barron and Word on Fire

John Hutton

I'm becoming a big fan of Bishop Barron and Word on Fire. I enjoy his podcasts and videos, particularly his ones on various saints.

I think he puts the Catholic viewpoint and religion forward in an intellectually satisfying way, and sets out to address many of the objections of the "nones" in a way that is accessible to them in a rational, intellectual way, often appealing to them in a more intellectual, mindful way rather than a purely emotional way that is sometimes seen. I certainly found it great in my ongoing slow journey from being "lapsed".

He is also not afraid to address some of the "rad trad" conspiracy type excesses.

I recently bought a copy of the Word on Fire Bible - a leather-bound copy of just the Gospels with commentary from various saints and theologians - which is really a wonderful, and very aesthetically pleasing, book.

Has anyone any thoughts on the Bishop or his Word on Fire group? I'm tempted to sign up for the Word on Fire Institute.

Thinkingaboutit

If we've ex Cardinal Becciu heading to Australia with 700k of stolen or misappropriated money, apparently to fund the case against his foe George Cardinal Pell, and so forth, you don't need 'rad trad" conspiracy type excesses' to be mad as hell about it. If Francis stripped him of his Cardinalate almost immediately

Bp Barron is one of those proponents of the idea of Hans Urs von Balthasar that hell is probably empty. It is a dangerous idea which runs contrary to such as Matthew 7:13 which says that 'Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat.' Hebrews 12:14 has us struggling or striving against sin. Perhaps WOF underplays that. Now I might be wrong on that, but it is just my impression.

The bible is said to be of a very high quality, with one option, the 'Evangelization Pack' giving at least an American purchaser, a leather bound WOF with four paperback copies, a steal if you will.

John Hutton

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

If we've ex Cardinal Becciu heading to Australia with 700k of stolen or misappropriated money, apparently to fund the case against his foe George Cardinal Pell, and so forth, you don't need 'rad trad" conspiracy type excesses' to be mad as hell about it. If Francis stripped him of his Cardinalate almost immediately

The conspiracy excesses I'm talking about are the ones about how Pope Francis is a freemason, not really Pope, etc. There is some really bad stuff out there.

Bp Barron is one of those proponents of the idea of Hans Urs von Balthasar that hell is probably empty. It is a dangerous idea which runs contrary to such as Matthew 7:13 which says that 'Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat.' Hebrews 12:14 has us struggling or striving against sin. Perhaps WOF underplays that. Now I might be wrong on that, but it is just my impression.

The position he holds, as far as I can make out, is essentially that we do not know for sure who is in hell and can "reasonably hope" that all are saved, even if it takes a massive stint in purgatory first. So he doesn't say that everyone is saved and hell is empty or doesn't exist. Rather, that there is enough theological wiggle room that we can "hope" that hell is empty. Of course, this "wiggle room" goes both ways, and as a Catholic you can also be of the opinion that the majority are damned and only a few are saved. Neither is a heresy.

Personally this is my "issue" with Barron too, because this position invites someone to basically decide that they can do what they want and will get to heaven no matter what. But to be fair to Barron, his discourages this view, and if he was of that opinion I don't think he would bother with all his evangelizing efforts. He would not spend so much time helping people to know Jesus and advising how to live good lives if he thought it didn't matter.

Personally, I think we can hope that most people go to heaven and that hell, while not empty, might have less people in it than you might assume. But the fact is, as Barron points out, all of this is just a "hope" not anything we actually know. Best to proceed assuming that hell is real, and it is a real possibility you could end up there. And as far as I can tell, this is what Barron does.

The bible is said to be of a very high quality, with one option, the 'Evangelization Pack' giving at least an American purchaser, a leather bound WOF with four paperback copies, a steal if you will.

The Bible is brilliant.I have been working my way through it. I have found it hard to read from my "normal" Bible and, truth be told, I spend more time reading "about" the Bible, commentaries etc, than actually reading the Bible, but the WOF Bible is a perfect antidote to that. I will have worked my way through it by the time the next volume is out next summer.

There is a WOF Europe store, see here: https://europe.wordonfire.org/

Thinkingaboutit

The Euro Evangelization Pack is 84.48 Euro, which has to be good value, and a close equivalent of the US price.

A hope that hell is empty certainly is not saying that it is empty, but it could be too great a change of emphasis for people who need to struggle to change their lives, and don't need to hear they are good as they are.

I thought a bit less as Bp Barron would have authorised his content director Brandon Voigt to make a calumnious attack on Dr Taylor Marshall (writes on St Thomas Aquinas mainly). Dr Marshall wasn't analysing by word count or use, but what words are included in a document is highly suggestive. Noting the type of words used isn't 'intellectually dishonest.' I suppose Dr Marshall is happy for the free publicity.

A Masonic membership in the past or present would fatally undermine Francis, even a suspected membership of Mgsr Bugnini destroyed the career of the chief liturgist from Pius XII to Paul VI. A more plausible claim would be Masonic language and Francis does over-use the horrible language of the UN and international conferences too much.

Anyhow, the bible is good value.

John Hutton

Thinkingaboutit wrote: »

The Euro Evangelization Pack is 84.48 Euro, which has to be good value, and a close equivalent of the US price.

A hope that hell is empty certainly is not saying that it is empty, but it could be too great a change of emphasis for people who need to struggle to change their lives, and don't need to hear they are good as they are.

I thought a bit less as Bp Barron would have authorised his content director Brandon Voigt to make a calumnious attack on Dr Taylor Marshall (writes on St Thomas Aquinas mainly). Dr Marshall wasn't analysing by word count or use, but what words are included in a document is highly suggestive. Noting the type of words used isn't 'intellectually dishonest.' I suppose Dr Marshall is happy for the free publicity.

A Masonic membership in the past or present would fatally undermine Francis, even a suspected membership of Mgsr Bugnini destroyed the career of the chief liturgist from Pius XII to Paul VI. A more plausible claim would be Masonic language and Francis does over-use the horrible language of the UN and international conferences too much.

Anyhow, the bible is good value.

I just bought the leather Bible by itself, I regret not paying a bit extra for the pack you mention, which is great value. It would be a great present and I think the book is fancy and nice enough that if it were given to a disinterested party they would keep it and look at it.

Call me old school, (or Trad 🙂) but I tend to look towards the Bishops and the Pope for authoritative guidance firstly, especially when criticism veers from "this isnt a great document" to calumny about its author. But I suspect, as you say, Marshall will be happy with the publicity. But maybe there is a valid point buried in there about the document, but a lot of "internal" catholic discussion seems to get very nasty very quickly.

Anyway, I would never say that Barron is perfect and without fault, but I think he is doing a good job overall.

8kczg9v0swrydm

Yeah, I think that Bishop Barron has a lot of great stuff and has done great work in presenting the truths of Catholicism in a fresh and exciting way.

However, the "reasonable hope" that hell is empty is a big let down. It is completely anti-Scriptural and goes contrary to what Doctors of the Church and Saints had said throughout the ages. What are the reasons for this "hope", if it is so reasonable? We cannot be afraid to proclaim to the world that yes, hell exists and yes, there are many souls there. (This brings me no joy. However, it has been reported by many visionaries, for example the Children of Fatima and St Faustina).

I wonder why does Bp Barron persist in this strange opinion?

John Hutton

Lillian Jealous Skunk wrote: »

Yeah, I think that Bishop Barron has a lot of great stuff and has done great work in presenting the truths of Catholicism in a fresh and exciting way.

However, the "reasonable hope" that hell is empty is a big let down. It is completely anti-Scriptural and goes contrary to what Doctors of the Church and Saints had said throughout the ages. What are the reasons for this "hope", if it is so reasonable? We cannot be afraid to proclaim to the world that yes, hell exists and yes, there are many souls there. (This brings me no joy. However, it has been reported by many visionaries, for example the Children of Fatima and St Faustina).

I wonder why does Bp Barron persist in this strange opinion?

I don't know why he does, but I wonder, if he thinks that hell is empty, why would he bother with his mission, and all the work he does? Is it perhaps the case that he doesn't actually have faith in his "reasonable hope" and thinks he might be wrong, so its better to be "safe than sorry" and thus evangelize? If so, he would have been best to keep his "hope" to himself as it is a dangerous idea.

Peregrinus

John Hutton wrote: »

I don't know why he does, but I wonder, if he thinks that hell is empty, why would he bother with his mission, and all the work he does? Is it perhaps the case that he doesn't actually have faith in his "reasonable hope" and thinks he might be wrong, so its better to be "safe than sorry" and thus evangelize? If so, he would have been best to keep his "hope" to himself as it is a dangerous idea.

This only makes sense if you think the only point to Christianity is avoiding hell.

John Hutton

Peregrinus wrote: »

This only makes sense if you think the only point to Christianity is avoiding hell.

Point taken!

It's just strange though, and he doesn't really go on about it save when he is directly asked. If I thought hell was empty I'd think that would be front and center when talking about the faith.

Have you read Hans Urs von Balthasar? How does he support his "reasonable hope"?

Peregrinus

John Hutton wrote: »

Point taken!

It's just strange though, and he doesn't really go on about it save when he is directly asked. If I thought hell was empty I'd think that would be front and center when talking about the faith.

I could be mischeivous, and suggest that this preoccupation may say more about you that it does about the faith. It's possible that Barron is just not that interested in the question of Hell.

John Hutton wrote: »

Have you read Hans Urs von Balthasar? How does he support his "reasonable hope"?

I haven't read him, I'm afraid.