T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
I don’t know if cestus meant this, but my reservations about JFK (may he rest in peace) come from what I have read about his wrongful interpretation of what his Catholicism was or meant. He was so busy telling the world that he wasn’t the Pope’s lackey, or that he was just like any other person, that he fell into the trap of the relativists. I believe Gov. Mario Cuomo did the same, with his “I am personally opposed to abortion, but I would not legislate my morality on somebody else”–both Cuomo and Kennedy wanted to have their Catholicism as a personal “set of values” but not to act on it. They were politicians who happened to be Catholic, in their minds, rather than Catholics who happened to be politicians.Father, what’s your beef with President Kennedy’s faith?
If you don’t put your Catholic faith first, and your job/vocation/calling second, you run the risk of denying your faith. It’s the “servant with two masters” problem–you hate the one and love the other. You cannot serve both the world and God. You can serve the world through God, but the corollary is not necessarily true that you can serve God through the world. Mostly, there will come a time where you will have to make a choice.
President Kennedy, when faced with upholding Catholicism, in all good “faith” no doubt decided that he would best serve his faith by downplaying it, minimizing it, relativising it, narrowing the focus on it, ecumenizing it. I’m sure that he tried his best, as a man and as a President, as shown by some of the very great things he did and the ideals he espoused in his speeches about service, etc., but he actually did Catholicism more harm by attempting to make it quasi-Protestant by focusing on values and relativism, IMO.