Cardinal Dolan's Response to the Al Smith Dinner Backlash

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJD1987
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tighty_Whitey said:
It is a word that was not used lightly and reflects my sentiment. There are several posts on this site that deal specifically with the threat to religious freedom in this country and the necessity to take a stand against the tyranny of our government. The term betrayal is therefore appropriate.

If you don’t care about the HHS mandate, immigration policy and many many other issues relevant to Catholicism, then feel free to use watered-down PC terms.
Click to expand...
You do realize that Cardinal Dolan is on the forefront of the battle against the HHS mandate, don’t you?

I don’t see how wanting to show respect for our shepherds is equivalent to not caring about religious liberty and being PC. 🤷
 
Tighty_Whitey said:
Exactly, we are Americans, that’s what we do.
That’s what the world needs us for.
That is our role.
We are the leaders of the free world.
That’s the America that I believe in.
That is the America that people that yearn for freedom need.
Click to expand...
Well, then, Canadians have every right to express their opinions on this or any other issue.
 
Joe_5859 said:
You do realize that Cardinal Dolan is on the forefront of the battle against the HHS mandate, don’t you?

I don’t see how wanting to show respect for our shepherds is equivalent to not caring about religious liberty and being PC. 🤷
Click to expand...
I really thought he was and that is why this is a betrayal. He has injected chaos and rancor into this debate and provided aid to the single most important adversary in the dispute.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
And you, Sir, have gotten the Cardinal and the entire event very, very wrong. 😦
Click to expand...
No, I haven’t. We are on the verge of making the single most important decision regarding our religious freedom and the freedom that may be enjoyed by our children and this invitation discounts and ignores the significance of this. The Cardinal has made an exceedingly risky decision that calls into question his leadership on this most important issue.
 
Tighty_Whitey said:
No, I haven’t. We are on the verge of making the single most important decision regarding our religious freedom and the freedom that may be enjoyed by our children and this invitation discounts and ignores the significance of this. The Cardinal has made an exceedingly risky decision that calls into question his leadership on this most important issue.
Click to expand...
You can believe that if you like. 🤷
 
Buon apetito Cardinal Dolan. I hope your dinner with the President goes down easier than this news does for me. Oh, and the next time you call for Catholics to take a stand…oh never mind.
 
I do not like the opportunity it presents for photo ops for Obama. This dinner will be used by Democrats as propaganda for the proposition that our leading American Catholic supports Obama. If Romney is there, I hope the media fairly portrays the event as a non-political bipartisan event so American Catholics do not get the wrong idea. I do not trust how Obama and the Democrats will treat this event for one second.
 
MarMax said:
There are no limits to doing good, perhaps, but there is the proper way of directing doing good. And sometimes, one can do good in what seems like opposite ways. Right now we essentially have something like a parent inviting their child’s abuser to dinner, when there is no apology or even regret or change of heart from the abuser. That’s not “good”, that’s just bad leadership and prudence at BEST.

The explicit invitation is misdirected in its implicit intent, resulting in the implicit “good” (squeezing that drop of charity from my charity tube) being overshadowed by the explicitly BAD.
Click to expand...
So Christ sitting down with sinners isn’t similar to the analogy of a parent sitting down with the child’s abusers?
 
MidnightSun12 said:
There was no photo op when the Pope met with Obama… in fact when the Pope met with Nancy Pelosi (edit) there was a specific requirement that absolutely no photography would be allowed.

You don’t need to accept Obama with words to promote his campaign. It’s a simple fact that Obama would not be attending this dinner in the middle of an election campaign if it wasn’t to his political benefit to attend.
Click to expand...
Have you not seen the photos of when Obama visited the Pope?

Christ’s teachings are as clear as can be.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
You have no idea what tyranny is if you think that the United States government is a tyranny. 😦 😦
Click to expand...
I think it was Jefferson who said somthing like " when the people fear the goverment thats tyranny, when the government fears the people thats freedom"

I for one fear this government sorry to say. 🤷
I respect Cardinal Dolan’s decision in this matter, and I pray for him and pray he is guided by the Holy Spirit.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
You, as an American citizen, are polite to the two men because they represent the aspirations of millions of voters supporting the two political parties. Political correctness has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...
I agree with that only in cases where being polite does not hinder the expression of the Truth. If being polite resulted in the Church mis-representing its teachings or giving the impression that it condones something that it does not, then I would oppose that vehemently.
Rich_Olszewski said:
Haven’t you heard? The Church does confront evil, whether abortion, racism, unjust wars, genocide, etc. 🤷
Click to expand...
That’s great but just because a worker is doing a good job 4 days out of the week, doesn’t mean that he gets to take the 5th day off. The Church needs to be consistent in it’s opposition to intrinsic evils… and that means being consistent in both it’s action as well as appearance (lest giving scandal to sin).
 
MidnightSun12 said:
…Please tell me how it is doing Obama “good” to invite him to this dinner? If anything, it’s promoting his campaign which is just leading the man further into sin by furthering his agenda of evil.
Click to expand...
How was it bad for Christ to dine with sinners? It’s the same thing…
MidnightSun12 said:
Doing “good” for Obama would be trying to save his soul by calling out what he is doing as evil, opposing his re-election efforts and preventing any more babies from being murdered under his watch (the life of each and every one he is going to be accountable for on judgment day)… and let’s face it, that’s just not going to happen at the Al Smith fundraising dinner.
Click to expand...
Christ said do good to your enemies so that you can be like the Father. Where did Christ say, ‘the only good you can do?’ He didn’t.
MidnightSun12 said:
I honestly can’t see how we are destroying him. If anything, we are trying to help prevent the Cardinal from making a grave mistake.
Click to expand...
People see the division; challenging a decision made by a man of the Church that evidently is operating with the confidence of the Pope…
 
MidnightSun12 said:
That’s great but just because a worker is doing a good job 4 days out of the week, doesn’t mean that he gets to take the 5th day off. The Church needs to be consistent in it’s opposition to intrinsic evils… and that means being consistent in both it’s action as well as appearance (lest giving scandal to sin).
Click to expand...
Where did Christ qualify doing good to them that hate you? He didn’t.
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
Christ said do good to your enemies so that you can be like the Father. …
Click to expand...
Yes, there is a commandment to love your enemies, but I am not sure how practical it is. For example, in the case of war or in the case of someone trying to kidnap your child. How do you love someone who is shooting at you? Of course, this case is somewhat different, since Obama is not shooting at anyone, but I suppose that the analogy could be made when you bring abortion into the discussion.
 
JoeBowen7 said:
Yes, there is a commandment to love your enemies, but I am not sure how practical it is. For example, in the case of war or in the case of someone trying to kidnap your child. How do you love someone who is shooting at you? Of course, this case is somewhat different, since Obama is not shooting at anyone, but I suppose that the analogy could be made when you bring abortion into the discussion.
Click to expand...
If it’s not practical, you realize what that says about He who gave the commandment?

Where does Christ qualify ‘enemies’ and who is to be excluded?
 
Prodigal_Son1 said:
If it’s not practical, you realize what that says about He who gave the commandment?

Where does Christ qualify ‘enemies’ and who is to be excluded?
Click to expand...
Right. I don;t see any exclusion. So you are supposed to love your enemy who is shooting at you in a war? How was this done by Catholic soldiers in Vietnam, when napalm was dropped on the children of the enemy? Where was the love shown to these children who were burned horribly? this is a bit off topic, but it could relate to the abortion question and Obama.
 
JoeBowen7 said:
Right. I don;t see any exclusion. So you are supposed to love your enemy who is shooting at you in a war? How was this done by Catholic soldiers in Vietnam, when napalm was dropped on the children of the enemy? Where was the love shown to these children who were burned horribly? this is a bit off topic, but it could relate to the abortion question and Obama.
Click to expand...
We need to look at the earliest Christians for the example. That’s just my opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top