Yup, read them all. Your compassion filter on them, is much different than my logic filter on them. So I come up with different ideas than marching in lockstep with Obama. Proposing programs, based on compassion that have not worked in the past, cause more harm than good, and cannot possible work based on the application of the simplest element of logic, is not compassion. It is foolishness.
I can assure you I do NOT march in lock step with Obama. I have never voted for a democratic candidate in my entire life. The extreme dichotomies raised around this place are truly astonding at times. I believe I said that there is valid criticism on the Bishop’s stances on social justice. I am simply trying to make the point that the idea that the bishops should be quiet on these issues is absurd and that it seems rather apparent that people have not read many of the church’s documents on the subject before they spout off.
I’m not only concerned about what is demanded (a small subset of our faith) but rather what is taught. I refuse to be a minimalist and only do what the Church currently teaches is the minimum requirement for living the Catholic faith.
When people respond to your posts, you disregard the info they give you. Here it is, one more time:
Read ‘em all except for #3 which I’m still mulling over. You left out an important one: Centissimus Annus (written after Rerum Novarem.) Let us ask you a couple of questions. Why, in their desire for universal healthcare did the American bishops disregard the fundamental principle of subsidiarity which appears again and again in the earlier church encyclicals. Why, in their desire for “immigration reform” (code name) for amnesty, are they ignoring the principle of solidarity which appears again and again in earlier church encyclicals.
You have not grasped the point that what the Church teaches is generic; it is about the ends toward which we should strive, but there is nothing about the means we must use to achieve those ends. She teaches that we must be fair to immigrants, that they have rights and that we have duties toward them … but she says not one word about what that means in practice.
Well then I apologize for misunderstanding your point. However in my opinion, the USCCB has been absolutely wrong and in lockstep with Democratic Socialism most of the time when they deal with political issues. Thankfully there are a few Bishops who don’t agree with the USCCB.
Well, you guys who have read them all are definitely part of the .0001% of catholics who have. Question #1, From what I could tell, most of the Bishops’ actions in the healthcare debate was trying to promote right-to-life issues. I do know they acknowledged the need for health care reform in this country, and I have no problem with that. We do need valid healthcare reform critically since our healthcare system is likely to bankrupt us in the next decade or so. As to how they ignored the principal of subsidiarity on this issue, I can’t say. I do know it was totally ignored by Obama, Pelosi, and Co and we will pay dearly for it in the future. But I did not think this was a debate about Obama.
Question # 1) I don’t see the Bishops doing so #2) no/yes. But what does that question have to do with the Bishops?
Apology accepted, but next time try to read my point of view. I suspect, with the exception of immigration, I would agree with you guys on almost all political issues. And with immigration, I simply do not think your solution (ie simply seal the border and enforce disfunctional laws) will work. I think we need to step back and take a look at some of Bush’s proposals from the early part of the decade.
Sorry, both JP II and Benedict XVI issued social justice encyclicals. Social justice was key to them and to equate it with liberation theology is WRONG. One of Liberation theology many faults was an abandonment of many of the church’s long held social justice teachings. Catholic conservatives would serve themselves much better by coming to a better understanding of some of the principals of the church’s social justice teachings and applying their conservative principals to make them become a reality. Instead, you guys think the game plan should be to reject the whole idea of social justice, and in the process cede the whole lot of it to the liberal catholics, with very bad results.
mark, I know you apologized for misreading my original post, but considering the nature of your response, I think I am somewhat justified in making at least one rather cynical response and here it is.
Why is it lukewarm to advocate for the tenants that Jesus taught?
NO, I do not disregard their info.
But the U.S. Bishops have clearly taught some things in practice. Like their response to the Arizona law. Yes, generally, the Church teaches principles, but the Church also teaches about specific applications of principles, as warranted by contemporary circumstances.
Then substitute the word “liberal” for “you” and pretend I was talking to liberals and not yourself. I only read the post I responded to. Don’t take it personal, unless you are a liberal democrat. I apologized and now you go on the attack? .
I hardly know where to start in response to your posts. BTW, you misread my comment on the immigration issue. I stated it was contrary to solidarity (or the common good), not subsidiarity. But let’s leave that for the moment and try a different approach.
Going one step further, we can now look at a group in one diocese (Santa Fe) who has one affiliate of the IAF strongly entrenched there:
The post you responded to was written by me and had nothing to do with liberalism. But the attack is dropped. And I do apologize for the implication of dishonesty, but when I went back and read what I wrote, you response and then the disconnect of those two posts with your subsequent apology, I thought a further challenge was due. now you just want me to pretend you were not responding to me or my original post. I don’t lknow why you quoted it at the time.
Whoops, sorry about that.
But the end result:is completely contradictory with the statement that Social Justice should be equated to Liberatino Theology.