Annoyed with alienating political comments during homily!!

[Seatuck]

I don’t get it still. Your upset cuz he thought his view was the truth and he put this truth into the homily? I mean, I guess you could disagree but priests gotta be able to talk about what happens every day and how catholics might best handle it.

Martin , the US Bishops were against passing this health care plan. This priest spoke openly in opposition of the US Bishop’s. That’s why what he said is a problem.

 

[Roy5]

Lycorth

I guess we have a different idea of America. I may disagree with Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc., but I am a patriot who respects the office and is offended when people lie about a president, no matter who that president is.

For example, I liked GW Bush personally, but was very much against the invasion of Iraq (agreed with the Pope on that). One can debate the issue without becoming scurrilous about Bush, which many opponents of that war were.

In the case of Obama, I want to give him a bit more time. I do become annoyed when people try to make him out to be a Marxist and/or a cryptic Muslim who was not born in the USA. As for abortion, two thoughts. (1) I agree with those who say they ought to be as rare as possible. (2) there are extreme situations where I believe there may be a just reason for having one.

Let me illustrate briefly with these two cases familiar to me personally, and then add two comments…

(1) A downs syndrome young teen (13) was gang raped at a group home. She became pregnant. Her parents were good Catholics who in principle opposed abortion. The mother was even ready to raise the child - her daughter could not possibly have done that - but the mother had developed MS and was physically unable to. When they checked into adoption, they were told that since the baby’s mother and father were severely challenged mentally adoption was most unlikely. So they finally were convinced to have an abortion. We can judge them severely if we want to, but I don’t want to. That I will leave up to God, who is merciful.

(2) A Catholic couple I know had six children and felt that’s all they could provide for. Moreover, the mother had been warned by her doctor that another birth could easily take her life and leave six young children motherless. The couple faithfully used the church-approved birth control method which failed. The couple even consulted their priest who said the decision was between them and God. They opted for an early abortion, having heard that Augustine and others had written that the fetus did not have a soul until two or three months (I forget which). Anyway,she had an abortion and lived. We can censure that couple, but I won’t. I will leave that matter up to God, also.

(3) I am tired of religious people, pious and judgmental Catholics and Protestants both, who get irate on the issue of abortion, but are ready to remain silent or even applaud when thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians - and fine young men and women in the military - are killed in war, while certain rich people get richer. 9/11 demanded action in Afghanistan. But Iraq? And now there are those who are trying to convinced us to bomb Iran. And we have a long history of supporting undemocratic powers when they are on our side. Let’s be consistent.

(4) This is not an argument, but I have noted that most abortions are spontaneous - miscarriages. We had two, so I am personally well acquainted with them. Was God calling those little ones home - or what? I do know that babies who die or are killed spend eternity in the presence of our compassionate Christ, so that helped dry our tears. There are even those fleeting moments when I read the headlines and think that “they are the lucky ones”, especially now that limbo had been sidelined.

God bless people of every creed, color and country, and may religion serve to unite rather than divide, become a bridge and not a barrier.

 

[Lycorth]

Lycorth

I guess we have a different idea of America. I may disagree with Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc., but I am a patriot who respects the office and is offended when people lie about a president, no matter who that president is.

I did not talk about the man’s office, I talked about the *man.

*President or not, he is not immune from criticism and should not be.

For example, I liked GW Bush personally, but was very much against the invasion of Iraq (agreed with the Pope on that). One can debate the issue without becoming scurrilous about Bush, which many opponents of that war were.

In the case of Obama, I want to give him a bit more time. I do become annoyed when people try to make him out to be a Marxist and/or a cryptic Muslim who was not born in the USA.

He wasn’t born in the USA, he’s at least a cultural Marxist, and even if he isn’t Muslim he has openly admitted in his book that he will side with them should the political winds “shift in an ugly direction”.

Why does this annoy you? Why should his credentials not be questioned and his real agenda not scrutinized? If we believe in electing leaders, they need to be put to the test; elections do not magically turn crooks into fine statesmen.

As for abortion, two thoughts. (1) I agree with those who say they ought to be as rare as possible. (2) there are extreme situations where I believe there may be a just reason for having one.

Let me illustrate briefly with these two cases familiar to me personally, and then add two comments…

(1) A downs syndrome young teen (13) was gang raped at a group home. She became pregnant. Her parents were good Catholics who in principle opposed abortion. The mother was even ready to raise the child - her daughter could not possibly have done that - but the mother had developed MS and was physically unable to. When they checked into adoption, they were told that since the baby’s mother and father were severely challenged mentally adoption was most unlikely. So they finally were convinced to have an abortion. We can judge them severely if we want to, but I don’t want to. That I will leave up to God, who is merciful.

(2) A Catholic couple I know had six children and felt that’s all they could provide for. Moreover, the mother had been warned by her doctor that another birth could easily take her life and leave six young children motherless. The couple faithfully used the church-approved birth control method which failed. The couple even consulted their priest who said the decision was between them and God. They opted for an early abortion, having heard that Augustine and others had written that the fetus did not have a soul until two or three months (I forget which). Anyway,she had an abortion and lived. We can censure that couple, but I won’t. I will leave that matter up to God, also.

When did we get onto politicking about abortion? I know I mentioned abortion as an example, but why are you arguing off-topic points?

(3) I am tired of religious people, pious and judgmental Catholics and Protestants both, who get irate on the issue of abortion, but are ready to remain silent or even applaud when thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians - and fine young men and women in the military - are killed in war, while certain rich people get richer. 9/11 demanded action in Afghanistan. But Iraq? And now there are those who are trying to convinced us to bomb Iran. And we have a long history of supporting undemocratic powers when they are on our side. Let’s be consistent.

I agree with this for the most part, but we need to get “irate” about abortion regardless of the war or anything else. The war in the middle-east is not the world’s worst problem.

(4) This is not an argument, but I have noted that most abortions are spontaneous - miscarriages. We had two, so I am personally well acquainted with them. Was God calling those little ones home - or what? I do know that babies who die or are killed spend eternity in the presence of our compassionate Christ, so that helped dry our tears. There are even those fleeting moments when I read the headlines and think that “they are the lucky ones”, especially now that limbo had been sidelined.

“Limbo” was never a doctrine to begin with.

God bless people of every creed, color and country, and may religion serve to unite rather than divide, become a bridge and not a barrier.

Yes, but may those of us who defend the cause of the Lord and His Church not be cowed into silence because someone may get offended. Otherwise, there will be no unity and no peace in the world.

 

[the_phoenix]

(1) A downs syndrome young teen (13) was gang raped at a group home. She became pregnant. Her parents were good Catholics who in principle opposed abortion. The mother was even ready to raise the child - her daughter could not possibly have done that - but the mother had developed MS and was physically unable to. When they checked into adoption, they were told that since the baby’s mother and father were severely challenged mentally adoption was most unlikely. So they finally were convinced to have an abortion. We can judge them severely if we want to, but I don’t want to. That I will leave up to God, who is merciful.

The unborn child was innocent and should not have died due to lack of love and charity.

(2) A Catholic couple I know had six children and felt that’s all they could provide for. Moreover, the mother had been warned by her doctor that another birth could easily take her life and leave six young children motherless. The couple faithfully used the church-approved birth control method which failed. The couple even consulted their priest who said the decision was between them and God. They opted for an early abortion, having heard that Augustine and others had written that the fetus did not have a soul until two or three months (I forget which). Anyway,she had an abortion and lived. We can censure that couple, but I won’t. I will leave that matter up to God, also.

**Take a look at the life story of Saint Gianna Molla. She chose not to abort, had the child, died, and now lives in Heaven.

One quote from a website dedicated to her: “And again when speaking to her husband Pietro on another occasion, she said in a firm voice and with a penetrating gaze, “If you have to decide between me and the child, do not hesitate; I demand it, the child, save it.” Such was her generous attitude throughout her pregnancy.”

saintgianna.org/medicalcircum.htm**

(3) I am tired of religious people, pious and judgmental Catholics and Protestants both, who get irate on the issue of abortion, but are ready to remain silent or even applaud when thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians - and fine young men and women in the military - are killed in war, while certain rich people get richer. 9/11 demanded action in Afghanistan. But Iraq? And now there are those who are trying to convinced us to bomb Iran. And we have a long history of supporting undemocratic powers when they are on our side. Let’s be consistent.

I pray the Rosary for peace and the conversion of the Muslims. Do you pray for peace as well?

(4) This is not an argument, but I have noted that most abortions are spontaneous - miscarriages. We had two, so I am personally well acquainted with them. Was God calling those little ones home - or what? I do know that babies who die or are killed spend eternity in the presence of our compassionate Christ, so that helped dry our tears. There are even those fleeting moments when I read the headlines and think that “they are the lucky ones”, especially now that limbo had been sidelined.

Please accept my condolences on your loss.

God bless people of every creed, color and country, and may religion serve to unite rather than divide, become a bridge and not a barrier.

Sounds to me from your post like the Catholic Church
could use more pro-life homilies.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I just wanted to know if any of you have had this happen during mass and if so how you dealt with it in any way. Please don’t respond if you just want to trash my political views. My intention is not to flare up some religion vs. political opinion debate, but to see how people feel about priests integrating their* personal *views into their homilies as though they were the"correct" or the “right” way to see it, and how you respond to it, internally or otherwise.

To begin, at our parish we have 3 priests one of which is quite liberal and has in the past gotten reprimanded for his decisions in the church, such as letting a lay woman do the homily and other things as well. That being said the other day during the homily he was talking about how many Jews rejected Christianity because they felt that it went against Jewish law. That the Jews were resistant to change because it went against what was familiar to them. Then he went on to say that this was the very attitude of resisting change and fear that crucified Christ! Then he started up about how many are fighting against health care for all because they are afraid of change. He said other similar things that I don’t remember because I was so irritated at the time. The health care issues is just one example that stood out. It seems as though he expects us to liken the people who crucified Christ to people who do not want universal health care! Because we are some how afraid and resistant to change? That we resist doing the Christian thing because its not what we are used to? I am not even gonna start on how inaccurate his point was but I am a politically conservative and a conservative Catholic and do not appreciate things like this during the homily. It was so insulting. He was so clearly interjecting his personal opinion about a social/political matter, and demonizing contrary opinions. My fiance and I were so taken aback by his words that we have discussed moving to another church because it just felt like we were being alienated or judged as being wrong for our views (which personally I feel are charitable not heartless). I have talked to several of our friends who heard this homily and they shared my feelings, so it’s not just me being overly sensitive. Thanks for your responses in advance!

i know how you feel. in my parish, the priest make this allusion towards Catholics who reject changes. changes from Traditional to a more liberal views. it is very agravating to me. they want to change the Mass to be just some protestant like service.

show him a dvd from fr. Pacwa’s homilies. it is inspiring and informative. fr. Mitch Pacwa really knows how to give a homily. He explains everything so well. it makes you understand the Bible. this is how all homilies should be.

 

[Martin_Le_Fay]

Martin , the US Bishops were against passing this health care plan. This priest spoke openly in opposition of the US Bishop’s. That’s why what he said is a problem.

I thought the only thing the bishops didn’t like about the healthcare bill was the abortion it allowed. The op didn’t say anything about the priest supporting abortion or even the healthcare bill your talking about. All the op said was that the priest was talking about “healthcare for all.” If you are saying that the bishops are teaching that not everyone is supposed to get healthcare, doesn’t that mean there was nothing wrong in denying healthcare to Terry Schaivo? Based on what the op said, it doesn’t seem like the priest went against the bishops.

If the priest is talking about people who would fight against healthcare for all when it didn’t matter how they got the healthcare, isn’t he kinda right? I mean, those kinds of people are being unreasonable and kinda selfish if they want to not let some people get healthcare so things can stay the same for themselves.

So the only thing left is that the op was offended by what the priest said because she disagreed. I mentioned that other people in my church get mad when the priest talked about condoms. It seems like its the same. Even if you said that using condoms went against church teaching so that their being angry wasn’t right, isn’t letting other people get really sick and die just so you can keep something for yourself against church teaching too?

Maybe the op has good reasons for being against healthcare. I don’t know. Its just I don’t think that you could definitely say about what the priest said that he didn’t have good reasons for what he thought to. If the op goes to another church just because she heard something she didn’t like and if we say thats right, then don’t we owe everyone who ever left the church because they heard something they didn’t like an apology?

 

[Cathryn]

My last prarish had a Deacon that wrote the prayers of the faithful and would interject his political digs into them, all regarding Pres. Bush. Then we were all to pray, Lord, here our prayer. I calmly asked the Pastor on leaving one day if it was OK to opt out of the prayers of the faithful when they are offensive. He told me “absolutely!”. I think he also told his deacon to knock it off.

 

[utah_rose]

I just wanted to know if any of you have had this happen during mass and if so how you dealt with it in any way. Please don’t respond if you just want to trash my political views. My intention is not to flare up some religion vs. political opinion debate, but to see how people feel about priests integrating their* personal *views into their homilies as though they were the"correct" or the “right” way to see it, and how you respond to it, internally or otherwise.

To begin, at our parish we have 3 priests one of which is quite liberal and has in the past gotten reprimanded for his decisions in the church, such as letting a lay woman do the homily and other things as well. That being said the other day during the homily he was talking about how many Jews rejected Christianity because they felt that it went against Jewish law. That the Jews were resistant to change because it went against what was familiar to them. Then he went on to say that this was the very attitude of resisting change and fear that crucified Christ! Then he started up about how many are fighting against health care for all because they are afraid of change. He said other similar things that I don’t remember because I was so irritated at the time. The health care issues is just one example that stood out. It seems as though he expects us to liken the people who crucified Christ to people who do not want universal health care! Because we are some how afraid and resistant to change? That we resist doing the Christian thing because its not what we are used to? I am not even gonna start on how inaccurate his point was but I am a politically conservative and a conservative Catholic and do not appreciate things like this during the homily. It was so insulting. He was so clearly interjecting his personal opinion about a social/political matter, and demonizing contrary opinions. My fiance and I were so taken aback by his words that we have discussed moving to another church because it just felt like we were being alienated or judged as being wrong for our views (which personally I feel are charitable not heartless). I have talked to several of our friends who heard this homily and they shared my feelings, so it’s not just me being overly sensitive. Thanks for your responses in advance!

We have a pastor that is the same way, He is very liberal. He made no bones that he voted for Obama because of the “health plan” and not a word about the abortion issue. Now he keeps mentioning the immigration issue. In fact, our Bishop went so far as to have cards to fill our and sent to the government about it.

I understand Christian views differ, but I think he should not be inserting these things into the homily. The homily should reflect the gospel and readings primarily.

So, although I do like him, he has no problem airing his views, so we have more or less switched to another Church, where the priest there does speak of more traditional views )ex. temptations, etc). I believe political comments could be inserted into the bulletin if he wants, but that and homilies about raising money for the Church could be handled a different way.

 

[Martin_Le_Fay]

We have a pastor that is the same way, He is very liberal. He made no bones that he voted for Obama because of the “health plan” and not a word about the abortion issue. Now he keeps mentioning the immigration issue. In fact, our Bishop went so far as to have cards to fill our and sent to the government about it.

I understand Christian views differ, but I think he should not be inserting these things into the homily. The homily should reflect the gospel and readings primarily.

So, although I do like him, he has no problem airing his views, so we have more or less switched to another Church, where the priest there does speak of more traditional views )ex. temptations, etc). I believe political comments could be inserted into the bulletin if he wants, but that and homilies about raising money for the Church could be handled a different way.

I don’t know. I WANT the priest to talk about things like abortion and condoms and stuff because they need to be talked about. So, I guess if he’s allowed to speak about those political things, he’s got to be allowed to talk about other political things, like presidents and immigration and stuff. I mean, isn’t it a cafeteria catholic who only wants to talk about certain parts of the religion and not others?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

I just wanted to know if any of you have had this happen during mass and if so how you dealt with it in any way. Please don’t respond if you just want to trash my political views. My intention is not to flare up some religion vs. political opinion debate, but to see how people feel about priests integrating their* personal *views into their homilies as though they were the"correct" or the “right” way to see it, and how you respond to it, internally or otherwise.

To begin, at our parish we have 3 priests one of which is quite liberal and has in the past gotten reprimanded for his decisions in the church, such as letting a lay woman do the homily and other things as well. That being said the other day during the homily he was talking about how many Jews rejected Christianity because they felt that it went against Jewish law. That the Jews were resistant to change because it went against what was familiar to them. Then he went on to say that this was the very attitude of resisting change and fear that crucified Christ! Then he started up about how many are fighting against health care for all because they are afraid of change. He said other similar things that I don’t remember because I was so irritated at the time. The health care issues is just one example that stood out. It seems as though he expects us to liken the people who crucified Christ to people who do not want universal health care! Because we are some how afraid and resistant to change? That we resist doing the Christian thing because its not what we are used to? I am not even gonna start on how inaccurate his point was but I am a politically conservative and a conservative Catholic and do not appreciate things like this during the homily. It was so insulting. He was so clearly interjecting his personal opinion about a social/political matter, and demonizing contrary opinions. My fiance and I were so taken aback by his words that we have discussed moving to another church because it just felt like we were being alienated or judged as being wrong for our views (which personally I feel are charitable not heartless). I have talked to several of our friends who heard this homily and they shared my feelings, so it’s not just me being overly sensitive. Thanks for your responses in advance!

Yeah, your priest is WAAAAY out of line (and I happen to support health care reform).

 

[zab]

I don’t know. I WANT the priest to talk about things like abortion and condoms and stuff because they need to be talked about.** So, I guess if he’s allowed to speak about those political things**, he’s got to be allowed to talk about other political things, like presidents and immigration and stuff. I mean, isn’t it a cafeteria catholic who only wants to talk about certain parts of the religion and not others?

Abortion, contraception, euthanasia and so on are not political issues. They are moral issues. The priest has not only a right but a duty to instruct the people as to what the church teaches on these issues. A priest or deacon does not have a right to teach anything contrary to what the church teaches.

 

[2cats]

I’ve encountered the same thing, though more subtly - and the mirror image of what you described. I tend to be “liberal” on all issues where the Church permits. One of the priests in my parish is extremely conservative (and not just on issues like abortion that re non-negotiable, so to speak). His political views tend to creep into his homilies, and even more so in the RCIA classes he taught. In RCIA, he said something about capital punishment that bothered me. I met with him afterward and quoted something from the Catechism that contradicted what he said, and he just said that the Catechism was not “official church teaching” (???), and that we could agree to disagree.

Anyway, what you described seems much more blatant. I sympathize. I’ve come to realize that this particular priest and I will probably never see eye to eye or have a rapport, but there are others in the parish with whom I’m more comfortable.

 

[Martin_Le_Fay]

Abortion, contraception, euthanasia and so on are not political issues. They are moral issues. The priest has not only a right but a duty to instruct the people as to what the church teaches on these issues. A priest or deacon does not have a right to teach anything contrary to what the church teaches.

But if healthcare isn’t a moral issue, then how is the health of a fetus, an old man or the sex people have a moral issue?

 

[GwenL]

But what about those of us who watch EWTN and find ourselves alienated by the grossly slanted political views we hear expressed there regularly? Consider Arroyo, for example, who I believe is the news director on EWTN. He always is presenting biased political opinions on his ‘Worldover’ coverage

Uh…the OP was talking about a priest giving a homily and interjecting his political views. I wasn’t aware that Raymond Arroyo had been ordained and was now giving EWTN homilies? Your argument might have merit if the homilists on EWTN Masses were giving political speeches. Are they?

Also, you can turn the TV off and even leave the room. OP is required by the Church to be at Sunday Mass. You, on the other hand, can happily turn off EWTN and turn on MSNBC or CNN or any of the other many media outlets that will be your echo chamber.

I sat through a homily a few months ago; not my parish. The readings were about the burning bush and the fig tree. The priest used this as a starting point to talk about the Amazonian rain forest that global warming is supposedly destroying. Why should I have to listen to this type of political garbage, tilted either left or right? I prayed for the priest, thinking about the opportunity he missed to teach his flock about the gospel.

Priests can and should talk about the teachings of the Church–faith and morals–and leave politics to the politicians.

 

[zab]

Lycorth

I guess we have a different idea of America. I may disagree with Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc., but I am a patriot who respects the office and is offended when people lie about a president, no matter who that president is.

For example, I liked GW Bush personally, but was very much against the invasion of Iraq (agreed with the Pope on that). One can debate the issue without becoming scurrilous about Bush, which many opponents of that war were.

In the case of Obama, I want to give him a bit more time. I do become annoyed when people try to make him out to be a Marxist and/or a cryptic Muslim who was not born in the USA. As for abortion, two thoughts. (1) I agree with those who say they ought to be as rare as possible. (2) there are extreme situations where I believe there may be a just reason for having one.

Let me illustrate briefly with these two cases familiar to me personally, and then add two comments…

(1) A downs syndrome young teen (13) was gang raped at a group home. She became pregnant. Her parents were good Catholics who in principle opposed abortion. The mother was even ready to raise the child - her daughter could not possibly have done that - but the mother had developed MS and was physically unable to. When they checked into adoption, they were told that since the baby’s mother and father were severely challenged mentally adoption was most unlikely. So they finally were convinced to have an abortion. We can judge them severely if we want to, but I don’t want to. That I will leave up to God, who is merciful.

(2) A Catholic couple I know had six children and felt that’s all they could provide for. Moreover, the mother had been warned by her doctor that another birth could easily take her life and leave six young children motherless. The couple faithfully used the church-approved birth control method which failed. The couple even consulted their priest who said the decision was between them and God. They opted for an early abortion, having heard that Augustine and others had written that the fetus did not have a soul until two or three months (I forget which). Anyway,she had an abortion and lived. We can censure that couple, but I won’t. I will leave that matter up to God, also.

(3) I am tired of religious people, pious and judgmental Catholics and Protestants both, who get irate on the issue of abortion, but are ready to remain silent or even applaud when thousands upon thousands of innocent civilians - and fine young men and women in the military - are killed in war, while certain rich people get richer. 9/11 demanded action in Afghanistan. But Iraq? And now there are those who are trying to convinced us to bomb Iran. And we have a long history of supporting undemocratic powers when they are on our side. Let’s be consistent.

(4) This is not an argument, but I have noted that most abortions are spontaneous - miscarriages. We had two, so I am personally well acquainted with them. Was God calling those little ones home - or what? I do know that babies who die or are killed spend eternity in the presence of our compassionate Christ, so that helped dry our tears. There are even those fleeting moments when I read the headlines and think that “they are the lucky ones”, especially now that limbo had been sidelined.

God bless people of every creed, color and country, and may religion serve to unite rather than divide, become a bridge and not a barrier.

This is the Liturgy and Sacraments Board. The topics on this board are not up for debate. You might want to check out the topics on other boards where your comments may be more suitable.

 

[Martin_Le_Fay]

Uh…the OP was talking about a priest giving a homily and interjecting his political views. I wasn’t aware that Raymond Arroyo had been ordained and was now giving EWTN homilies? Your argument might have merit if the homilists on EWTN Masses were giving political speeches. Are they?

Also, you can turn the TV off and even leave the room. OP is required by the Church to be at Sunday Mass. You, on the other hand, can happily turn off EWTN and turn on MSNBC or CNN or any of the other many media outlets that will be your echo chamber.

I sat through a homily a few months ago; not my parish. The readings were about the burning bush and the fig tree. The priest used this as a starting point to talk about the Amazonian rain forest that global warming is supposedly destroying. Why should I have to listen to this type of political garbage, tilted either left or right? I prayed for the priest, thinking about the opportunity he missed to teach his flock about the gospel.

Priests can and should talk about the teachings of the Church–faith and morals–and leave politics to the politicians.

That doesn’t even make sense. If you say that priests have no business talking about politics, only faith and moral, then your saying that faith and morals can never have anything to do with politics, like the way people vote or the goverment programs they support. That’s crazy. Voting for some things is bad and the priest has to tell people about that. I used to think it was only liberals who wanted to keep Jesus and the government separate.

 

[JKirkLVNV]

But if healthcare isn’t a moral issue, then how is the health of a fetus, an old man or the sex people have a moral issue?

It IS a moral issue. There simply isn’t ONE moral way of dealing with it. For the priest to suggest that there is (and to compare it to Our Lord’s Passion!) is wrong.

 

[Martin_Le_Fay]

It IS a moral issue. There simply isn’t ONE moral way of dealing with it. For the priest to suggest that there is (and to compare it to Our Lord’s Passion!) is wrong.

Ok, but I don’t know if the priest said that there was only one way of dealing with the moral issue. I thought that the whole problem that the op had was that the priest complained about the people who fought against it. Do you mean that everyone in the country who was against healthcare was against it for exactly the same reasons with no differences at all? Isn’t it possible that for some of them the reasons that they had to fight healthcare were unchristian? Or, do you mean that it doesn’t matter what reasons people had to be against healthcare because the goal that they had in mind was good?

If there was anything unchristian about it, why wouldn’t the priest want to compare it to Jesus on the cross? If Jesus dies for ALL sins then he should have died for any unchristian sin that might be involved in fighting healthcare. Its the priet’s job to point that out.

 

[zab]

Ok, but I don’t know if the priest said that there was only one way of dealing with the moral issue. I thought that the whole problem that the op had was that the priest complained about the people who fought against it. Do you mean that everyone in the country who was against healthcare was against it for exactly the same reasons with no differences at all? Isn’t it possible that for some of them the reasons that they had to fight healthcare were unchristian? Or, do you mean that it doesn’t matter what reasons people had to be against healthcare because the goal that they had in mind was good?

If there was anything unchristian about it, why wouldn’t the priest want to compare it to Jesus on the cross? If Jesus dies for ALL sins then he should have died for any unchristian sin that might be involved in fighting healthcare. Its the priet’s job to point that out.

Good food and drink can kill if it has been tainted with a few drops of poison. Which is more helpful: to warn people of possible death if they eat the tainted food or to chastise people because their reasons for being suspicious of the poisoned food may be unchristian?

 

[Martin_Le_Fay]

Good food and drink can kill if it has been tainted with a few drops of poison. Which is more helpful: to warn people of possible death if they eat the tainted food or to chastise people because their reasons for being suspicious of the poisoned food may be unchristian?

What do you mean? If your saying that providing healthcare to people who don’t have it is only like giving them poisoned food, isn’t that like saying that all food those people can get is poisoned and that they should accept starving? Worse, if you have healthcare, isn’t that like telling those same people that all the food they can get is poisoned while your munching on a bag of chips?

I’m not saying that the healthcare law is good or bad. I don’t know. What I’m saying is that the people who worked for the law wanted it because it was supposed to do something that the church teaches us we should be doing. We’re supposed to care for the sick and dying. That means healthcare.

I think that the priest we’re talking about was reminding the people in church about that. I think that’s what a priest’s supposed to do. I think he might be wrong about the best way to do it and maybe the op has a better idea, but all the op said about the priest was that he was talking about people who fought against healthcare. That means he could have been talking about people who would rather ignore the sick and the dying so that they can have good things for themselves. If your a priest, its your job to speak out against that.