Bishops too involved in US Politics?

[estesbob]

But I can not be a follower of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and His Gospel unless I place the greatest emphasis, not on where the CC places it. but on where He placed it. On issues of the poor, the hungry, the thirsty, the homeless, the sick, and war and peace.

.

Your “revelations” appear to spring more from the Democrat party platfrom than they do the teachings of the Chruch You tell us that you do not want to force your views on abortion on anyone but have no problem promoting your views on social “justice” and homosexual behavior on us. It is, of course , your chocie to reject the teachings of the church and follow any politics you want-but then you should not got in a snit when people point out what you are expousing is in direct conflict with the Chruch you swear your allegaince to.

 

[Brendan]

Not exactly. Take those considered poor in the US by defined income poverty levels. .

So you are saying that when Christ was talking about the poor in Matthew 25, He was simply referinng to defined income levels as set by the State?

So if people voted on a lower standard, say defined ‘poor’ as < $2,000 per year, that would be OK with Christ?

Or are there actually gray areas in the definition of what is ‘poor’ that Christ did not define, and are therefore open to a plurarity of opinion?

 

[CMatt25]

Your “revelations” appear to spring more from the Democrat party platfrom than they do the teachings of the Chruch You tell us that you do not want to force your views on abortion on anyone but have no problem promoting your views on social “justice” and homosexual behavior on us. It is, of course , your chocie to reject the teachings of the church and follow any politics you want-but then you should not got in a snit when people point out what you are expousing is in direct conflict with the Chruch you swear your allegaince to.

Hi again Estesbob, for some reason you seem to perhaps be having some difficulty in distinguishing the difference between when Christ’s views are clearly spelled out for us on the social justice issues and on issues where they are not. I simply do not need a church to add to His words. But I am not forcing my religious views onto you. Neither am I in even the slightest snit. God granted us free will and you are free to believe as you choose to do so. On homosexual behavior I merely have spoken in regards to it as a civil rights issue. I do however swear blind allegiance to no human. God bless you immensely my dear friend in Christ.

 

[estesbob]

Hi again Estesbob, for some reason you seem to perhaps be having some difficulty in distinguishing the difference between when Christ’s views are clearly spelled out for us on the social justice issues and on issues where they are not. I simply do not need a church to add to His words. But I am not forcing my religious views onto you. Neither am I in even the slightest snit. God granted us free will and you are free to believe as you choose to do so. On homosexual behavior I merely have spoken in regards to it as a civil rights issue. I do however swear blind allegiance to no human. God bless you immensely my dear friend in Christ.

For some reason you seem to have difficulty with the fact Christ did not appoint you to tell the rest of us what he taught on social issues. He gave us his Church to guide us in that and in all things. You are welcome to interpret Scripture all you want as long as you dont try to tell us that what you say is any way compatible with the Catholic faith

 

[CMatt25]

So you are saying that when Christ was talking about the poor in Matthew 25, He was simply referinng to defined income levels as set by the State?

So if people voted on a lower standard, say defined ‘poor’ as < $2,000 per year, that would be OK with Christ?

Or are there actually gray areas in the definition of what is ‘poor’ that Christ did not define, and are therefore open to a plurarity of opinion?

:nope: $2000 /yr would not be ok to Christ in today’s marketplace. Examples of those Christ defined as having the least among us include those having insufficient food or drink or clothing. The homeless. Those without adequate affordable healthcare. I was merely saying the current levels set are a decent guideline but if anything should not be set lower. God bless you abundantly and peace.

 

[CMatt25]

For some reason you seem to have difficulty with the fact Christ did not appoint you to tell the rest of us what he taught on social issues. He gave us his Church to guide us in that and in all things. You are welcome to interpret Scripture all you want as long as you dont try to tell us that what you say is any way compatible with the Catholic faith

Estesbob, I’m sorry if you overlooked the part where I said you have free will to believe as you choose. Obviously I don’t believe Catholic teaching is entirely compatible with what Christ taught in Scripture or else I would believe as you believe and be a fully devout perfectly practicing Catholic. I am Catholic as the Church defines Catholic and I discuss my beliefs. Peace.

 

[estesbob]

:nope: $2000 /yr would not be ok to Christ in today’s marketplace. e.

And when did Christ reveal that to you? Is there something like the Conusmer price index he uses to define the poor or does he leave that up to you?

 

[estesbob]

Estesbob, I’m sorry if you overlooked the part where I said you have free will to believe as you choose. Obviously I don’t believe Catholic teaching is entirely compatible with what Christ taught in Scripture or else I would believe as you believe and be a fully devout perfectly practicing Catholic. I am Catholic as the Church defines Catholic and I discuss my beliefs. Peace.

Why should someone put their soul at risk to reject the Church and take your word for what Christ says? Do you think that fitting the definition of a Catholic is a ticket to heaven?

 

[CMatt25]

And when did Christ reveal that to you? Is there something like the Conusmer price index he uses to define the poor or does he leave that up to you?

No Estesbob, Christ leaves it to our common sense. $2000 a yr might buy a health insurance policy but often frought with poor coverage, high unaffordable deductibles and that’s only if one is not denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions. Now lets see how much is left for food and shelter and other expenses.

 

[Brendan]

:nope: $2000 /yr would not be ok to Christ in today’s marketplace. .

So where in the Gospels does Christ set a particular income level?

You seem to accept a plurarity of views on abortion, why not on what constitutes poverty?

 

[WatchingMedia]

Estesbob, I’m sorry if you overlooked the part where I said you have free will to believe as you choose. Obviously I don’t believe Catholic teaching is entirely compatible with what Christ taught in Scripture or else I would believe as you believe and be a fully devout perfectly practicing Catholic. I am Catholic as the Church defines Catholic and I discuss my beliefs. Peace.

Matt, be careful.
You don’t have has much room to wiggle as you may think regarding Church teachings - but only if you want to be a Catholic.
See:
2089 regarding teachings of the Church;
1791 & 1792 regarding ignorance of Church teachings and sin/culpability;
2245 & 2246 regarding - the political community and the Church.

Man’s free will has gotten him into much trouble.

 

[WatchingMedia]

Be careful that you do not misinterpret Jesus.
He said we (individuals)must be charitable, not an organization, or government.
He put the responsibility squarely on each of us (as iindividuals) to the best of our ability.

 

[CMatt25]

Why should someone put their soul at risk to reject the Church and take your word for what Christ says? Do you think that fitting the definition of a Catholic is a ticket to heaven?

Estesbob, no one needs to take my word nor the CC’s interpretation of things nor the CC’s interpretation of itself for that matter. Simply take Christ’s ticket to heaven. He already gave up His life you us.

Jn 3:16 and Matt 25:35-46 gives all who care to read His words, a path to heaven.

But now you’ve ventured off track a bit by discussing me so lets allow the thread to return to its original intent. Are the bishops too involved in politics? My response was issues on which Christ spoke clearly and directly on should be where the greatest emphasis lies. And the Church has its priorities a bit out of whack at the moment. I have answered the OP’s question.

God bless and peace.

 

[CMatt25]

So where in the Gospels does Christ set a particular income level?

You seem to accept a plurarity of views on abortion, why not on what constitutes poverty?

Brendan, good luck on remaining not poor on $2000/yr. God bless!

 

[WatchingMedia]

Everyone on this thread might be interested in what the New Archbishop of LA has to say about this.
I just posted it.

Unlike Mahoney -
the good Archbishop will not be:
calling Americans Nazi’s;
incite people to march against the Governments;
and let them break the US laws if they come to him for advice.

Politics is for lay people. Right down the middle with teachings of CCC, 2nd Edition.
And the Archbishop has dual citizenship - part American and part Mexican - so no one can call him prejudiced.
Thank you Pope Benedict.

 

[estesbob]

No Estesbob, Christ leaves it to our common sense. $2000 a yr might buy a health insurance policy but often frought with poor coverage, high unaffordable deductibles and that’s only if one is not denied coverage due to pre-existing conditions. Now lets see how much is left for food and shelter and other expenses.

You claim that since Chorst never mentions abortion it is not an issue. Can you tell us where Christ demands universal health coverage?

 

[estesbob]

Estesbob, no one needs to take my word nor the CC’s interpretation of things nor the CC’s interpretation of itself for that matter. Simply take Christ’s ticket to heaven. He already gave up His life you us.

Jn 3:16 and Matt 25:35-46 gives all who care to read His words, a path to heaven.

But now you’ve ventured off track a bit by discussing me so lets allow the thread to return to its original intent. Are the bishops too involved in politics? My response was issues on which Christ spoke clearly and directly on should be where the greatest emphasis lies. And the Church has its priorities a bit out of whack at the moment. I have answered the OP’s question.

God bless and peace.

Where does Christ mention universal health care.

Let me see I can follow you:

The Church is wrong about abortion
The Church is wrong about homosexuality
The Church is wrong about how one is saved
You know this because Christ personally revealed it to you
You are a staunch Catholic

 

[Sir_Knight]

Estesbob and CathFaith1, with all due respect I’m more concerned about whether I agree with Christ not whether you or the Catholic Church agrees with me. The good of peace and social programs is these things Christ taught affect human beings already born. In their cases it is not a matter of belief as to what occurs at the moment of conception. Everyone knows they are. Peace and God’s blessings to you both.

Sorry if I am coming late to the party but you do realize that …

1. 
   *] In Matt. 16:19 & 18:18 the Church is given Christ’s authority to make visible decisions on earth that WILL BE ratified in heaven.
   
   Thus, we know that the position of Christ and the position of the Church on matters of faith and morals will ALWAYS be the SAME.
   
   *] Rejecting a fundamental teaching of the Church is called “Hersey” per Church Canon Law §751 …
   Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.
   
   *] “Heretics” are AUTOMATICLY excommunicated from the Catholic Church as declared in Canon 1364 §1 …
   “an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”
   
   *]And keep in mind that your own quote from St. Thomas Aquinas demonstrate that those who are excommunicated DO “perish” and are not saved …
   “It is better to perish in excommunication than to violate one’s conscience.” (St. Thomas Aquinas)
   
   … Wouldn’t it then be better to get one’s conscience in line with Church Teaching? After all, doesn’t the infallible Word of God refer to the Church as the defender of the truth? (1 Timothy 3:15). How could the defender of the truth teach something that was wrong?

 

[estesbob]

Sorry if I am coming late to the party but you do realize that …

1. 
   *]In Matt. 16:19 & 18:18 the Church is given Christ’s authority to make visible decisions on earth that WILL BE ratified in heaven.
   
   Thus, we know that the position of Christ and the position of the Church on matters of faith and morals will ALWAYS be the SAME.
   
   *]Rejecting a fundamental teaching of the Church is called “Hersey” per Church Canon Law §751 …
   
   Heresy is the obstinate denial or obstinate doubt after the reception of baptism of some truth which is to be believed by divine and Catholic faith; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Supreme Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.
   
   *]“Heretics” are AUTOMATICLY excommunicated from the Catholic Church as declared in Canon 1364 §1 …
   
   “an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.”
   
   *]And keep in mind that your own quote from St. Thomas Aquinas demonstrate that those who are excommunicated DO “perish” and are not saved …
   
   “It is better to perish in excommunication than to violate one’s conscience.” (St. Thomas Aquinas)
   
   … Wouldn’t it then be better to get one’s conscience in line with Church Teaching? After all, doesn’t the infallible Word of God refer to the Church as the defender of the truth? (1 Timothy 3:15). How could the defender of the truth teach something that was wrong?

1. 
   CMatt25 says he meets the definiition of a Catholic but , in his posts, invokes Sola Scriptura and Sola Fidelis while questioning the Church’s teachings on a variety of issues. I suspect he is a Baptized Catholic who no longer attends.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Actually, according to Church Canon Law §751 & §1364 ¶1, he meets the definition of an excommunicated Catholic – thus placing his soul at risk. This is not to say that those who are excommunicated are automatically damned but they are barred from any and all Church blessings and prayers for their soul.