I know Rohr is the IN theologian but have found him somewhat too vague and appealing to feelings as paramount
Here Ian Paul gives good criticisms especially his pantheism (popular today as green christians often tend that way, and don’t see the difference between Creator and created)
Put experience as so primary tends to the infallibility of experience
Dec 2020. I went back to Rohr after hearing the Bishop of Reading’s pantheistic arguments on caring for creation. They were almost lifted out of Rohr.
To Rohr your experience is most important and seems to acquire the status of infallible and inerrant, especially when baptised with god-words and allusions to scripture.
He really IS the ideal theologian and spiritual writer for a postmodern church as his writings have the words of orthodoxy but not the substance.
He is great if feelings and subjective experience trumps everything else. and his cosy universalism and lack of judgement is what so many want.
I find it difficult not say that Rohr is not a Pantheist and his separation of Jesus Christ into the human teacher- Jesus and the universal Christ whom we can meet in an ant, makes all the famous heretics seem ultra-orthodox.
I am sure some will like what either Ian or I have written
Rev Dr Ian Paul reviews Richard Rohr’s new book The Universal Christ (SPCK)