LA Times Editorial: Teaching the Pope

  • Thread starter Thread starter Judeluke
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
France before its revolution???

How about during and immediately after…check your facts before such easy generalizations.
 
Joe_Stong said:
I love it when these people hide behind the excuse “I was merely doing what my constituents wanted” by voting for an abortion bill or some other innocent-life-destroying-measure.

Somehow this “I had to do it for the constituents” reason is always a one-way street: it only works to advance socialism and more immorality.

Gay marriage? Sure only 2% of the population wants it and massive majorities of both parties don’t but hey, gotta do what “the constituents” want right?..i.e. vote for the minority’s agenda, majority be damned.

Embronic-killing research? Sure! Gotta support the abortion-phrama complex and another absolute minority’s desires, after all, “they’re my constituents”.

It was like Kerry claiming in the same paragraph that “his deeply held religious convictions” where what motivated him to support various types of welfare and environmental regulations but that same faith and conviction was off limits when it came to “abortion” since in the latter he’d be “forcing his belief on others” (as though the former wasn’t a case of forcing his belief on others?!)
Click to expand...
Let me see, now if you were President and one of your friends did a little thing wrong like got a person terminated from her profession would you think that you could just commute or even ask the people of the U.S. to be so forgiving of you when there are two Law Enforcers in CA locked up for shooting an Alien in the bottom with buckshot because he was bringing some drugs into CA, AR, TX? Is that ok? There are many things that have gone wrong on George Bush’s watch. Right is right and Wrong is wrong. From the time that he told America that Saddam Hussein “had weapons of mass destruction” to the time that New Orleans flooded and the President was golfing in his home state of TX. Sometimes it takes the people to rise up and say what is on their mind. Would you ever give a part of yourself to another? Jesus does. He gives me His Own Self everytime I receive Him into my soul. It may be at mass, ar it may be in the chapel of Adoration that they have in our city of Montgomery AL. I am not saying that Jesus would not say that Abortion is OK, in fact my thoughts about Abortion is a personal and private thought. I would not say that it is okay for me but not ok for you. If you told me that you had gone through the abortion process, I would tell you that I would pray for you. Just because a person kills another person, does it make it all right for me a human being to kill that person? Jesus wouldn’t. He told men to turn the other cheek. To forgive your brother(and sister) if you want to be forgiven. The pope does not need a bunch of Americans teaching him about Justice nor about Love. 👍 😉
 
A few random points ~
  1. The “separation of church and state” (which has been correctly pointed out as not in the Constitution) was meant to protect the church from the state, not the state from the church.
  2. The establishment clause of the 1st Amendment was intended to prevent the adoption of a single religion as the “state religion” and thus put all other religions at a disadvantage. This set the US apart from many European countries at the time. It was never intended to forbid such things as the posting of the Ten Commandments in public buildings, Nativity scenes on government property or prayer ANYWHERE. It was not intended to shelter an atheist from exposure to every facet of religion throughout their life.
  3. I’m a Catholic convert, not a Cradle Catholic, but since I was previously Episcopalian, I thought I had a pretty good understanding of the Catholic church. I was terribly wrong in my assumption and didn’t learn that until I went through the process of conversion. I submit that no one that is not a Catholic (and perhaps even some who are! 😃 ) is competent to discuss the Catholic church, the Pope, what the Pope should or shouldn’t do, or anything else because they don’t know what they’re talking about.
These suggestions for what the Pope should do during his visit are just a wish list from people who basically only believe in free speech if you’re going to say something they agree with. They want to DICTATE to the Pope what he should do. This is nonsense.

All too often, many such persons will even attempt to drown out speech they disagree with (a common tactic these days) which raises the question whether they truly support the OTHER part of the first amendment, having to do with free speech. This sort of denial of free speech is, in fact, a form of fascism/totalitarianism, it is not democratic by any stretch of the imagination. It is directly contrary to the 1st Amendment and anyone who advocates it is wrong.
 
**Teaching the pope
**
During his visit to the U.S. in April, Benedict XVI could learn the value of separation of church and state.
November 14, 2007
Click to expand...
Pope Benedict XVI will be preaching on his visit to Washington and New York next April, his first trip to the United States as pope. That’s part of a pope’s job description. But many American Catholics hope that the papal visit will double as what politicians in this country call a “listening tour.” They know that, erudite as this former theology professor may be, he still might be able to learn something from their experience in a pluralistic country where the Catholic faith has flourished despite – or because of – the separation of church and state…(click on the link for the full story)
Click to expand...
I find it strange that people think they know how to tell the leader of a 2000-year-old institution how to do his job.
 
tzarno1 said:
France before its revolution???

How about during and immediately after…check your facts before such easy generalizations.
Click to expand...
The union of Church and State has already been tried, does not work.
 
I do not see any of those “catholic” democrats as religious at all.

How you see things doesn’t really matter.

Only GOD knows their hearts.
 
Blah, blah, blah. That editorial is presumptuous junk. The State SHOULD get out of the way of religion but that does not mean those who make our laws should divorce themselves of their consciences for “the greater good.”
 
Brian_C said:
Blah, blah, blah. That editorial is presumptuous junk. The State SHOULD get out of the way of religion but that does not mean those who make our laws should divorce themselves of their consciences for “the greater good.”
Click to expand...
Indeed. Actually it is only when the politicians that make our laws start passing laws and advocating things that are bad that any conflict arises between “church and state”.
 
bpbasilphx said:
I do not see any of those “catholic” democrats as religious at all.

How you see things doesn’t really matter.

Only GOD knows their hearts.
Click to expand...
If their hearts are with God, their actions would be too.
 
beckers said:
This is my favorite part…"But many American Catholics hope that the papal visit will double as what politicians in this country call a “listening tour.” " The Times has not a clue about why the pope is visiting or how the church runs. Peoples can scream and hollow all we want for “changes” but it’s not going to happen. The church is not (thankful) a democracy…
Click to expand...
Good grief, it’s like a re-play of when John Paul II first came to the U.S. for a pastoral visit. 😦 The more things change, the more they stay the same, it seems.
 
We do need to follow our conscience, but an informed Conscience. Holy Mother Church is our Guide. Mother Mary, Pray for us and show us the way.
 
Roy5 said:
Hm! I guess I’m in the minority. The root cause of much of American anti-Catholicism in years past was the position of the Vatican that there should not be separation of church and state. Protestants from Europe this fear with them. The “Syllabus of Errors” by Pope Pius IX (1870?) was very specific about that, and this was used for generations to stir up suspicion of the Catholic Church among Americans.

John F. Kennedy put this fear to rest in 1960, but it is not far beneath the surface, and any perceived attempt by a Pope to intefere in US politics is dangerous. It could not only rekindle anxiety about Catholicism among Protestants, Jews and others but alienate many Catholics as well. If the Pope declares that the Eucharist is to be denied to Catholic politicians who are pro-choice that would mean turning away many, probably the majority, of Catholic members of Congress. Just imagine what the consequences would be. It seems to me that every Catholic candidate for president, Republican (Giuliani) or Democrat (Biden, Dodd, Kucinich, etc) support choice - though they claim to be anti-abortion on a personal level.
Code: 
 Keep smiling
Click to expand...
**The Church has the moral authority to bind and loose, even in regards of reception of the Eucharist among politicians. The false concept that “I am personally against (place it in here) but I can’t let my personal views affect my vote” is absolutely lame. The reason people put one in office is because of “personal views”.

However, I think you miss the bigger picture - the Faith. A person’s Faith comes FIRST BEFORE any politics. This is particularly true of Catholic Christians who have been entrusted with the fullness of Faith. Jesus does not expect us to hide under a bushel. One can work for building up the Kingdom here on earth by pushing for legislation that reflects the Church’s social justice teachings. And this can be done without mentioning the Faith at all. In this sense, one can understand what Pius IX was alluding to in his encyclical. You cannot separate the Faith of your conscience from the Church’s social justice issues, and that is what is meant.

JFK? He was a ‘cultural’ Catholic in name only, certainly not a believer.**
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top