Is This the Death of the Catholic Church in Ireland?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Amen to this!

We can never impose morality on others through collusion with the state. Our job is to convert hearts and minds, firstly and fundamentally. Did not the Apostle Paul exclaim:
2 Corinthians: 10

3 Indeed, we live as human beings, but we do not wage war according to human standards;[c] 4 for the weapons of our warfare are not merely human,[d] but they have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments 5 and every proud obstacle raised up against the knowledge of God, and we take every thought captive to obey Christ.
Click to expand...

Legal changes can only be envisioned when whole cultures have already embraced the civilization of love and life. Our entire tactic and calculus has to change IMHO.

In A.D. 866 Pope St. Nicholas the Great wrote the following, which I believe is still applicable today:

https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/basis/866nicholas-bulgar.asp
Concerning those who refuse to receive the good of Christianity and sacrifice and bend their knees to idols, we can write nothing else to you than that you move them towards the right faith by warnings, exhortations, and reason rather than by force, proving that what they know in vain, is wrong: [cf. Jer. 1:16] namely that, although they are people with capable intellects, they nevertheless adore works of their own hands …Yet, violence should by no means be inflicted upon them to make them believe. For everything which is not voluntary, cannot be good; for it is written: Willingly shall I sacrifice to you,[Ps. 53:8] and again: Make all the commands of my mouth your will,[Ps. 118:108] and again, And by my own will I shall confess to Him.[Ps. 27:7] Indeed, God commands that willing service be performed only by the willing
Click to expand...
In Ireland, the church unfortunately became almost like a privileged arm of the state and relied upon its social capital to enforce moral norms. It is now paying a hefty price for that mistake.
 
Last edited:
You’ll perhaps note that this is precisely what I have been arguing since the start of this thread.
 
Last edited:
Yes the healthcare system of Ireland and the UK covers abortion as an elective procedure.
 
I highly agree with your second point. I know the Catholic Church asks a lot from its parishioners in both volunteering and donations but I think for people to see that abortion is a bad option, the Church needs to have in place organizations that care for mothers and there born and unborn children till the y can get back on their feet. I know this is a ton of money and manpower but the world will see that we are serious about saving the unborn child. Hopefully, that will change hearts for the better. I hear it all the time at work that if I’m that concern with the unborn child then take care of the mother and her child.
 
Some Catholics believe that they can be personally opposed to abortion but oppose any laws restricting abortion. For example, Catholic Father Robert F. Drinan, a congressman from Massachusetts, was 100% in favor of abortion rights and was a leader in the US Congress supporting laws which protect the woman’s right to have an abortion. But at the same time he said that he was personally opposed to abortion and believed it to be immoral. Catholic Father Drinan publicly supported Bill Clinton’s veto of the partial birth abortion ban in 1996. Upon his death he was praised by students, faculty and deans of Georgetown and Boston college, both Catholic schools.
 
glencor63 said:
In Ireland and Quebec the Catholic church was extremely authoritarian and autocratic. The vote in Ireland and The Quiet Revolution in Quebec is a rejection of a state church. The Catholic church should teach the faith. People have free will to reject or accept its teachings. The Catholic church has to come to terms with the reality that even with thorough catechesis people still say no.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t put it quite that way, but my view is close to yours on this point. In both instances there’s a lesson about what happens when the Church is too close to the state and functions as a quasi state entity in some areas. It puts the church in a bad spot in numerous ways, including putting the church in charge of some things it would be better off not being in charge of.

The Church in Ireland would have been better off it it had rejected the “special relationship” that was created in Ireland in 1922. In Quebec it would have been better if it started to disengage from some secular roles in the 1920s as well. Hindsight is 20/20 of course, but of paramount importance now is that the church in Ireland still plays this role in some areas, such as education, and getting out now causes its own problems and can’t be done gracefully very easily.

The irony of both of these situations, of course, is that the Church provided the backbone and support that allowed both peoples to exist into the modern age. Without the Church, the Quebecois probably would have ceased to exist at all, and the Irish would be a poor reflection of their current selves.
 
hvizsgyak said:
I hear it all the time at work that if I’m that concern with the unborn child then take care of the mother and her child.
Click to expand...
I can’t speak for everywhere, but in a lot of places, they do. In the area I live the multi faith effort along these lines was so successful that there are no longer any abortionist locally.
 
Sure. The problem is that when people say things like, “if you really care about unborn children you have to support the mother and child for the rest of their lives” is that the people saying this don’t actually care about that particular argument and they don’t care about the mother or the child, beyond the belief that a woman should not be “punished” with a pregnancy and should be free from any responsibility. They just want any excuse to have legal abortions and will use anything to justify it. “Caring for the mother and child” is just a moving goalpost. If you meet their conditions for caring for the mother and child now they will simply change what they consider appropriate care to not murder the child. If we consent to having to meet every proposed precondition for having a perfect life before making abortion illegal, we will never get rid of abortion.
 
Sounds like Catholic Father Drinan though it was more important to be a Democrat politician than an actual Catholic Priest. You can follow Catholic Father Drinan straight to hell though if you want.
 
14
They came and said to him, “Teacher, we know that you are a truthful man and that you are not concerned with anyone’s opinion. You do not regard a person’s status but teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. Is it lawful to pay the census tax to Caesar or not? Should we pay or should we not pay?”
15
Knowing their hypocrisy he said to them, “Why are you testing me? Bring me a denarius to look at.”
16
They brought one to him and he said to them, “Whose image and inscription is this?” They replied to him, “Caesar’s.”
17
So Jesus said to them, “Repay to Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.” They were utterly amazed at him.
-Mark, chapter 12

“Is This the Death of the Catholic Church in Ireland?”

No.

As Deacon Nick Donnelly correctly anticipates, I see his question as alarmist and defeatist. Thankfully, another question asked of Jesus that was intended to undermine his ministry offered the opportunity, providentially, for Him to address the order of Faith and affairs of State for Christians. My understanding is that God is over all, but earthly matters such as taxes belong to Caesar and matters of Faith belong to God.

Because our every personal obligation to God supersedes matters of State, it should not be necessary that “Caesar” mandate compliance. The faithful carry on. Free will is not a burden. Although sometimes, even often, we might fail to act according to the Will of God, our free will is a great source of joyfulness when our relationship with God pleases Him, in my humble opinion.
 
FirstFiveEighth said:
beyond the belief that a woman should not be “punished” with a pregnancy and should be free from any responsibility.
Click to expand...
Just to be clear, you feel that a mother should be “punished with a pregnancy” You believe a child is a punishment? You believe that a woman is solely responsible for raising her children? Father has no responsibility? Family, community, we simply are good to walk past our sister in need?
 
I am pretty sure the poster’s comment was tongue n cheek.Obama is the one who said no woman should be punished with a baby.Shake your finger at him.
 
I live in a world where Barak Obama is not the president of the United States. Honestly, if I am quoting someone I cite the source. I do not carry around a grudge for something one person said in a campaign any more than I consider every mockery of a disabled person to reference the Trump campaign.

We are our brothers and sisters keepers. It is my responsibility to help to the best of my ability any woman in a crisis pregnancy or any man who is homeless or any person who is hurt by the words of a political candidate.
 
The Catholic church confuses its role in the lives of the laity. It’s the role of the church to teach the faith. It’s not the role of the church to micromanage the lives of the laity. People have to be allowed the freedom to accept or reject the teachings of the church. Jesus never forced anyone to follow him. He allowed them to have free will. The Catholic church sometimes reminds me of parents that continue to exercise control over their children’s lives well into adulthood. Children must be allowed to grow up. Teach the faith and allow the laity to make its own decisions and choices. It’s no commentary on Christ when people live contrary to the gospel.
 
Last edited:
You are deflecting from your original comment,If you had taken the time to notice he/ she placed punished with a baby in quotation marks. While you may only concern yourself with issues re our current POTUSremember thanks to Obama and his pro death support of abortion by voting against the infant born alive act,countless babies who have survived an abortion are left to die alone,cold and in agony. This should be of great concern to anyone who believes n the dignity of life from womb to tomb.Do some research before you start lecturing others re this issue.Obama is the most pro abort president ever,only HC would have equaled him in that distinction
 
Jeanne_S said:
You are deflecting from your original comment,If you had taken the time to notice he/ she placed punished with a baby in quotation marks. While you may only concern yourself with issues re our current POTUSremember thanks to Obama and his pro death support of abortion by voting against the infant born alive act,countless babies who have survived an abortion are left to die alone,cold and in agony. This should be of great concern to anyone who believes n the dignity of life from womb to tomb.Do some research before you start lecturing others re this issue.Obama is the most pro abort president ever,only HC would have equaled him in that distinction
Click to expand...
Born-Alive Infants Protection Act

en.m.wikipedia.org

Born-Alive Infants Protection Act - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org

The Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002 (“BAIPA” Pub.L. 107–207, 116 Stat. 926, enacted August 5, 2002, 1 U.S.C. § 8) is an Act of Congress. It extends legal protection to an infant born alive after a failed attempt at induced abortion. It was signed by President George W. Bush.

Legislative history Edit
  • ▪️ Based on H.R. 2175 - passed March 12, 2002
  • Introduced on June 14, 2001[1]
  • Reported by Committee on August 2, 2001[1]
  • Passed House on March 12, 2002[1]
  • Passed Senate by unanimous consent July 18, 2002.[2]
  • Signed into law by President Bush in Pittsburgh at the Pittsburgh Hilton.[3] on August 5, 2002[1]
  • The original author of the bill was Congressman Charles T. Canady of Florida who had by then retired from Congress.
 
Jeanne_S said:
You are deflecting from your original comment,If you had taken the time to notice he/ she placed punished with a baby in quotation marks. While you may only concern yourself with issues re our current POTUSremember thanks to Obama and his pro death support of abortion by voting against the infant born alive act,countless babies who have survived an abortion are left to die alone,cold and in agony. This should be of great concern to anyone who believes n the dignity of life from womb to tomb.Do some research before you start lecturing others re this issue.Obama is the most pro abort president ever,only HC would have equaled him in that distinction
Click to expand...
In my humble opinion, it would be appropriate for you to withdraw this comment since it is a reprehensible falsehood.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top