Confirmed: Obama, Romney to attend Al Smith dinner [CWN]

[Rich_Olszewski]

As well as an Obama commercial in which he’s pictured with Cardinal Dolan – to the confusion of the faithful, which is exactly Obama’s purpose.

No, it’s not IMO, except to those who see a conspiracy in everything. He’s going to the dinner because it’s traditional for both parties’ candidates to attend, and to mix with the Cardinal and his bunch in a friendly environment. Should be a win-win for Church and State - at least that once.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I expect after a nice, polite dinner, we’ll see commercial from a Super PAC claiming Romney is reponsible for Al Smith’s passing.

But I thought Al Smith’s death was Bush’s fault! (Maybe I’m not updated or something)

 

[RobbyS]

I know people have issues with this and I understand that, but I think the Cardinal is right. You don’t close off dialogue with those you disagree with, you keep the lines of communication open.

We are Catholic and we do not hate the sinner. We pray and work and hope that the sinner will find conversion.

Dialogue is a much abused term. We can talk to Muslims all day. but not dialogue with their leaders. They don’t dialogue, they only dictate. Obama is pretty much the same. He was invited to Notre Dame, honored there, and has broken his promises to respect religious liberty. The fact that he appointed Sebelius to be head of HHS and has now given her the authority to dictate terms to the bishops makes it clear that whatever honied words he utters, he is an enemy of the Church. But the fact that Obama was invited has another effect. It disheartens those of us who are waiting for the bishops to take a stand. Politicians spit in their face and they accept it, even Catholic politicians who owe obedience to their teachings but unapologetically refuse to obey.

 

[RobbyS]

No, it’s not IMO, except to those who see a conspiracy in everything. He’s going to the dinner because it’s traditional for both parties’ candidates to attend, and to mix with the Cardinal and his bunch in a friendly environment. Should be a win-win for Church and State - at least that once.

On two previous occasions the candidates were not there. If the Archbishop wishes to be neutral, he can follow that precedent. Talk about mixed signals!

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Mat 11:19 The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say: Behold a man that is a glutton and a wine drinker, a friend of publicans and sinners. And wisdom is justified by her children.

Mar 2:16 And the scribes and the Pharisees, seeing that he ate with publicans and sinners, said to his disciples: Why doth your master eat and drink with publicans and sinners?
Mar 2:17 Jesus hearing this, saith to them: They that are well have no need of a physician, but they that are sick. For I came not to call the just, but sinners.

 

[PJD1987]

Quite frankly, I don’t believe the Bible quotes there are comparable to the current situation.

God bless.

-Paul

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Quite frankly, I don’t believe the Bible quotes there are comparable to the current situation.

God bless.

-Paul

I see similarities. Christ publicly put Himself into the company of sinners in those days, and an authorized man of His Church publicly puts himself into the company of sinners in present times.

It seems some in this thread would just as soon see a complete separation, which seems to be ‘giving up’ on another individual. That’s all the president is; another individual, no greater or no less than any other person in the eyes of God. Correction cannot come without contact.

 

[PJD1987]

I see similarities. Christ publicly put Himself into the company of sinners in those days, and an authorized man of His Church publicly puts himself into the company of sinners in present times.

It seems some in this thread would just as soon see a complete separation, which seems to be ‘giving up’ on another individual. That’s all the president is; another individual, no greater or no less than any other person in the eyes of God. Correction cannot come without contact.

He’s just another person…with a lot of power to persecute. Which is what he is doing, there is a time for everything under the sun. The time for talking has passed. I think this Bible verse is much more applicable, Matthew 18:15-17

“If your brother sins [against you], go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.*

We have tried “dialogue” with this man, and he continually makes fools of us, lies to us, persecutes us, and does his best to relegate us to a private hobby with as few rights as possible. Forcing us against our consciences.

Yes, talk with sinners we do, and we have, but at this point, it is painfully obvious Mr. Obama is not interested in anything but disrespecting us.

God bless.

-Paul

 

[PJD1987]

I’d like to add. It is not a matter of “giving up” on him, we should pray for him, he certainly needs it, but the position he holds now is not conducive to a healthy dialogue without continued harm to our faith, and the salvation of many other souls in this country. His is certainly not the only one that needs conversion, all of us are called to a deeper conversion, he is actively working against our ability to do that, to live out our faith, and has placed himself as an enemy of the Church as someone said.

God bless.

-Paul

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Don’t you think there were those who thought Christ’s choice of company was detrimental to His ministry? Christ even pointed that out in what He said.

As for His Church having enemies, we can rest assured that not even the gates of hell shall prevail against it.

 

[PJD1987]

Don’t you think there were those who thought Christ’s choice of company was detrimental to His ministry? Christ even pointed that out in what He said.

As for His Church having enemies, we can rest assured that not even the gates of hell shall prevail against it.

When brought before the unjust authorities, Jesus did not throw them a party and tell jokes with them, he largely remained silent before them. I think there is a marked difference between individual sinners and obstinate enemies of the Church that are not open to conversion and see it as part of their mission to persecute. I understand the logic of your point, I just do not think that it is a comparable situation. The Church welcomes sinners in a spirit of charity, but there is nothing wrong with calling out people for their true intention of propogating evil and diminishing the Church as much as they can. I simply believe the passage I quoted, along with Jesus’ actions before the unjust authorities is a much stronger comparison for the crisis we are facing in this scenerio.

God bless.

-Paul

 

[exoflare]

But I thought Al Smith’s death was Bush’s fault! (Maybe I’m not updated or something)

The second part of that commercial will reveal that Romney IS Bush!

I use the word “reveal” loosely, as most of the Obama supporters who even pay attention to these commercials already believe this anyway.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

He’s just another person…with a lot of power to persecute. Which is what he is doing, there is a time for everything under the sun. The time for talking has passed. I think this Bible verse is much more applicable, Matthew 18:15-17

“If your brother sins [against you], go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.*

We have tried “dialogue” with this man, and he continually makes fools of us, lies to us, persecutes us, and does his best to relegate us to a private hobby with as few rights as possible. Forcing us against our consciences.

Yes, talk with sinners we do, and we have, but at this point, it is painfully obvious Mr. Obama is not interested in anything but disrespecting us.

God bless.

-Paul

As bad as we see his decisions are, I really don’t think they are intended to be against us individually. As we’ve gone to try and understand this situation through scriptures, we have to remember that Christ taught us to love our enemies.

Moving on beyond that, I see the Cardinal’s actions being questioned in this thread. Didn’t the Pope receive the Obama’s into his company?

Cardinal Dolan met with Obama on the Church’s behalf in 2011. It was after that, in 2012, that the Pope elevated Dolan’s position to Cardinal.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Don’t you think there were those who thought Christ’s choice of company was detrimental to His ministry? Christ even pointed that out in what He said.

As for His Church having enemies, we can rest assured that not even the gates of hell shall prevail against it.

To my certain knowledge, Jesus did not invite the woman at the well to dinner, let alone the wild man of Gerasa. He did admonish the woman and separated the wild man from his demons. He neither pretended their conditions were “okay”, nor did He cause others to think He was condoning such things.

Consequently, it is difficult for one to think well of Obama at the Al Smith dinner in the absence of either a miracle cure or a clear and public rebuke being given then and there, lest people be deceived into thinking the Cardinal approves his immorality and his forcing immorality on the Church.

And notwithstanding that the gates of hell will not prevail over the Church, they can certainly prevail over individuals, and we should not condone anything evil does to deceive them. How did Jesus put it “…it were better for him that he tied a millstone around his neck and cast himself into the sea than to scandalize my little ones…” Isn’t that what he said?

Perhaps the good Cardinal has a rebuke prepared. One hopes he does.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

To my certain knowledge, Jesus did not invite the woman at the well to dinner, let alone the wild man of Gerasa. He did admonish the woman and separated the wild man from his demons. He neither pretended their conditions were “okay”, nor did He cause others to think He was condoning such things.

Consequently, it is difficult for one to think well of Obama at the Al Smith dinner in the absence of either a miracle cure or a clear and public rebuke being given then and there, lest people be deceived into thinking the Cardinal approves his immorality and his forcing immorality on the Church.

And notwithstanding that the gates of hell will not prevail over the Church, they can certainly prevail over individuals, and we should not condone anything evil does to deceive them. How did Jesus put it “…it were better for him that he tied a millstone around his neck and cast himself into the sea than to scandalize my little ones…” Isn’t that what he said?

Perhaps the good Cardinal has a rebuke prepared. One hopes he does.

Christ handled all His adversaries on His terms. He never turned it over to His disciples, or the multitudes that followed Him. Christ addressed those that might think He approved the morality of the sinners and publicans He was in the company of.

Christ is the judge of all, including leaders of this world. The fate worst than the millstone would be addressed by God. No one was appointed that charge.

I trust in the authoritative men of the Church, through faith in Christ and His promises.

The New Testament repeats a steady message of staying strong in faith and avoiding dissension and wolves in sheep’s clothing. For all we know we are being tested to see if we still hear His voice and trust in Him to deliver us.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Christ handled all His adversaries on His terms. He never turned it over to His disciples, or the multitudes that followed Him. Christ addressed those that might think He approved the morality of the sinners and publicans He was in the company of.

Christ is the judge of all, including leaders of this world. The fate worst than the millstone would be addressed by God. No one was appointed that charge.

I trust in the authoritative men of the Church, through faith in Christ and His promises.

The New Testament repeats a steady message of staying strong in faith and avoiding dissension and wolves in sheep’s clothing. For all we know we are being tested to see if we still hear His voice and trust in Him to deliver us.

Yes, yes, we know all of that.

But we have no moral obligation to condone abortion, homosexual marriage or persecution of the Church or act as if we do. There will be people who will see Obama being feted at the dinner as a tacit condonation, even as a surrender to evil. Unless the Cardinal intends a clear message of disapproval at the event, then I say he’s making a mistake, Cardinal or no Cardinal, and needs to think it out some more.

I do have faith, however, that he will express what he surely thinks about this latter-day Nero’s persecution of the Church.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I think it is worth mentioning that, despite the obvious risk of scandalization of the faithful, this decision begets the opportunity for Cardinal Dolan to have a little private chat with Obama and Romney, which may bear some sort of fruit.

Not proper protocol and I doubt Cardinal Dolan is so naive that he would think he can take the president off to the side without security preventing it.

The Cardinal didn’t invite the president to the dinner to chew him out privately.

Jim

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Yes, yes, we know all of that.

But we have no moral obligation to condone abortion, homosexual marriage or persecution of the Church or act as if we do. There will be people who will see Obama being feted at the dinner as a tacit condonation, even as a surrender to evil. Unless the Cardinal intends a clear message of disapproval at the event, then I say he’s making a mistake, Cardinal or no Cardinal, and needs to think it out some more.

I do have faith, however, that he will express what he surely thinks about this latter-day Nero’s persecution of the Church.

No one is suggesting we obligate ourselves to condone any sin; just as Christ made clear that because of the company He kept was not to be taken as Him condoning the sins of those times, even though He made clear that there would be those that would see it that way.

There were none to correct His decisions. In the hierarchy of the Church, there are none posting in this thread with the authority to correct the Cardinal. If there is a mistake on his part, it is addressed who will exert authority over him; in scriptures and in our Church.

I am not trying to argue any point in this discussion and only spoke up to provide food for thought. I see too many threads that engage in the ‘political’ discussion and see some that seem to think it’s license to exclude charity in how they address politics. The second mistake is people placing their views over the authoritative men of the Church. The Cardinal did not get to where he is today by making many mistakes. As I’ve already pointed out, he met with Obama and expressed Church concerns in the latter part of 2011. In 2012 the Pope elevated his position to Cardinal. This seems to indicate he has approval with the authority over himself in the hierarchy of the Church.

Just as Christ chose His time and place to address the issues of His time, we should give the Cardinal his time and place to address issues concerning the Church and trust that he is doing so. Just today I read another article where the Cardinal publicly makes his views, and the views of the Church, known. This is not to say the Cardinal is above making a mistake, but it’s not for us to judge.

 

[Ridgerunner]

No one is suggesting we obligate ourselves to condone any sin; just as Christ made clear that because of the company He kept was not to be taken as Him condoning the sins of those times, even though He made clear that there would be those that would see it that way.

There were none to correct His decisions. In the hierarchy of the Church, there are none posting in this thread with the authority to correct the Cardinal. If there is a mistake on his part, it is addressed who will exert authority over him; in scriptures and in our Church.

I am not trying to argue any point in this discussion and only spoke up to provide food for thought. I see too many threads that engage in the ‘political’ discussion and see some that seem to think it’s license to exclude charity in how they address politics. The second mistake is people placing their views over the authoritative men of the Church. The Cardinal did not get to where he is today by making many mistakes. As I’ve already pointed out, he met with Obama and expressed Church concerns in the latter part of 2011. In 2012 the Pope elevated his position to Cardinal. This seems to indicate he has approval with the authority over himself in the hierarchy of the Church.

Just as Christ chose His time and place to address the issues of His time, we should give the Cardinal his time and place to address issues concerning the Church and trust that he is doing so. Just today I read another article where the Cardinal publicly makes his views, and the views of the Church, known. This is not to say the Cardinal is above making a mistake, but it’s not for us to judge.

I think we’re in agreement, then. The good Cardinal will make it clear and public at the dinner that he does not approve of Obama’s persecution of the Church. As you say, he would not want to lead anyone to think he condones it.

You see, I do have faith in the Cardinal, and do not think he will make the mistake of creating the appearance that he approves of Obama’s persecution.

 

[SpeakInSilence]

For goodness sake! Have faith in our Cardinals! What is the point of screaming people like the LCWR and liberal Catholic colleges not listening to the bishops if we are just going to shout about what they do also?

Get a grip and trust Cardinal Dolan until the dinner is actually over.