Archbishop Warns Obama: You’ll Cause 'Conflict Between Church and State of Enormous Proportions’

[Swiss_Guy]

The Middle Ages were basically feudal in nature, which is just a step above organized anarchy. Private wars, and self contained manses were the order of the day in the Middle Ages. The rise of nationalism and absolute monarchies brought something somewhat more large in the way of government, and Bismark increased this trend, but these governments arose as often as not opposed to papal power than in obedience to it.

If it is a relatively large government, it is not a Catholic one. Subsidiarity entails keeping governance as local as possible, and that is pretty much dogma. Large totalitarian theocratic government cannot by definition then, be a Catholic one. Like Catholics who support the leftist agenda of abortion rights and redefining marriage in the name of “compassion” such a government would be Catholic in name only, but would otherwise be heretical according to Catholic doctrine.

The middle ages were better than now - at least the early middle ages.

And I don’t mean a socialist government.never mind.

What I think I meant was that I don’t really care if we have a big or small government. But when I say big I don’t mean socialism, etc. Cause honestly, here in the US, I want a smaller government.

Looking back, I don’t really know what I was thinking when I wrote that. So never mind.

 

[Darryl1958]

The middle ages were better than now - at least the early middle ages.

And I don’t mean a socialist government.never mind.

From my understanding, much that was written about the Middle Ages as being the ‘Dark Ages’ was written from the pen of a very anti-Catholic Protestant perspective. Central government nevertheless was destroyed by the Germanic invasions of the Roman Empire, so even as Catholic belief was universal, papal authority was very limited in what it could do as a ‘government’.

What I think I meant was that I don’t really care if we have a big or small government. But when I say big I don’t mean socialism, etc. Cause honestly, here in the US, I want a smaller government.

Well, I do care about the existence of big government. A non-socialist big government, if anything, may well be worse in that it is totally indifferent to the rights of its subjects.
Some people on these forums tout the government of Franco of Spain as a shining example of a Catholic government. It makes me shudder every time.

Looking back, I don’t really know what I was thinking when I wrote that. So never mind.

You should have said this first, before I constructed my reply.

If by big government, you meant Yaweh for President, that would be big and totally unobjectionable by me too.

God indeed was much bigger in people’s lives in the Middle Ages than now. Their faith had no limits and the culture flowered and grew into something unprecedented as a result. Catholics need feel nothing but awe when considering how God refashioned Europe into a vibrant, fearless Christian people during this time.
As God shrinks in our modern lives, as the Church becomes ever smaller, so do we as individuals, as peoples, and as nations.

Europe is shrinking into oblivion and so will North America, without God. Big government displaces God, becomes a new god even, feeding us, clothing us, providing us with shelter and education and a code of conduct, displacing what God and Church provided us with in the past.
The bigger the government, the smaller the gods that rule over us. Even a lowly serf of the Middle Ages had more of a meaningful and necessary role than the cogs in the machinery of big government that us moderns have now become.

 

[Swiss_Guy]

From my understanding, much that was written about the Middle Ages as being the ‘Dark Ages’ was written from the pen of a very anti-Catholic Protestant perspective. Central government nevertheless was destroyed by the Germanic invasions of the Roman Empire, so even as Catholic belief was universal, papal authority was very limited in what it could do as a government.

The pope got to influence the government more once Charlemagne was around. But the leaders got more corrupt after that I think.

Well, I do care about the existence of big government. a non-socialist big government, if anything, may well be worse in that it is totally indifferent to its subjects.
Some people on these forums tout the government of Franco of Spain as a shining example of a Catholic government. It makes me shudder every time.

It doesn’t have to be indifferent.

You should have said this first, before I constructed my reply.
If by big government, you meant Yaweh for President, that would be big and totally unobjectionable by me too.

God indeed was much bigger in people’s lives in the Middle Ages than now. Their faith had no limits and the culture flowered and grew into something unprecedented as a result. Catholics need feel nothing but awe when considering how God refashioned Europe into a vibrant, fearless Christian people during this time.
As God shrinks in our modern lives, as the Church becomes smaller, so do we as individuals, as peoples and as nations.

Europe is shrinking into oblivion and so will North America, without God. Big government displaces God, becomes a new god even feeding us, clothing us, providing us with shelter and education and a code of conduct. The bigger the government, the smaller the gods that rule over us. Even a lowly serf of the Middle Ages had more of a meaningful and necessary role than the cogs in the machinery of big government that us moderns have become.

Hehe, yeah.

I cringe just a little everytime I hear something like our world is better than it was back in something something AD (like 600). It was much better for the church back then than it is now. At least it was improving for the Church.

yep, I agree. Generally today, people will start relying on the government for help, not God and His Church, with all of the long term welfare stuff, etc.

 

[donsnow]

This is why even what is seen as legitimate regulation by both parties is a path to tyranny. This is no slippery slope but a proven reality as this administration is proving. A president is allowed to shut down all public and private activity he does not agree with. This is what tolerance has brought us to. I do not blame the Democrats totally, just mostly. If this trend does not stop at the polls, we will see bishops, priests and lay Catholics arrested and imprisoned for being faithfully Catholic within a generation.

Good afternoon, pnewton,

I sadly agree.

God loves you,
Don

 

[donsnow]

Good afternoon, Bro. JR, OSF,

Thank you, for all your posts. I find them edifying and sometimes uplifting. Please, don’t stop.

God loves you and yours,
Don

 

[donsnow]

Good afternoon, Swiss Guy,

Thank you for your posts to me. I appreciate the support. I also enjoy your posts.

God loves you,
Don

 

[JohnPRoco]

Obama’s administration has empowered gay movement groups enormously. The “Every Child Deserves a Family Act” which several years ago was considered a liberal whim, now, as introduced in May 2011, is HR 1681 introduced by Pete Stark (D-CA) and would eliminate Catholic Charities adoption and foster care across the United states of America, as just on a smaller scale happened in Illinois. It currently has 70 co-sponsors, and only has been growing in co-sponsorship. Here is the 2 minute flashy vid of HR 1681 goals:

youtube.com/watch?v=wvscfsqiX8Y

And here is the 18 minute video going into depth into underlying issues of HR 1681:

youtube.com/watch?v=QAFfNMbVW7s

 

[Swiss_Guy]

Good afternoon, Swiss Guy,

Thank you for your posts to me. I appreciate the support. I also enjoy your posts.

God loves you,
Don

thanks.

 

[Teelynn]

The bigger the government, the smaller the Church.

Spot on. You got it.

 

[JReducation]

Good afternoon, Bro. JR, OSF,

Thank you, for all your posts. I find them edifying and sometimes uplifting. Please, don’t stop.

God loves you and yours,
Don

My community expects me to take a break to pray with them. LOL

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[CMatt25]

Of course not. Only persons can be Catholic and a nation is not a person. However, American Catholics do have a right and responsibility to participate in the political process and form the nation by Catholic principles. There is no conflict between that responsibility and the Establishment Clause.

Of course they have a right to participate as do persons of other faiths and beliefs in a nation of many, many faiths, beliefs, and even non belief. Take Americans who are Christians in the United Church of Christ for instance whose denomination endorses same sex marriage. They too then have as much a right as Catholics do to participate in the political process and attempt to shape a nation based on their beliefs as well.

 

[Donna_Maria]

Thank you for your reply, Br. JR.

Almost every major diocese that had an adoption service has closed it. Those religious orders that still own their colleges and universities are talking about closing them. Some dioceses no long offer benefit packages to their employees in order to avoid paying insurance for same-sex coupltes. Employees have to buy their own policies. Some Catholic hospitals are alrady talking about stopping all OB/GYN services. Several religious superiors have already stated that they will pull their religious from hospitals and schools that force them to buy into these proposals. The laity will have to take over or close them.

I was afraid of that.

I told my brothers that we can move into apostolates that do not require us to hire lay people. We’ll just have less pregnancy centers, shelters, homes for the dying and youth services. We’ll work with volunteers instead of paid staff. We won’t offer any medical care. When you reduce your staff to volunteers, you also have to reduce your hours and the number of facilities that you run.

I’m not sure I understand: how is not hiring lay people going to help? Is it because the government won’t interfere with apostolates? Sorry for my ignorance, but I guess I am trying to comprehend all the details. My mind is totally flabbergasted of how Americans are allowing this to occur. Our religious freedom is in jeopardy and it seems that few care.

What saddens me is that I get the feeling that for many Catholics, as long as they have their Sunday mass, they don’t really care about all of the other apostolic works that religious and clergy provide. If these other works close down, it makes little difference ot some people. That’s sad. Every Catholic should care about the apostolate, even if it does not benefit you directly.

So true. I also get the feeling that Catholics either don’t know about these issues or are in agreement with the secular mindset.

 

[JReducation]

I’m not sure I understand: how is not hiring lay people going to help? Is it because the government won’t interfere with apostolates? Sorry for my ignorance, but I guess I am trying to comprehend all the details. My mind is totally flabbergasted of how Americans are allowing this to occur. Our religious freedom is in jeopardy and it seems that few care.
.

The new laws are going to require employers to offer insurance for contraception and abortion, probably same-sex couples too. The last point is yet to be decided.

If we run our services with volunteers, we don’t have to provide health benefits, life insurance, and family leave. We can decide who can volunteer and who cannot, without being accused of discrimination in hiring.

Of course, you realize this means that everyone whom we employ now will be unemployed. The government and those who support these plans are not thinking about this part. There will be thousands of people unemployed. The Church in the USA employes well over one milliion lay people of all faiths, not just Catholics.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[Darryl1958]

Most if not all Catholic hospitals in Canada have already gotten out of the business due to requirements to provide abortion services. However, the Canadian health care system which everybody pays into, does provide abortion etc. The Catholic Church has basically sucked it up and pays the medical premiums, inasmuch as they exist in the specific province, for those that they employ.

In America though, the issue of abortion has been held at a white hot level for quite some time now. I am not one bit surprised then that the American Catholic Church will resort to becoming 100% volunteer rather than monetarily supporting abortion in any way.

It is a grim situation.

 

[kslat]

Good morning, kslat,

Oh, I see what you’re saying. Had to read your opening line about three times.

No, that’s not what I meant: same sex marriage is unjust and infringes the freedom from militant gays who want to be more equal. The perfect liberty in Christ Jesus to practice a Christian life without being called homophobes.
I sincerely think that gays have always had the same civil rights as any other segment of the population: to vote, right to equal housing, and equal opportunity of employment. That’s civil rights. They’ve always had the same criminal rights, when arrested. All those other ‘rights’ they’re wailing about are imaginary.

God loves you,
Don

Heh, sorry…I’m inherently confusing…

Awesome. I’m totally with you on that front. Plus, there’s no such thing as “couple’s rights.” I love that line…

 

[JReducation]

Most if not all Catholic hospitals in Canada have already gotten out of the business due to requirements to provide abortion services. However, the Canadian health care system which everybody pays into, does provide abortion etc. The Catholic Church has basically sucked it up and pays the medical premiums, inasmuch as they exist in the specific province, for those that they employ.

In America though, the issue of abortion has been held at a white hot level for quite some time now. I am not one bit surprised then that the American Catholic Church will resort to becoming 100% volunteer rather than monetarily supporting abortion in any way.

It is a grim situation.

What we’re afraid will happen in the USA is the same thing as in Canada and UK. The Church has been enslaved by the state. The one thing that the Church cannot close are parishes. Religious orders can pull out. We don’t have a commitment to run parishes. We can run other ministries that don’t require employees.

Bishops have to run parishes. Parishes require staff. If you’re in a country that requires that you pay these premiums or they’ll close your parishes, you’re stuck, unless we start digging catacombs again.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[mystagogia]

Health care policy in the United States today requires that birth control and abortion services be made available to women free of charge. These things must happen by 2014. Some religious exemptions were written into the law to allow for religious institutions to be exempt from these requirements.

As it turns out, the Catholic Church is not a religious institution that qualifies for these exceptions under the law. This comes as no little shock to a great many everywhere.

Obama has touted his pride in this accomplishment publicly and without sympathy toward Catholic sentiment.

He gotcha.

 

[Raskolnikov]

The new laws are going to require employers to offer insurance for contraception and abortion, probably same-sex couples too. The last point is yet to be decided.

If we run our services with volunteers, we don’t have to provide health benefits, life insurance, and family leave. We can decide who can volunteer and who cannot, without being accused of discrimination in hiring.

Of course, you realize this means that everyone whom we employ now will be unemployed. The government and those who support these plans are not thinking about this part. There will be thousands of people unemployed. The Church in the USA employes well over one milliion lay people of all faiths, not just Catholics.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

I’ve always wondered in amazement at two things. As one who thinks some measure of universal healthcare is not a bad idea, I cannot understand how anyone can view abortion or contraception as health care, let alone necessary health care. Even igoring all moral discussions, abortion and contraception are unnecessary commodities, not by any stretch of the imagination in the same category as heart surgery and flu vaccines.

And the second thing, I would think any thoughtful person, no matter how avidly in favor of gay marriage, would see that the benefits provided by Catholic ministries to society far outway any cost they percieve from discrimination. It seems rather petty to insist on shutting down charities for such an insignificant reason.

 

[Darryl1958]

What we’re afraid will happen in the USA is the same thing as in Canada and UK. The Church has been enslaved by the state. The one thing that the Church cannot close are parishes. Religious orders can pull out. We don’t have a commitment to run parishes. We can run other ministries that don’t require employees.

Bishops have to run parishes. Parishes require staff. If you’re in a country that requires that you pay these premiums or they’ll close your parishes, you’re stuck, unless we start digging catacombs again.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Like in China, where the Church at least metaphorically exists underground.

 

[JReducation]

I’ve always wondered in amazement at two things. As one who thinks some measure of universal healthcare is not a bad idea, I cannot understand how anyone can view abortion or contraception as health care, let alone necessary health care. Even igoring all moral discussions, abortion and contraception are unnecessary commodities, not by any stretch of the imagination in the same category as heart surgery and flu vaccines.

And the second thing, I would think any thoughtful person, no matter how avidly in favor of gay marriage, would see that the benefits provided by Catholic ministries to society far outway any cost they percieve from discrimination. It seems rather petty to insist on shutting down charities for such an insignificant reason.

You’ve stated two great truths my child.

First, pregnancy is not an illness. Therefore, abortion and contraception are not healthcare.

Second, if you count the number of gay couples that would be denied adoption by Catholic Charities and the number of straight couples that would be granted adoption, the latter number far exceeds the former. It’s not as if the Church is saying, “No one can give a child to a gay couple.” The Church does not have the jurisdiction to say this. The Church is saying, "We can’t do this, because of the implications.

People often take this further than it has to go. I’ve heard even conservative Catholics say dumb things like, “The child will be damaged”. Stop the presses. You can’t say that, because we don’t know. How many children are there with same-sex parents?

The Church’s position is from another angle. It’s not about speculation. It’s about a reality. A married couple is a man and a woman. The Church does not place children in homes of straight couples who are not married either.

All of these people may make lovely parents. Who knows? That’s not the problem.

The problem is that we cannot recognize what is not as if it were. A couple that is not married, is not married, period. In fact, the Church does not have a policy against single people adopting. We’ve even had priests who have adopted children and been single dads. A single relative will often adopt an orphaned nephew or niece.

It’s the idea of placing a child into a home where there is an alleged married couple is lying to the child. That’s an injustice. It’s also lying to the couple. It’s telling the couple that it’s something that it’s not. That’s another injustice.

Like in China, where the Church at least metaphorically exists underground.

I’m just glad that I’m too old to live long enough to see that.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF