Cardinal Dolan Congratulates President Obama On Re-Election

[benjammin]

I’m really getting sick and tired of authorities in the Church putting on a happy face and offering congratulatory gestures to those who want nothing more than to marginalize the Church and force the Church to conform to the morals, or lack of morals that this country is increasingly adopting.

Is Cardinal Dolan congratulating Obama because of the fact that he is the most pro-abortion president in history? Because he is pushing abortion and birth control measures around the globe? Because he and people of his ilk have initiated the biggest legal infringements on the Catholic Church and all Catholics in this country’s history? I doubt it, so why extend congratulations to someone who wants nothing more than for you to shut your mouth and go along with the immorality? Don’t those of authority in the Church understand that as long as they do things like this, put a happy face on occasions of mourning, that no one will respect them, no one will take their statements of defiance seriously? On one side of their mouth they cry for religious liberty and non compliance with immorality, and on the other side of their mouth they congratulate the very man who is pushing all of this for retaining the office he uses to do these things.

We must love those who persecute us, but we don’t have to congratulate Caesar on his ascension to the imperial throne from which he will persecute. And I think it is damaging to the Church to do the latter.

If I was Dolan I’d say I hope you lose. Honestly Dolan’s just a liberal bishop. I think he’s a double agent. He’ll probably support the HHS mandate if we don’t watch out

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The teaching of fraternal correction, of which you speak, can be done in public if the offense was public and the public was somehow unduly scandalized and needed to know the truth for some important reason.

There’s a difference between say, the Benghazi situation, which looks like a cover-up and the papparazzi running around taking pictures of celebs misbehaving.

What does this have to do with Cardinal Dolan, or Pope Benedict, congratulating the president? And the fraternal correction applies to non Catholics? One cannot politicize the Church. It is not a democracy.

 

[frattura30]

I invite you to reread your posts in this thread.

What did Christ say about Pontius Pilate, or King Herod? Surely you realize the barbarism of the Romans who ruled over them in those days.

He gave those men He chose and appointed their instructions, and He gave instructions to the multitudes (laity) of those times.

Your first post stated: “I’m very disappointed in Cardinal Dolan. He should not have sent anything to Obama.”

A part of his message to Obama stated:

I stand by what I said, the congratulation comes off as an approval or admittance of defeat to me. I respect your opinion but we just disagree. I dont feel Christ would send congratulations to his enemies, nor should the church. Obama attended a black liberal hate theology church, ran with a known terrorist. I could go on and on, but Im not trying to come across rude but I know the Chicago way and their ilk, and how they run things.

Sorry to go off topic but I am more concerned now for the Church than ever before. The HHS mandate will force the closure of healthcare facilities all over the country. I know of one closing this coming March. His next phase will be to force Catholic facilities to perform abortions. This is nothing short of human sacrifice to the pagan god moloch.

Yes Im disappointed in the letter, but theres far more important things going on. Whatever this nation sows, so shall it reap.
God help us all.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I stand by what I said, the congratulation comes off as an approval or admittance of defeat to me. I respect your opinion but we just disagree. I dont feel Christ would send congratulations to his enemies, nor should the church. Obama attended a black liberal hate theology church, ran with a known terrorist. I could go on and on, but Im not trying to come across rude but I know the Chicago way and their ilk, and how they run things.

Sorry to go off topic but I am more concerned now for the Church than ever before. The HHS mandate will force the closure of healthcare facilities all over the country. I know of one closing this coming March. His next phase will be to force Catholic facilities to perform abortions. This is nothing short of human sacrifice to the pagan god moloch.

Yes Im disappointed in the letter, but theres far more important things going on. Whatever this nation sows, so shall it reap.
God help us all.

I don’t go in for the conspiracy theories. If I did, GWB was behind the 9/11 attacks.

The letter represented Catholic values very well, and was given in the spirit of love and charity. Cardinal Dolan filed a suit against this administration, prior to the charities dinner. He is making no concessions and the Church is lucky to have such men that have dedicated their lives to the Church.

 

[Lucky7]

No, I am not speaking against the Church. I have explained we make our opinions known to the Church, but our opinions have no authority over the authoritative men of the Church.

It’s a shame that partisanship would bring people out to criticize a good man of the Church.

And no one here has said that OUR opinions have authority over these men! Neither does Canon Law. It does say however, that we can disagree with them, speak our minds, and still not be disrespectful about that. YOU continue to imply that we are trying to be superior to them. YOU keep informing us that Christ would congratulate Obama (well, not really, but you conitnue to use Scripture references to show us that you think He would).

I have given a different Scripture reference…His getting angry and turning tables over in the Temple as a matter of asserting justice…but you have poo-pooed it. According to you, Christ wasn’t teaching us how to act then…that that episode/behavior is only allowed by Christ Himself…that we are only supposed to imitate all of His other behavior.

Nowehere do I see Him saying that only He should get angry in matters of justice. This is where the Catechism teaching comes in…getting angry, generally, is wrong. We should avoid it; however, there are times when it is necessary. I have been asked in confession when I confess to getting angry. There is anger and then there is anger. Some anger is legitimate.

 

[Lucky7]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=488779&highlight=anger

 

[frattura30]

I don’t go in for the conspiracy theories. If I did, GWB was behind the 9/11 attacks.

The letter represented Catholic values very well, and was given in the spirit of love and charity. Cardinal Dolan filed a suit against this administration, prior to the charities dinner. He is making no concessions and the Church is lucky to have such men that have dedicated their lives to the Church.

nothing i said was conspiratorial.

 

[onenow1]

I agree and did not say that. I was, however, trying to express that there is no teaching from the Church that anyone can know the disposition of another person’s soul, or conscience, except Christ. He, and ONLY He, is our judge and He will judge us all.

Hi Son Again!
Barrack Obama knows very well the Catholic Church Speaks for Jesus"s Church and probably knows the catechism better then a lot of catholics;he also knows; The Cardinal is speaking in a spiritual context and Barrack will have none of that.

Opinion: Reminds me of Satan, Satan spoke to Adam and Eve in physical reality,thus deceiving them in the spiritual,for they did not die when they ate. Barracks policies are basically the same people ate and were deceived.

God Bless

 

[frattura30]

Hi Son Again!
Barrack Obama knows very well the Catholic Church Speaks for Jesus"s Church and probably knows the catechism better then a lot of catholics;he also knows; The Cardinal is speaking in a spiritual context and Barrack will have none of that.

Opinion: Reminds me of Satan, Satan spoke to Adam and Eve in physical reality,thus deceiving them in the spiritual,for they did not die when they ate. Barracks policies are basically the same people ate and were deceived.

God Bless

well said!!

 

[frattura30]

I’m really getting sick and tired of authorities in the Church putting on a happy face and offering congratulatory gestures to those who want nothing more than to marginalize the Church and force the Church to conform to the morals, or lack of morals that this country is increasingly adopting.

Is Cardinal Dolan congratulating Obama because of the fact that he is the most pro-abortion president in history? Because he is pushing abortion and birth control measures around the globe? Because he and people of his ilk have initiated the biggest legal infringements on the Catholic Church and all Catholics in this country’s history? I doubt it, so why extend congratulations to someone who wants nothing more than for you to shut your mouth and go along with the immorality? Don’t those of authority in the Church understand that as long as they do things like this, put a happy face on occasions of mourning, that no one will respect them, no one will take their statements of defiance seriously? On one side of their mouth they cry for religious liberty and non compliance with immorality, and on the other side of their mouth they congratulate the very man who is pushing all of this for retaining the office he uses to do these things.

We must love those who persecute us, but we don’t have to congratulate Caesar on his ascension to the imperial throne from which he will persecute. And I think it is damaging to the Church to do the latter.

I couldn’t agree more. Well said.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

And no one here has said that OUR opinions have authority over these men! Neither does Canon Law. It does say however, that we can disagree with them, speak our minds, and still not be disrespectful about that. YOU continue to imply that we are trying to be superior to them. YOU keep informing us that Christ would congratulate Obama (well, not really, but you conitnue to use Scripture references to show us that you think He would).

I have given a different Scripture reference…His getting angry and turning tables over in the Temple as a matter of asserting justice…but you have poo-pooed it. According to you, Christ wasn’t teaching us how to act then…that that episode/behavior is only allowed by Christ Himself…that we are only supposed to imitate all of His other behavior.

Nowehere do I see Him saying that only He should get angry in matters of justice. This is where the Catechism teaching comes in…getting angry, generally, is wrong. We should avoid it; however, there are times when it is necessary. I have been asked in confession when I confess to getting angry. There is anger and then there is anger. Some anger is legitimate.

When you criticize men of the Church, over their decisions, you are placing your opinion as superior to their opinion. Of course Canon law states you should express your opinion, but does not specifically state ‘disagree’, and in this instance people are disagreeing and presupposing what the man of the Church should have, or should not have, done.

And Jesus judged others, and we’re supposed to be like Him? No, He gave specific instructions, judge not, lest ye be judged. Through the authoritative men of the early Church, we also know that Christ taught:

Heb 10:30 For we know him that hath said: Vengeance belongeth to me, and I will repay. And again: The Lord shall judge his people.

Righteous anger? And where does it teach that righteous anger should be expressed without love and charity?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The Cardinal offered correction, in a loving and charitable way; by offering prayers that specify corrections.

In particular, we pray that you will exercise your office to pursue the common good, especially in care of the most vulnerable among us, including the unborn, the poor, and the immigrant.We will continue to stand in defense of life, marriage, and our first, most cherished liberty, religious freedom.We pray, too, that you will help restore a sense of civility to the public order, so our public conversations may be imbued with respect and charity toward everyone.

But it appears some did not want this message given to the supporter of intrinsic evil. Some suggested it would be ignored. Do we withhold correction because we ‘assume’ one will reject it?

 

[Teelynn]

There was a piece recently on his note which pointed out how similar this was to the one he sent in 2008.

In particular, the first and last parts were identical.

But where the Cardinal now says “We will continue to stand in defense of life, marriage, and [religious liberty]”, in 2008 he worded this more as “stand with us [in defense of life, marriage, and [religious liberty]]”, similar to the inviting language used here for pursuing the common good and restoring civility. So on those original three points, formerly the language was inviting, but now it is subtly, but clearly, adversarial.

I continue to be amazed at the people who thing the Cardinal is a modernist lapdog. He knows exactly what he is doing. Time will only tell whether he was as effective as he could have been, but there is no doubt the man is faithful and an asset in the New Evangielization, not a liability.

I agree with you, but I do believe that there are those who are so convinced that this tactic will never work, that it is a ridiculous notion, and they are overreacting a tad. I myself have serious doubts that Obama will cave on his original mandate, or even compromise at all. I do believe they want to minimize any power that the Church in the US has. They see the Church as being “in their way”.

In any case, Cardinal Dolan has gone by the notion that you “can attract more bees with honey than with vinegar.” Who knows? It just may work with a lot of prayer. One thing is for sure, he is trying to sway things the Church’s way. I don’t see this as being at all unfaithful, I’m just a doubting Thomas as to the effectiveness. (especially with this President!)

 

[Candescent]

I stand by what I said, the congratulation comes off as an approval or admittance of defeat to me. I respect your opinion but we just disagree. I dont feel Christ would send congratulations to his enemies, nor should the church.

I also think that there is a big difference in being rude or uncharitable, and in giving congratulations. I looked up the word in 3 dictionaries and found= 1-an expression of approval and commendation, 2- an expression of joy in the success of another, and 3- word for expressing praise for an achievement. So yes, I agree with the above poster that this message will come off to many people as approval.

 

[Lucky7]

When you criticize men of the Church, over their decisions, you are placing your opinion as superior to their opinion. Of course Canon law states you should express your opinion, but does not specifically state ‘disagree’, and in this instance people are disagreeing and presupposing what the man of the Church should have, or should not have, done.

When we are told we can express our opinions, then its a pretty good chance that that opinion will be different than the one expressed by the pastors of the Church. Or are we only allowed to express opinions that agree with them? That doesn’t even make sense.

And as far as I can tell, no one has been uncharitable here towards Cardinal Dolan.

I’m done here.

I respectfully disagree with congratulating Obama. I would like to see our Church be tougher and start turning over some tables. And that includes not only how we interact with Obama but how we interact with other Catholics who support things that go against Church teaching.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

When we are told we can express our opinions, then its a pretty good chance that that opinion will be different than the one expressed by the pastors of the Church. Or are we only allowed to express opinions that agree with them? That doesn’t even make sense.

And as far as I can tell, no one has been uncharitable here towards Cardinal Dolan.

I’m done here.

I respectfully disagree with congratulating Obama. I would like to see our Church be tougher and start turning over some tables. And that includes not only how we interact with Obama but how we interact with other Catholics who support things that go against Church teaching.

It’s something to see the extent of some people’s dislike of the president, to a point they would turn their critical attention on men of the Church.

Desiring to see ‘tables overturned’ seems to be a desire for vengeance, or public humiliation.

Then to view other Catholics as not as righteous as ourselves just seems wrong as well.

Christ definitely taught forgiveness for others, as we want to be forgiven. Maybe we could agree to pass a little of that around.

 

[Lucky7]

It’s something to see the extent of some people’s dislike of the president, to a point they would turn their critical attention on men of the Church.

Desiring to see ‘tables overturned’ seems to be a desire for vengeance, or public humiliation.

Then to view other Catholics as not as righteous as ourselves just seems wrong as well.

Christ definitely taught forgiveness for others, as we want to be forgiven. Maybe we could agree to pass a little of that around.

Actually my issues go beyond Obama, so it isn’t about dislike for a president. I can’t speak for anyone else.

If tables overturned was not vengeance for Christ why would it have to be for the Church? Of course, it doesn’t.

I think you and I will never see eye to eye on this, so like I said before, I’m done here. We’re just going around in circles.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Actually my issues go beyond Obama, so it isn’t about dislike for a president. I can’t speak for anyone else.

If tables overturned was not vengeance for Christ why would it have to be for the Church? Of course, it doesn’t.

I think you and I will never see eye to eye on this, so like I said before, I’m done here. We’re just going around in circles.

Yes it’s circular. I just wish people would consider their criticisms before casting them towards authoritative men of the Church, who have dedicated their entire lives to Christ, just because they used a congratulations as an opportunity to state a Catholic stance on important issues…

 

[onenow1]

Yes it’s circular. I just wish people would consider their criticisms before casting them towards authoritative men of the Church, who have dedicated their entire lives to Christ, just because they used a congratulations as an opportunity to state a Catholic stance on important issues…

The Cardnal is not a politician,he could do very little else, His message was true to the Gospel. What else could he do ? After all catholics are thought, to be too dogmatic by a lot of folks,including some Catholics.We must remember the Holy Spirit will act in His time not our clock.

Peace and God Bless.

 

[frattura30]

It’s something to see the extent of some people’s dislike of the president, to a point they would turn their critical attention on men of the Church.

Desiring to see ‘tables overturned’ seems to be a desire for vengeance, or public humiliation.

Then to view other Catholics as not as righteous as ourselves just seems wrong as well.

Christ definitely taught forgiveness for others, as we want to be forgiven. Maybe we could agree to pass a little of that around.

Everyone here made an opinion, and quite frankly its healthy to question. The Church took a stand during the Crusades, there was a physical response to an evil. It was necessary. Im certain the church did not congratulate the muslims when they took Sicily and Spain.

I thought earlier it was odd that you had no idea what God would do. Someone who has over 9000 comments has no idea what God would do. The Holy Spirit speaks to us, its that quiet yet firm voice within us that say, wait a minute, would Christ do what he did?

I think some hear the shepherds voice and some don’t.

In the spirit of Christ YES we are to forgive we get it, but that doesn’t mean we should hand the keys of our house to a thief!!!

This is the end for me.