That is not necessarily true.
Why yes of course.
I was addressing estesbob, who objected to another poster’s post. Estesbob was also expressing incredulity that the VP for Moral Theology on CAF could possibly be uttering authentic moral theology, despite that person being highly knowledgeable in the subject and despite having his own EWTN radio show. (You know, the EWTN that is just wild and radical and non-orthodox, that couldn’t possibly be as knowledgeable as the lay opinionators on CAF.)
You can probably download the podcast of Patrick Coffin’s Thursday show.
Nowhere is this more true than on CAF, where the single-issue fanatics choose to hear only the most extreme statements than fit within their own moral, political, and religious agendas, rather than understanding fully the entire theology of the Roman Catholic Church.
I made no statement that the subject of the call was “a vote for Obama.” The subject was the theoretical situation of a decision to vote based both on moral positions of the candidates and the likelihood of a particular “morally best” candidate winning.
(1) Colin Donovan is not a priest. Are you embarrassed yet?
Whether or not Colin Donovan is a priest is irrelevant. I am fairly certain you are twisting what he said, just as you are twisting what the Bishops have said to rationalize voting for evil.
So actually adhering to what the church teaches makes on a single issue fanatic =? I quoted the pope and Archbishop Chaput on this matter-are they extremists? Does the “entire” theology of the Catholic embrace infanticide?
So do you believe such was the situation in the last election?
So wonderful and complex that one ends up supporting intrinsic evils? I think not.
I dont care what he is-if he is teaching conrtay to the teachings of the Church he is wrong. And ones conscience does not enter into decisions making?
Again, this is what the radio segment covered, quoting myself in my recent post about it:
The program is there for the record for anyone with the courage and honesty to download it.
Again, anyone who does not like what a conservative, traditional, Roman Catholic, degreed authority in Moral Theology has to say on The Eternal Word Televison/Radio Network, should take your opposition up with him. Quit bullying the messenger because you’re not getting your way.
Correct. You don’t care that he is a moral theologian. You only first dismiss him as someone who doesn’t agree with you, who therefore must be an errant priest that other people use to rationalize immoral decisions: because apparently you, not the deposit of moral theology in the Roman Catholic Church, are the moral authority for CAF and EWTN.
Wow. Talk about manipulating one’s own argument to suit your agenda. You’re the one that brought up conscience as a negative, not a positive or a neutral factor in Catholic decision-making. Now it’s a positive, when you want to use it as a weapon against those who suggest listening to what an actual authority says.
P(name removed by moderator)oint for our audience here where I said what is highlighted in blue. What is highlighted in blue is your distortion and manipulation of what I said. I made a broad statement that anyone who has deeply studied the faith is aware of: moral theology is a system involving good, evil, decision-making, competing goods, ‘lesser evils,’ and logic. It has as its base Catholic philosophy as applied to moral truths handed down by the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, popes who followed them, and by our Lord himself. That has nothing to do with relativism. Anyone, again, who has studied Catholic moral theology understands the difference. What Colin Donovan has done on many of his shows is give an answer to a caller, and then explain to the caller what the ***Catholic thinking ***is behind that – not the loosey-goosy thinking, not the secularist thinking, not the humanistic thinking, not the atheistic thinking, not the dissident thinking, not the Protestant, Muslim, Jewish, or Buddhist thinking.
Obama by name was not discussed. This is at least the second time I have said that. You seem to have trouble following a discussion point by point.
I had a priest once who said during a homily we must vote for GWB and all members of his party because of abortion. The same GW who led us into 2 wars and signed executive orders to kill I don’t know how many death row inmates in TX. I personally don’t really care who the bishops tell me I must vote for. But have they actually said Catholics must vote Republican?
though. I had wondered why my cable company removed them from basic cable!Well we know that’s impossible, as most of them use some form of artificial birth control. You can’t have it both ways.
That is why they need to pay attention to the teachings.
Not in this last election was there a more Intrinsic Evil being spread and advocated than abortion. This “single issue” as many call it, is at the basis of all other issues. Without life, why worry about economics, war, death penalty etc? As Estes said, people hear and read what they want to hear and read. You are deeply entrenched in Bernadin’s Seamless Garment theory in which he states all issues are of the same level of evil. I heard what you are saying back in the sixties when Church teachings suddenly bacame a matter of individual conscience. Your argument holds no weight as stating proportionate evils to abortion. You should read what Archbishop Burke has to say on the matter. Oh, that’s right you’re probably not in his diocese.It’s only confusing if you elevate a single issue above all others. It has to be loosely worded once you understand Christ talked much more about the poor, the hungry, the sick.
Peace. Oh he talked about that too.
Peace. Oh he talked about that too.
Of course not. So many get politics confused with morality. What was said was we must vote for the candidate that stands for the lesser evil. Many became confused and using their own fallible conscience voted for economic reasons (I would imagine most voted for this reason), or because they are against war, or the death penalty, or because s/he thought the environment would be saved. (Remember Gore) Wow were we saved.
And gee look at the economy, isn’t it great? bo promised miracles that the gullable believed he could perform. Where are they? Not saying the Pubs. would do any better. But to vote for economic reasons, or any of the other issues seems very short sighted to me. After all, if we eventually have no human life on earth, then what do the above issues matter? Even if we do have life on earth, what do the above issues matter when compared to the aborting of over a million babies each year just in the US? Are any of the above proportionate reasons to vote for a party that promotes the death of the most vulnerable and innocent? We save the whales, the have laws protecting turtle eggs, but no law protecting unborn life, or even life just born and allowed to be killed through partial birth abortions. The world is upside down.
Don’t get snippy with me lady. Check other sources. You still haven’t given me a source where I can get a copy of what he said, so I know for myself what he stated. Is there such a source?
Personally, I RESENT being forced to pay for someone elses care. If I am forced, how can I willingly contribute to helping the poor? One earns Grace through free choice to perform acts of Mercy, not through obamacare. What a farce!
I have read it. It is a convoluted mess.