You may just want to skip this post. I am not a fan.
Some brief comments on Fr. Rohr for those who are unfamiliar: Fr. Rohr has become quite the phenomenon. However, after reading from some of his books and listening to a few of his talks, I feel that he is, at best, confused and at worst a complete nut job. Many of Rohr's fundamental opinions and teaching lie outside the realm of orthodox Catholic teaching. For example, in his book "Adam's Return", he teaches that "Incarnation is already redemption," and "you do not need any blood sacrifice to display God's commitment to humanity." Basically, he says that the crucifixion was unnecessary because the Incarnation redeemed us all. So, then I ask you - what kind of God allows his only son to be crucified? But, I mildly digress, as this isn't exactly my current rant...
A few days ago I was subjected to a lecture based on Fr. Rohr's ideas of Christ as Light. Now, there was this comment early on that really irked me - "Fr. Rohr tells us that if we had a video camera running at the moment Jesus came out of the tomb, all we would see was a bright light." What, he was there? This was stated as if it was completely factual, but that was only the beginning.
"Jesus didn’t move from Jesus to the Christ without death and resurrection." - Fr. Rohr
There was much talk of Jesus "becoming" the Christ (Messiah). Ummm, shall I point out Jesus' conversation with Peter (pre-resurrection) when Jesus asks his disciples, "Who do you say I am?" Simon Peter said in reply, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father."
Jesus doesn't correct Peter. He doesn't tell him, that he isn't the Messiah yet. He acknowledges that God has revealed this truth. Maybe Fr. Rohr missed that part of Matthew's Gospel...
I think I probably need to stop now. Rethinking it just annoys me.
Pray for me..I think I am really going to need it over the next few years.