I
irenaeus1
Guest
That does not make one ‘Protestant.’ Big difference from protesting official church teaching.
- Status
I
irenaeus1
Guest
There is nothing ‘Protestant’ about criticizing Wuerl either. While he is clearly orthodox doctrinally, he seems to be weak and hypocritical pastorally.
On the day of the March for Life, he addressed the issue of remaining silent in the face of social evils in his homily: “Have you ever wondered how the great atrocities of history came to be? How is it that there were concentration camps dedicated to the extermination of people? How could it be that slavery - the reduction of human beings to the status of property - was protected by law? How is it possible that the wholesale destruction of human life can be accepted by society? When we look at the magnitude of the evil we are dealing with, one wonders how such activities could be accepted by any people anywhere at any time.”
He continued, “Silence is the ally of atrocity. Sometimes the silence of individuals is compounded by the means of social communication. The full horror of what is taking place can be presented in a way that most people remain ignorant of what is really happening. Silence and ignorance are twin allies of atrocities.”
One could be an agnostic and completely neutral on this issue and clearly see that Archbishop Wuerl did not practice what he preached. Nothing ‘Protestant’ about this position at all. And I’m not even talking about forbidding Holy Communion. Just a word of stern admonishment and correction would have been good. But instead, Archbishop Wuerl remained silent.
A
awalt
Guest
Exactly - a more effective way to get the message across.
The reality is calling someone out by name is considered rude in our culture. As I stated before, any time our Church sinks to secular ways it is less effective and no better than the secular culture we pray to reconcile with Jesus.
F
frommi
Guest
The protestant reduced the ordained ministry to something less than what it is to us…they no longer believed in the gifts given through holy orders.
One of those gifts is the gift of governance…
So, if one is not willing to be supportive of a bishop’s governance…that is protestant-like
T
Tom317
Guest
Yes, many people left the Church when tough preaching was done, sort of reminds me of when Jesus gave His talk about eating His Flesh and many of His followers left Him. Notice that Jesus did not call them to come back.
F
fix
Guest
Who has denied the authority of the bishop? The questions seem to be about the prudence of not publicly correcting a politician who votes contrary to Church teaching.
How is questioning the prudence of not correcting being a Protestant?
F
fix
Guest
I do not think you are doing that. Many ask why the bishops do not do more to uphold Catholic teaching. They are not asking the bishop to teach error, but to teach the truth more boldly.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
You don’t understand the mind-set of many in this forum.
Many believe in the ridged-absolute-authority of the Roman Catholic Church, but reject the authority of a Bishop when he doesn’t follow this format.
Jim
F
fix
Guest
It seems to be a failure to distinguish between what binds and what is free opinion. I find that some want the moral law and Church disciplines to be free opinion and they also want prudential judgements to bind. Why is that?You don’t understand the mind-set of many in this forum.
Many believe in the ridged-absolute-authority of the Roman Catholic Church, but reject the authority of a Bishop when he doesn’t follow this format.
Jim
F
frommi
Guest
Yes…these would be the folks who look exclusively to the diocese of Rome for guidance on all matters local.You don’t understand the mind-set of many in this forum.
Many believe in the ridged-absolute-authority of the Roman Catholic Church, but reject the authority of a Bishop when he doesn’t follow this format.
Jim
I
irenaeus1
Guest
Criticizing the prudential judgment of one in legitimate authority is NOT the same as rejecting their authority, or to point out inconsistencies between official Church teaching and the actual practice of a person in authority is NOT the same as rejecting their authority. In the example of Archbishop Wuerl (since someone brought him up also), it is clear that he preached one thing (which was not in conflict with church teaching), yet did not put this into practice just a few days earlier (which is what he is being criticized for).You don’t understand the mind-set of many in this forum.
Many believe in the ridged-absolute-authority of the Roman Catholic Church, but reject the authority of a Bishop when he doesn’t follow this format.
While Jesus clearly challenged and admonished the Pharisees, He did not reject nor teach his disciples to reject the teaching authority of the Pharisees… proof that criticizing authority is NOT the same as rejecting that same authority.
B
buffalo
Guest
Higgins Replies:
Critics of stem cell research ignore conspicuous facts
Chronic diseases like cancer, heart disease, diabetes and Alzheimer’s inflict untold misery upon Americans each year. Stem cell research has the potential to alleviate much of that misery. Unfortunately, much confusion remains about this research. What is stem cell research? In a world where chronic diseases claim the lives of 70 percent of Americans, this research remains the best hope toward developing regenerative therapies resulting in creation of new cells and tissue in virtually every organ in the body.
Opponents contend that it will result in the destruction of surplus embryos. They ignore the fact that these embryos will eventually be destroyed as medical waste, with great life-saving potential tossed away. Because this fact renders opponents’ arguments hypocritical or inconsistent, they simply ignore it, just as they ignore the tremendous potential this research possesses.
This is an issue that has humanity at its core. While there will always be debate, reasonable people can find areas of common agreement. Let’s abandon the “all or nothing” approach that has dogged this issue, and let’s open our hearts and minds to the limitless potential this research has, and work together to eliminate chronic disease and human suffering in the years to come.
Brian Higgins
*Member of Congress *
Critics of stem cell research ignore conspicuous facts
Chronic diseases like cancer, heart disease, diabetes and Alzheimer’s inflict untold misery upon Americans each year. Stem cell research has the potential to alleviate much of that misery. Unfortunately, much confusion remains about this research. What is stem cell research? In a world where chronic diseases claim the lives of 70 percent of Americans, this research remains the best hope toward developing regenerative therapies resulting in creation of new cells and tissue in virtually every organ in the body.
Opponents contend that it will result in the destruction of surplus embryos. They ignore the fact that these embryos will eventually be destroyed as medical waste, with great life-saving potential tossed away. Because this fact renders opponents’ arguments hypocritical or inconsistent, they simply ignore it, just as they ignore the tremendous potential this research possesses.
This is an issue that has humanity at its core. While there will always be debate, reasonable people can find areas of common agreement. Let’s abandon the “all or nothing” approach that has dogged this issue, and let’s open our hearts and minds to the limitless potential this research has, and work together to eliminate chronic disease and human suffering in the years to come.
Brian Higgins
*Member of Congress *
S
Sheeniac
Guest
But the deacon asked the parishoners to talk with him. He didn’t call out hell and damnation on him.
K
kenwilsker
Guest
Mr. Higgins,
We sure can find lots of room for common ideas but as Catholics and as people who are serious about truth and morality we are not at liberty to sacrifice human beings for research. The means NEVER justify the ends in Catholic morality.
I respectfully ask you to reconsider your vote for this kind of research. There is no promising research done on embryonic stem cells. All of the promising research is done with other types of stem cells that Catholics would have no trouble agreeing to. Unfortunately, those in the business of abortion and other reproductive businesses are looking for ways to diversify since the abortion business is in the duldrums, thanks to serious Catholics and other Christians who are beginning to make a difference.
Mr. Higgins, I know that you are under some kind of party discipline to vote a certain way on certain issues but more importantly is your loyalty and discipline to the magisterium of the Church and your loyalty to Jesus Christ himself.
I ask you to consider changing your mind and heart on this issue and begin to vote like you think. Otherwise your ideas are just empty ideas. And all of us will have to give an account when we meet the Lord and I for one would be trembling with fear if I had not repented of this mistake in judgement. Do not misunderstand me, I am not judging you, only the Almighty can do that but I must and the Church must speak out for those who are unable to defend themselves and I believe that is what the good Deacons was doing. So the one who needs to make a change is not the Deacon but YOU.
With respect,
Ken
We sure can find lots of room for common ideas but as Catholics and as people who are serious about truth and morality we are not at liberty to sacrifice human beings for research. The means NEVER justify the ends in Catholic morality.
I respectfully ask you to reconsider your vote for this kind of research. There is no promising research done on embryonic stem cells. All of the promising research is done with other types of stem cells that Catholics would have no trouble agreeing to. Unfortunately, those in the business of abortion and other reproductive businesses are looking for ways to diversify since the abortion business is in the duldrums, thanks to serious Catholics and other Christians who are beginning to make a difference.
Mr. Higgins, I know that you are under some kind of party discipline to vote a certain way on certain issues but more importantly is your loyalty and discipline to the magisterium of the Church and your loyalty to Jesus Christ himself.
I ask you to consider changing your mind and heart on this issue and begin to vote like you think. Otherwise your ideas are just empty ideas. And all of us will have to give an account when we meet the Lord and I for one would be trembling with fear if I had not repented of this mistake in judgement. Do not misunderstand me, I am not judging you, only the Almighty can do that but I must and the Church must speak out for those who are unable to defend themselves and I believe that is what the good Deacons was doing. So the one who needs to make a change is not the Deacon but YOU.
With respect,
Ken
S
Sheeniac
Guest
We have a moral, spiritual and canonical right to have good guidance and governance. I pray for those in charge.You don’t understand the mind-set of many in this forum.
Many believe in the ridged-absolute-authority of the Roman Catholic Church, but reject the authority of a Bishop when he doesn’t follow this format.
Jim
B
buffalo
Guest
F
fix
Guest
The ends justify the means. Where have we heard that before? I hope someone in authority corrects his erroneous reasoning before it infects others.
F
frommi
Guest
Yes we do have a right to solid governance…the problem is that many have a problem accepting the decisons of those who govern unless they agree with their narrow and dogmatic view of the problems facing the world today.
C
contramundum7
Guest
- Status