Obama, Pope Benedict To Find Common Ground [NPR]

[diggerdomer]

There are two important observations that need to be made here. The first is the principle of subsidiarity. If the pope becomes involved in the American fight against abortion, he must get involved in the fight against abortion in every nation that has legal abortion. This is humanly impossible.

I disagree. The Church teaches that abortion is wrong always and everywhere. So what’s the problem being involved in every nation?

The second observation that’s equally important is that the pope does not agree with the way that Americans are handling the situation. The Holy Father sent the nuncio to the Bishops’ conference to order the bishops to tone it down. They are to preach the truth, but they are not to be rude or confrontational. The prevailing attitude of the Holy Fathers, from John XXIII to Benedict XVI is to ensure that every Catholic behaves in a saintly manner, while standing for the truth. We are to be holy and holy men and women treat others with respect. You can’t be a holy person and shout “Murderer!” in their face, when it is unnecessary. The Holy Father proved that when President Obama visited him.

I agree. Again, thanks.

 

[JReducation]

I disagree. The Church teaches that abortion is wrong always and everywhere. So what’s the problem being involved in every nation?

.

You’re right; the Church does teach this. It’s part of our faith. However, to ask the Holy Father to deal with every political leader of every nation that has legal abortions is what the Holy Father himself feels is an impossible task. Each nation handles its laws differently and applies them differently. Also each nation has a different relationship with the Vatican. For example, we cannot compare the way that China applies abortion to the way that the USA does. In China it is mandated by the State. It is not a choice. In addition, the relationship between China and the Church is more fragile than between the USA and the Church. It is better for the Holy Father to focus on the relationship between the Vatican and the Church, before it begins talking to the Chinese government about its abortion policies. As it is, the Chinese government only tolerates the Chinese National Catholic Church, not the Catholic Church in communion with Rome.

If the Vatican became involved in the internal issue of abortion in that nation, it could put many lives at risk. The issue is best left to be dealt with by the Catholic bishops there. The same applies to North Korea, Viet Nam and some of the African nations.

The Vatican can only get involved if it has a good relationship with a nation. To expect the Vatican to work on the relationships with a nation and on the abortion issue is to put too much on the Vatican’s plate at one time. Nothing is going to happen regarding abortion, unless there is friendship between the Vatican and the target nation. When a nation considers the Church its enemy, it’s not about to sit down and discuss abortion or any other internal law.

I don’t know if this is more clear.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[diggerdomer]

You’re right; the Church does teach this. It’s part of our faith. However, to ask the Holy Father to deal with every political leader of every nation that has legal abortions is what the Holy Father himself feels is an impossible task. Each nation handles its laws differently and applies them differently. Also each nation has a different relationship with the Vatican. For example, we cannot compare the way that China applies abortion to the way that the USA does. In China it is mandated by the State. It is not a choice. In addition, the relationship between China and the Church is more fragile than between the USA and the Church. It is better for the Holy Father to focus on the relationship between the Vatican and the Church, before it begins talking to the Chinese government about its abortion policies. As it is, the Chinese government only tolerates the Chinese National Catholic Church, not the Catholic Church in communion with Rome.

If the Vatican became involved in the internal issue of abortion in that nation, it could put many lives at risk. The issue is best left to be dealt with by the Catholic bishops there. The same applies to North Korea, Viet Nam and some of the African nations.

The Vatican can only get involved if it has a good relationship with a nation. To expect the Vatican to work on the relationships with a nation and on the abortion issue is to put too much on the Vatican’s plate at one time. Nothing is going to happen regarding abortion, unless there is friendship between the Vatican and the target nation. When a nation considers the Church its enemy, it’s not about to sit down and discuss abortion or any other internal law.

I don’t know if this is more clear.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Thanks. I’m just concerned that some may interpret what you’re saying as meaning the Pope should not preach the truth about abortion to political leaders whose views differ from the Catholic view.

 

[Brother2]

Hello Brothers and Sisters. I want to ask a question rather than answer one!

Just imagine if the power of the President and the power of the Pope was ever put together, Church and State combined??? What would be the result??

Interesting question eh?? Those of you who know Adventist teaching will know what I am getting at, but our opinion is only one, surely a lot of Good could also be done???

Shalom. May God bless all here. Michael.

 

[Janet_S]

Hello Brothers and Sisters. I want to ask a question rather than answer one!

Just imagine if the power of the President and the power of the Pope was ever put together, Church and State combined??? What would be the result??

Interesting question eh?? Those of you who know Adventist teaching will know what I am getting at, but our opinion is only one, surely a lot of Good could also be done???

Shalom. May God bless all here. Michael.

I don’t think about it because it will never happen. All Catholic priests are forbidden to hold elected office.

There is no greater promoter and defender of religious freedom than the Catholic Church:

DECLARATION ON RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
DIGNITATIS HUMANAE
ON THE RIGHT OF THE PERSON AND OF COMMUNITIES
TO SOCIAL AND CIVIL FREEDOM IN MATTERS RELIGIOUS
PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON DECEMBER 7, 1965

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-humanae_en.html

I once heard the Catholic conversion story (on the Journey Home) of a former SDA member (Dr. Beverly Whelton),

theotokos.co.za/blog/cat/index/2/Converts

but other than that, I’m not too familiar with their beliefs.

I would not worry about a world takeover by the Pope because it will never happen.

 

[dcavalie]

I am a Catholic faculty member of the University of Notre Dame. Here are some of the critical differences in the approach towards President Obama by Pope Benedict and Fr. Jenkins:

1. The Pope used the time spent with the President to actually dialogue with him. That is, the Pope was able to speak to President Obama. In speaking to him, directly, the Pope at least has an opportunity to teach the President about truths. Any erroneous interpretations by President Obama regarding truths would not be able to affect other people, as they were not in the room present to be misguided by falsehoods. Father Jenkins, unfortunately did not dialogue with President Obama at all, in the most literal and basic meaning of the word. In fact, President Obama and any fallacies he may believe were spoken as a monologue to many youth (the thousands of students at the graduation ceremony). By giving a one-sided platform to one acting in so many ways against the most basic fundamental tenant of our faith (that all human life is valuable and deserves dignity because we are made in the image of God) is, again in the most basic definition of the word: scandalous. Scandal is leading others to sin.
2. Pope Benedict did, in fact, give President Obama a gift. This was a private personal present that was given to help teach President Obama. It was a recent document written by the Holy See of Catholic teachings on the subject of bioethics. The reason for giving it to the President was not based upon anything the President did or said to deserve it. The present was not in appreciation for anything the President did or said. The gift was given to the President NOT out of merit for anything the President has ever done or said. This is very different than the two honors bestowed upon the President by Father Jenkins and the Boards of the University of Notre Dame. Father Jenkins and the Boards gave the President an extremely rare opportunity to speak without conditions to thousands of students, their partents and the public at large viewing the event, live or recorded, around the world. His words are immortalized in the written, magnetic and electronic record. The basis for receiving such an honor (only a handful of people in history have been given this, compared to the many thousands if not millions of people who have received the same documents the Pope gave the President. In fact, I have just downloaded the document the Pope gave the President from this website: vatican.va/archive/catechism_lt/p3s1c1_lt.htm). In contrast, Fr. Jenkins gave President Obama two honors, not gifts, based on merits they believe are worthy enough achievements for which he should receive honors that rarely extremely few others have been given. They were a platform from which to present a monologue of any topic he chose, and a Doctorate of Philosophy degree in law. The latter is especially wrong because is shows that a Catholic University finds value and true good merit in the teachings of law by President Obama. This is a mistake, because the words and actions of President Obama do not serve the purpose of law: to protect the dignity and rights of those who can not protect themselves. President Obama’s particular sin in this regard is not only his failure to provide protection to the helpless through laws, but to actually promote the murder of millions of the absolute most defenseless: the unborn. Furthermore, for a man like President Obama, whose failure to protect the most needful through the application of law to be given the title Doctor of Philosophy is a direct validation of his role as a teacher of the subject to students studying the art/science. For a University that claims to be Catholic to show its students that this man’s example is one worthy of honoring with a degree of such high-level that it enables him to have a title which is reserved for teachers for students to follow, is again scandal.

As far as the Pope “going out of his way”, I do not know what you mean by that, exactly. In fact, the President was in the area for a previous G-8 meeting, and so it was a convenient logistical arrangement for both of them. The Pope did not travel to see the President, but in fact, the President did travel to see the Pope. By that fact, it was instead the President who went out of his way.

I hope this sheds light on the truth for you. Please continue to investigate and seek the truth. Catholicism is the best route to the most accurate revelations of truth. It is a faith of “Yes!”.

God bless you.
-David Cavalieri

 

[Brother2]

I don’t think about it because it will never happen. All Catholic priests are forbidden to hold elected office.

There is no greater promoter and defender of religious freedom than the Catholic Church:

DECLARATION ON RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
DIGNITATIS HUMANAE
ON THE RIGHT OF THE PERSON AND OF COMMUNITIES
TO SOCIAL AND CIVIL FREEDOM IN MATTERS RELIGIOUS
PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS
POPE PAUL VI
ON DECEMBER 7, 1965

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-humanae_en.html

I once heard the Catholic conversion story (on the Journey Home) of a former SDA member (Dr. Beverly Whelton),

theotokos.co.za/blog/cat/index/2/Converts

but other than that, I’m not too familiar with their beliefs.

I would not worry about a world takeover by the Pope because it will never happen.

Well Sister Janet S, Greetings. Although I have to say I asked about what good could come, I don’t think you answered that, no good then??

Sorry Janet. I did read the two web pages you posted. I am always talking about the converts who leave through the back door of the Adventist Church…so are there none leaving the ‘one true church’?? Probably more because of the larger numbers, not counting the lapsed Catholics. In the Republic of Ireland there is a web site that allows people to leave the Roman Catholic Church to offer their resignation, or as one wag put it, excomunicate themselves!

I don’t like to hear of anyone leaving a denomination unless they are joining another, so atleast Dr Beverly Whelton is still in the fold of a Church…God has His true Christians in every denomination making up the Christian Church.

No Catholic would have to take up any ‘office’, the Power of ‘the one true church’ would be enough alongside the Power of the USA.

Yes religious freedom in the web page yet still talking of Salvation only in ‘the Church’, not sure I like that kind of religious freedom…although I much prefer it to the religious freedom of the Dark Ages, I would be burnt at the stake for being on this Forum…

So I don’t intend to ‘get at you Janet’, Salvation is through the our Lord Jesus Christ, by Grace through Faith in Him, Creator and Redeemer and King, whatever Church denomination we attend and hopefully practice what we believe.

So, what good could result Janet…stop spending so much on weapons of war, on space travel, sell some of the gold, jewels and paintings out of the Vatican, cor, the hungry of the world could be fed, more could be spent on cancer research, and Aids cures??? We could have a much better world for everybody??

Any other good ideas Janet??

Shalom. May God bless all here. Michael.