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

[Prodigal_Son1]

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.

If that is the Cardinal’s time and place, so be it. Is it coincidence that the Cardinal made a speech on marriage today, as time for the dinner meeting draws near?

As already explained, Christ continued keeping company with sinners and publicans without condoning their sins. He was not influenced by those under Him of time and place. We should not expect the Cardinal to do as we would have it at a precise time we find convenient. If anyone thinks he is condoning sin, or persecution of the Church, then the mistake falls on them. If there is fault, it is God’s to judge.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

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!

He can do whatever he wants; he’s the Archbishop of New York, a Cardinal, and is his own man. If he invited both candidates to the dinner, then they’re invited; they said they’d come, and they will.

You people want the Cardinal to lose face by telling Obama and Romney to forget it?

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

If that is the Cardinal’s time and place, so be it. Is it coincidence that the Cardinal made a speech on marriage today, as time for the dinner meeting draws near?

As already explained, Christ continued keeping company with sinners and publicans without condoning their sins. He was not influenced by those under Him of time and place. We should not expect the Cardinal to do as we would have it at a precise time we find convenient. If anyone thinks he is condoning sin, or persecution of the Church, then the mistake falls on them. If there is fault, it is God’s to judge.

Exactly. I find it wrong for laity to think they can order the Cardinal around to suit their own agenda.

 

[surritter]

Cardinal Dolan is making a HUGE mistake.
–We are not to give a platform for abortion-pushers
–The photos of Dolan and Obama yukking it up will look terrible for Catholics
–The president is out to squash the Church’s rights, and we say, “Ha ha, we’ll talk about business later; let’s have a drink together!”

What a disgrace to the cause that so many of us have fought hard for.

Too many posters say that the Cardinal knows what he is doing. In light of such a HORRIBLE decision, with such high stakes at play, I believe he doesn’t really know the repercussions of such a travesty. I’m not saying that the two men should have no communicaiton – they should be thoughtfully engaged in resolving the government’s unjuust harrassment – but they should not do so in a public forum that gives any impression of social compatability.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Cardinal Dolan is making a HUGE mistake.
–We are not to give a platform for abortion-pushers
–The photos of Dolan and Obama yukking it up will look terrible for Catholics
–The president is out to squash the Church’s rights, and we say, “Ha ha, we’ll talk about business later; let’s have a drink together!”

What a disgrace to the cause that so many of us have fought hard for.

Too many posters say that the Cardinal knows what he is doing. In light of such a HORRIBLE decision, with such high stakes at play, I believe he doesn’t really know the repercussions of such a travesty. I’m not saying that the two men should have no communicaiton – they should be thoughtfully engaged in resolving the government’s unjuust harrassment – but they should not do so in a public forum that gives any impression of social compatability.

With all due respect, it ain’t over until it’s over. We’ll see what the Cardinal does or says.

 

[Ridgerunner]

As already explained, Christ continued keeping company with sinners and publicans without condoning their sins. He was not influenced by those under Him of time and place. We should not expect the Cardinal to do as we would have it at a precise time we find convenient. If anyone thinks he is condoning sin, or persecution of the Church, then the mistake falls on them. If there is fault, it is God’s to judge.

As I said, I believe the Cardinal will make it clear that he does not condone Obama’s abortion-mindedness or his persecution of the Church.

But I do think attributing inerrancy to a Cardinal in a prudential matter is pulling it too long.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

As I said, I believe the Cardinal will make it clear that he does not condone Obama’s abortion-mindedness or his persecution of the Church.

But I do think attributing inerrancy to a Cardinal in a prudential matter is pulling it too long.

Who has attributed to the inerrancy of a Cardinal?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Cardinal Dolan is making a HUGE mistake.
–We are not to give a platform for abortion-pushers
–The photos of Dolan and Obama yukking it up will look terrible for Catholics
–The president is out to squash the Church’s rights, and we say, “Ha ha, we’ll talk about business later; let’s have a drink together!”

What a disgrace to the cause that so many of us have fought hard for.

Too many posters say that the Cardinal knows what he is doing. In light of such a HORRIBLE decision, with such high stakes at play, I believe he doesn’t really know the repercussions of such a travesty. I’m not saying that the two men should have no communicaiton – they should be thoughtfully engaged in resolving the government’s unjuust harrassment – but they should not do so in a public forum that gives any impression of social compatability.

Where did anyone tell Christ when, or what to do, and He listened?

Where is it taught that the laity control the authoritative men of the Church?

How do you feel about he Pope receiving and giving audience to the Obamas at the Vatican?

Did Christ’s association with publicans and sinners look terrible for Him?

As laity, we should let the men of the Church do their jobs.

Heb 13:17 Obey your prelates and be subject to them. For they watch as being to render an account of your souls: that they may do this with joy and not with grief. For this is not expedient for you.

 

[PJD1987]

Where did anyone tell Christ when, or what to do, and He listened?

Where is it taught that the laity control the authoritative men of the Church?

How do you feel about he Pope receiving and giving audience to the Obamas at the Vatican?

Did Christ’s association with publicans and sinners look terrible for Him?

As laity, we should let the men of the Church do their jobs.

CCC 907 “In accord with the knowledge, competence, and preeminence which they possess, [lay people] have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church, and they have a right to make their opinion known to the other Christian faithful, with due regard to the integrity of faith and morals and reverence toward their pastors, and with consideration for the common good and the dignity of persons.”

Can. 212
§1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.
§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.
§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.

I see nothing wrong with voicing our opinion to the good Cardinal, in fact I view it as my duty as these are “matters which pertain to the good of the Church”.

It has nothing to do with judging or trying to control.

God bless.

-Paul

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

CCC 907 “In accord with the knowledge, competence, and preeminence which they possess, [lay people] have the right and even at times a duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church, and they have a right to make their opinion known to the other Christian faithful, with due regard to the integrity of faith and morals and reverence toward their pastors, and with consideration for the common good and the dignity of persons.”

Can. 212
§1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.
§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.
§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.

I see nothing wrong with voicing our opinion to the good Cardinal, in fact I view it as my duty as these are “matters which pertain to the good of the Church”.

It has nothing to do with judging or trying to control.

God bless.

-Paul

There is nothing wrong with voicing one’s opinion to the men of the Church. It’s easy to see in this thread that some have gone beyond voicing an opinion to them and voicing an opinion to anyone and in a fashion demanding a certain response from the men of the Church.

There are others who are posting less than charitably; something the Church teaches us to include in all things.

Others seem to be guided by political views and not spiritual views through the Church.

There was a time in history where men felt they could do better than the men of the Church; now we have many, many Churches, all separated from each other.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

It’s easy to see the differences between men. Alienating them totally is not the correct answer. Through alienation we risk further separation and cementing the opposing view in their stances, without hope of ‘converting’, thus causing more damages to certain causes.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Cardinal Dolan is making a HUGE mistake.
–We are not to give a platform for abortion-pushers

Cardinal Dolan is not giving a platform to an “abortion pusher”. He has invited the President of the United States to a dinner.

–The photos of Dolan and Obama yukking it up will look terrible for Catholics

Speak for yourself. No one appointed you spokesman for all Catholics!

–The president is out to squash the Church’s rights, and we say, "Ha ha, we’ll talk about business later; let’s have a drink together!

You think so little of the Cardinal that you are sure that that is what he is going to say?"

What a disgrace to the cause that so many of us have fought hard for.

I’d not call Cardinal Dolan a disgrace to the cause. Who are you to make that judgment of the Archbishop of New York?

Too many posters say that the Cardinal knows what he is doing. In light of such a HORRIBLE decision, with such high stakes at play, I believe he doesn’t really know the repercussions of such a travesty.

You are implying that the Cardinal is ignorant of the situation. That’s a disgarceful thing to say about Archbishop Cardinal Dolan.

 

[surritter]

As I said, I believe the Cardinal will make it clear that he does not condone Obama’s abortion-mindedness or his persecution of the Church.

But I do think attributing inerrancy to a Cardinal in a prudential matter is pulling it too long.

Are you saying that you are pleased that the invitation was extended?

If not, then why is it wrong to suggest that the Cardinal is errant in this matter? We’re not disagreeing with Catholic doctrine, you know.

 

[surritter]

Cardinal Dolan is not giving a platform to an “abortion pusher”. He has invited the President of the United States to a dinner.

Oh please… “We honor the office, not the man.” Do you really want to use that as your mantra? A president who condones blatant murder of innocents should not be invited.

Speak for yourself. No one appointed you spokesman for all Catholics!

Hmmm – I don’t recall claiming to speak for all Catholics. I was raising some points for us to consider, and you can certainly speak for yourself as well.

You think so little of the Cardinal that you are sure that that is what he is going to say?"

I guess that’s a good point – if the Cardinal uses the dinner as an opportunity to publicly correct Mr. Obama, and the American public changes its thinking because of it, then I will have been proven wrong.

I’d not call Cardinal Dolan a disgrace to the cause. Who are you to make that judgment of the Archbishop of New York?

I didn’t call the Cardinal a disgrace; the invitation is a disgrace. Maybe that word was a little harsh, but it was still not directed at the person of His Eminence.

You are implying that the Cardinal is ignorant of the situation. That’s a disgarceful thing to say about Archbishop Cardinal Dolan.

I’m sorry you feel that way. These are prudential matters, not doctrinal, so if done with respect I am free to disagree, correct? Recall that this is not some issue where the Church disagrees with the government about entering a war. This HHS stuff is open fire upon our Church, and I’m questioning the PR angle of the invitation, not the motive of the Cardinal.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Are you saying that you are pleased that the invitation was extended?

Of course, He is the President of the United States. That’s no mean office.

There’ll be no reduction in abortion if we see anyone who doesn’t hold our view as an enemy. And that is not our call anyway, but that of the hierarchy. With hardened attitudes such as those you seem to display, I see little movement towards abolishing abortion, even if Mr. Romney wins the election.

If not, then why is it wrong to suggest that the Cardinal is errant in this matter?

Where is it going to end? Is he to be held out as stupid until he comes around to agreeing with you on everything?

When are you to decide on some other matter that he isn’t errant? Do you have some sort of committee that decides when to respect Cdl Dolan’s opinions and actions and when not to?

 

[surritter]

Of course, He is the President of the United States. That’s no mean office.

There’ll be no reduction in abortion if we see anyone who doesn’t hold our view as an enemy. And that is not our call anyway, but that of the hierarchy. With hardened attitudes such as those you seem to display, I see little movement towards abolishing abortion, even if Mr. Romney wins the election.

Where is it going to end? Is he to be held out as stupid until he comes around to agreeing with you on everything?

When are you to decide on some other matter that he isn’t errant? Do you have some sort of committee that decides when to respect Cdl Dolan’s opinions and actions and when not to?

I know where this is going – I’m judgemental, intolerant, and have a “hardened attitude,” right?
Why not debate the specific topic? Can you counter my original post with reasons that this invitation will be good for our cause? Then we can have a meaningful discussion here.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Oh please… “We honor the office, not the man.” Do you really want to use that as your mantra? A president who condones blatant murder of innocents should not be invited.

“Condones blatant murder.” With language like that, whom do you think you’re going to persuade to your side?

Hmmm – I don’t recall claiming to speak for all Catholics. I was raising some points for us to consider, and you can certainly speak for yourself as well.

You said, “it will look terrible for Catholics.” That’s speaking for Catholics.

I didn’t call the Cardinal a disgrace; the invitation is a disgrace.

Who extended te invitation?

But, do what you want.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

I know where this is going – I’m judgemental, intolerant, and have a “hardened attitude,” right?

You re saying that: not I.

Why not debate the specific topic? Can you counter my original post with reasons that this invitation will be good for our cause?

It will be good because, for one, it will show that Catholics aren’t so afraid of the President that one of their hierarchy won’t meet with him and his staff on a social basis. It will show that the Cardinal respects Obama’s office, for two.

Whatever.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Can you counter my original post with reasons that this invitation will be good for our cause?

Besides showing Christian charity in action; demonstrating love to all people, even those we disagree with and our enemies even?

Christ asked the Father to forgive those who persecuted Him, for they knew not what they were doing. People are holding others today to a much higher standard than Christ held his persecutors. People can be mistaken in their views and hopefully, one day, convert.

Politics has no place for that kind of view though. That’s what this is about, politics. That’s why I don’t vote. I fail to see Christ’s message when presented with such a lack of charity.

 

[threedogday]

Cardinal Dolan is making a HUGE mistake.
–We are not to give a platform for abortion-pushers
–The photos of Dolan and Obama yukking it up will look terrible for Catholics
–The president is out to squash the Church’s rights, and we say, “Ha ha, we’ll talk about business later; let’s have a drink together!”

What a disgrace to the cause that so many of us have fought hard for.

Too many posters say that the Cardinal knows what he is doing. In light of such a HORRIBLE decision, with such high stakes at play, I believe he doesn’t really know the repercussions of such a travesty. I’m not saying that the two men should have no communicaiton – they should be thoughtfully engaged in resolving the government’s unjuust harrassment – but they should not do so in a public forum that gives any impression of social compatability.

You are way out of line, fella. I’m wondering why you are still able to post.