Laura Ingraham sez the cafeteria is closed

[Steeltemplar]

She does not claim to be a spokesperson and she has faithful Catholics represent church issues, unlike some other Catholic hosts that shall remain nameless.

As far as not liking her voice? Really? Not too deep on the issues are you? Maybe it is her politics you don’t like!

I like her voice myself

Anyway, I agree with you that she does a great job with Catholicism.

In fact, one time she had a friend of hers on the show who was a lapsed Catholic. The friend mentioned that he had been by a Catholic church (possibly for mass? I forget), and she actually reminded him - kindly - that if he wants to receive communion he should be sure to go to confession first. I was amazed and very impressed.

 

[bellesjoy]

It is good to see someone who lives her faith, even on her program. I especially enjoy it when she has Raymond Arroyo on with her.
She never said she speaks for the Church. She speaks as an orthodox Catholic who is tired of fallen away Catholics actually claiming to speak for the Church, such as was done by a so-called Catholic senator last fall.
I have never heard her misrepresent any Catholic teaching. But even if she did, she is only speaking as an individual and she has the ear of only those who choose to listen to her program.
Some dissident RC politicians on the other hand get quoted on front pages across the country, and appear on all the news shows. Given how politically liberal and lacking in moral foundation that most of the media is; Laura is a welcome voice and a pleasant one at that.

 

[Bennie_P]

I really like this interview with Fr. Morris on the same subject concerning Pelosi’s visit.

youtube.com/watch?v=EP_eAriDn1c&feature=related

 

[Digitonomy]

As far as not liking her voice? Really? Not too deep on the issues are you?

I used to listen to her, but I found her avoidance of the issues to be disappointing. For someone who is obviously very intelligent and well-versed on the issues, it really seemed a shame that she wasted most of her show on shallow comedy like making fun of the voices or hair of politicians and Hollywood types, or setting up facile strawmen to knock down.

Fairly typical of talk radio, I suppose; it doesn’t bother me that simplistic Hannity or bitter Levin don’t delve deeply into the issues of the day. However, I’ve always felt (perhaps wrongly) that Ingraham is capable of doing a truly intelligent show, but chooses not to.

 

[PCM]

People who leave the Church don’t seem to investigate their disagreements first too often. You don’t find them researching Aquinas and discussing it with their priest. Or asking a couple of priests to explain the theology and WHY it is there and why it is good for us.
It is good though, for someone with questions to still attend mass if they are on a faith “journey” with questions --f it is truly a journey. It was very offensive though, when our cantor laughed while telling me she is a cafeteria Catholic when I questioned her Obama bumper sticker…

Personally, I have been through a divorce and have obtained an annulment. In the years waiting for the annulment though, I remarried, knowing it had been annulable but was being appealed over and over by my ex. I received communion during that time because I knew my new marriage was valid because of the nature of the vow(which i learned in a semester on Catholic marriage at a Jesuit University). So - did this make me a cafeteria Catholic? There was no way I could miss the mass I loved so much… Going back to my first point, I at least was brave enough to talk to a priest about it.

What do you all think of practicing Catholics using birth control (if not for medical purposes - just for birth control)? I have a lot of friends that do this and should they abstain from Communion?

 

[luminoushope]

Go Miss Ingram! I saw the original interview and she was great. Get hew r book “Guilty” nand see what she says about the the classic liberal causes like “single mothers”.

“Guilty” was written by Ann Coulter, not Laura Ingram. Ms. Ingram has written “Shut Up And Sing” and “Power To The People” that I know of, maybe more.

Laura Ingram ROCKS! I had no idea she was a convert. Hallelujah!

 

[Non_sum_dignus]

While she may be correct, since when did Laura Ingraham become the Catholic Church spokesperson? I can’t stand her voice, actually.

I think is happened by virture of her being one of very few Catholics in the media who will unflinchingly support the Church’s teachings. For years, Dr. Laura seemed to be the best Catholic voice in the media. And, yes, I know why that’s so sadly ironic.

 

[susanbeck]

Both of these are mortal sins.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

I think is happened by virture of her being one of very few Catholics in the media who will unflinchingly support the Church’s teachings. For years, Dr. Laura seemed to be the best Catholic voice in the media. And, yes, I know why that’s so sadly ironic.

To clarify, Laura Ingraham and Dr. Laura (Schlessinger) are two different people.

 

[Non_sum_dignus]

To clarify, Laura Ingraham and Dr. Laura (Schlessinger) are two different people.

I know. And Dr. Laura is a jew. Which is why her being one of the most prominent Catholic voices in the media is such a terrible thing.

 

[rpp]

You asked so I will answer. Yes. You decided for yourself that you knew better than what the Church taught and, in your case, decided. The fact that you were unable to restrain yourself long enough to refrain from re-

 

[Gerry_Hunter]

A small aside, if I may.

It may be wise to use the term “cafeteria Catholic” with some care. We should perhaps consider whether or not we are seeking to describe the phenomenon whereby people fail to keep some teachings of the Church on a regular basis. Is that distinguishable from being a “sinner”?

Or are we trying to describe people who convince themselves that, although a teaching is valid, it does not apply to them in their particular situation? I suggest the same term, “sinner”, applies.

Having used the term “sinner” twice, I pause to note that we are ALL sinners.

It seems to me the cafeteria Catholic has a different basis for doing the above things. They move from the self-centeredness that afflicts us all, to a particular exercise in self-justification. They do more than just apply special pleading to their particular situations. Rather, they claim that it is by the very nature of the teachings and teaching authority of the Church that this special pleading is appropriate. They do more than treat the Church as if she were a cafeteria. They hold and espouse that she truly IS, by her very nature, something like a cafeteria, to justify their behaviour.

There’s more involved, I suggest, than merely falling short. There’s more involved than merely a personal exercise in rationalization and self justification. What we have is a further step, where a different and erroneous nature of both the teachings and teaching authority of the Church are formulated, espoused, and promoted. It’s as if, rather than coming up with a scheme to avoid a commandment, they hold that a commandment is merely a point for consideration and discussion, and promote that as truth.

I’m not out to be a pedant here. Cafeteria Catholicism may be a belled cat, and not as fashionable as it one was (it is to be hoped), but it is still a danger to the faith and the Church. Confusing it with the sinning and weakness that besets everyone could compound that danger.

Blessings,

Gerry

 

[o_mlly]

We cannot know that one who contracepts is in the state of mortal sin. We do know that the act is intrinsically or objectively evil, that is its effects are in all people, places and times evil.

However, the subjective elements, intent and circumstance, are beyond our intellect and knowable only to God and the contraceptor. As baptized Catholics, we share in Christ’s prophetic office and are obligated to teach those who practice contraception the evil in their act remembering that fraternal correction is an act of charity – we judge the act, not the actor.

Catechism #2478 *To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way *…).

Peace,
O’Malley

 

[PCM]

very interesting remarks. I agree that the intent is different between Cafeteria Catholics and falling short. God bless. pcm

 

[Fitz]

I used to listen to her, but I found her avoidance of the issues to be disappointing. For someone who is obviously very intelligent and well-versed on the issues, it really seemed a shame that she wasted most of her show on shallow comedy like making fun of the voices or hair of politicians and Hollywood types, or setting up facile strawmen to knock down.

Fairly typical of talk radio, I suppose; it doesn’t bother me that simplistic Hannity or bitter Levin don’t delve deeply into the issues of the day. However, I’ve always felt (perhaps wrongly) that Ingraham is capable of doing a truly intelligent show, but chooses not to.

Very interesting that you say you don’t like her voice and then go on to criticize her for mocking someone else’s voice or superficial traits. I think we will have to agree to disagree. I couldn’t think you were more wrong about anyone than you are about Laura. So be it.

 

[Fitz]

I used to listen to her, but I found her avoidance of the issues to be disappointing. For someone who is obviously very intelligent and well-versed on the issues, it really seemed a shame that she wasted most of her show on shallow comedy like making fun of the voices or hair of politicians and Hollywood types, or setting up facile strawmen to knock down.

Fairly typical of talk radio, I suppose; it doesn’t bother me that simplistic Hannity or bitter Levin don’t delve deeply into the issues of the day. However, I’ve always felt (perhaps wrongly) that Ingraham is capable of doing a truly intelligent show, but chooses not to.

We will have to agree to disagree on this. I don’t find her shallow at all. In fact I don’t find her typical of talk radio and I enjoy her guests. As far as calling all of the talk show hosts names, you may find yourself reprimanded by the mods here. We don’t call people names even when discussing aspects that we don’t like about them. Perhaps reading the rules would be in order.

 

[goofyjim]

She does not claim to be a spokesperson and she has faithful Catholics represent church issues, unlike some other Catholic hosts that shall remain nameless.

As far as not liking her voice? Really? Not too deep on the issues are you? Maybe it is her politics you don’t like!

So quick to judge. I can’t take her voice. I can handle her politics although sometimes they are a bit extreme.

 

[PCM]

I like her and agree with her a lot butthought she could have gotten deeper too. An occasional joke is ok but you have to have the depth to balance it. Actually, Rush Limbaugh puts people off in style but his substance is much better than hers or Hannity’s - or Mike Gallagher’s. Medved is a great.

 

[Darryl1958]

There is nothing unusually unpleasant about the woman’s voice.

Her politics in the clip were no more extreme than the pope’s.

 

[Darryl1958]

I like her and agree with her a lot but thought she could have gotten deeper too. An occasional joke is ok but you have to have the depth to balance it. Actually, Rush Limbaugh puts people off in style but his substance is much better than hers or Hannity’s - or Mike Gallagher’s. Medved is a great.

Medved is great. He puts out a free webcast every now and again. I like Dennis Prager too, although he will soon be going off the free web. Hugh Hewitt is still free though.