Papal nuncio: Catholic division undermines religious freedom

[NeedsMercy]

Clever comeback reference to an earlier “post” there, Scipio, love it. I agree, ridgerunner’s post was very well said.

**And yes indeed, “do as you will…” wasn’t that the motto, more or less, of Anton Lavey, the author of the Satanic “bible?”:**rolleyes:

Just what are you trying to say here by making reference to Satanism? I do hope you are not pointing to Prodigal Son1 or Obama voters as being representatives of the Prince of Darkness, for that would be entirely uncalled for, uncharitable, and repugnant. It would also be worthy of an apology…

 

[wynnejj]

Just what are you trying to say here by making reference to Satanism? I do hope you are not pointing to Prodigal Son1 or Obama voters as being representatives of the Prince of Darkness, for that would be entirely uncalled for, uncharitable, and repugnant. It would also be worthy of an apology…

And yet, isn’t that the whole point of our observation of the Papal Nuncio’s message? Is not the Papal Nuncio demonizing (that is, asserting objectively that one is doing the devil’s work) those elements within the Church that are siding with intrinsic evil? Hasn’t he said that he laments the scandal of those who publicly support a major political party that espouses as basic principles a platform of intrinsic evils?

He cited Catholics’ duties to be disciples of Christ, not elements of a political or secular ideology. He lamented the fact that many Catholics are publicly supporting “a major political party” that has “intrinsic evils among its basic principles.”

“There is a divisive strategy at work here, an intentional dividing of the Church; through this strategy, the body of the Church is weakened, and thus the Church can be more easily persecuted,”

 

[NeedsMercy]

Just as the Papal Nuncio stated: “Catholic division” .

Perhaps with some reflection, we will find that we are not so very far apart as we think.

 

[Santi2]

Perhaps with some reflection, we will find that we are not so very far apart as we think.

I truly wish I could say the same, NM. I wish I could say that all are in Communion with Rome in the UK. Sadly, it is not the case over here.

 

[scipio337]

When the alternative is a candidate who promises only lip service on pro life issues, and further, actually solicits funding from anti-life sources, people I think can be forgiven for not taking the “pro life” candidate seriously and voting the other way. But, that’s only my opinion. If you actually believe Romney would have taken serious measures to end legal abortion and make that the major goal of his presidency, well, what can I say?

Again, your analysis is completely subjective. The “alternative” is a party who has unfettered abortion (taxpayer funded, no less) as part of its official party platform, willing takes funds from abortion providers, and invites them to speak at their national convention. Then we can add two other intrinsic evils (euthanasia, same sex marriage) to the mix.

Any type of justification on your part (“Romney wasn’t pro life ‘enough’”, etc.) at this point is only confirmation bias. Had the nominee been Gingrich or even Santorum, with more solid pro life cred, I’m sure many would still have found a reason to justify their actions (ie, they don’t want to impose Santorum’s views on contraception on the rest of the country because we are ‘not a theocracy’, but have no problem instituting other parts of Catholic Social Doctrine on a non-Catholic populace).

IMHO, people have taken then Cardinal Ratzinger’s “proportionate reasons” and taken it to mean absolutely anything they want it to.

If it “feels good”, must be okay!

 

[Lucky7]

Again, your analysis is completely subjective. The “alternative” is a party who has unfettered abortion (taxpayer funded, no less) as part of its official party platform, willing takes funds from abortion providers, and invites them to speak at their national convention. Then we can add two other intrinsic evils (euthanasia, same sex marriage) to the mix.

Any type of justification on your part (“Romney wasn’t pro life ‘enough’”, etc.) at this point is only confirmation bias. Had the nominee been Gingrich or even Santorum, with more solid pro life cred, I’m sure many would still have found a reason to justify their actions (ie, they don’t want to impose Santorum’s views on contraception on the rest of the country because we are ‘not a theocracy’, but have no problem instituting other parts of Catholic Social Doctrine on a non-Catholic populace).

IMHO, people have taken then Cardinal Ratzinger’s “proportionate reasons” and taken it to mean absolutely anything they want it to.

If it “feels good”, must be okay!

You, my friend, speak the truth. I’d rather see someone not vote or vote third party than choose Dem.

 

[Tigg]

Sad to say, but this is because the Church lost moral credibility with the sex scandal, and although Catholics may listen to Influential Catholic Public figures and university professors, however, more than anything they ignore all, both the Catholic Hierarchy and anyone associated with the religion.

This statement is secular in nature and speculation at best. Most Catholics can distinguish the supernatural from the human. According to church teaching, the merits of the celebrant have nothing to do with the efficacy of the sacraments – the grace conferred is independent of the priest and his personal sins. (Ex Opere Operato) It’s all about individual **faith **and the disposition in receiving the sacraments. (Ex Opere Operantis)

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Just what are you trying to say here by making reference to Satanism? I do hope you are not pointing to Prodigal Son1 or Obama voters as being representatives of the Prince of Darkness, for that would be entirely uncalled for, uncharitable, and repugnant. It would also be worthy of an apology…

I’ve tried to express the importance of civility and charity, and I’ve tried to convey the hurt I feel for the division and infighting in the Church.

References to ‘Protestant’, because I cite my understanding of specific teachings in the Catechism, ‘Satanism’ because I asked questions and try and explain how millions may not have intentionally ‘sinned’ because of documents identified as ‘not very clear’ and ‘confusion’ by some of the men of the Church, and then there were ‘insinuations’ of attacking the men of the Church and the Church itself because I feel there is an obligation to have moral teachings spoken unified and clearly. We see passages of scriptures, by the author who also penned ‘be perfect in the same mind and judgment.’

Even though I’ve said, ‘I’m apolitical’, I am told I am being partisan.

Some things are ‘veiled’ and some things are more blatant. It’s not important; not as important as all the issues we discuss.

I appreciate those who spoke with genuine reason, and even those who didn’t. It has been frustrating, and edifying. I am turning to Him, who has no obligation, yet loves each of us beyond description. I am going to be still and know that He is God. I am going to listen, as best as I can.

As I’ve told some about things I have not experienced first hand, I have never experienced discussions like these when face to face with my extended family through the body of Christ. There seems to be something about being anonymous on an internet forum that emboldens people to act beyond their norm. Again, it’s not important, to me anyways.

I ask for prayers from those that would, and know that I pray often in general terms, for everyone.

 

[Tigg]

If any of the people here are pro choice, pro gay marriage, or pro female priests, they’ve never voiced it. I haven’t noticed anyone on these forums promoting any of those ideas and identifying themselves as ‘Catholic’.

Surely you jest……you were on one thread recently where the faith was roundly attacked……and conscious formation was their defense. One lapsed Catholic posted that since the word abortion cannot be found in the bible, we may not condemn it as an intrinsic evil.

It’s fine, but I don’t see anyone going against Church teaching.

It is legendary……look at the LCWR and their doctrinally unsound theology, and groups like Catholics for a Free Choice, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, Voice of the Faithful, Catholics United………thousands who are highly organized and politically strong, spewing hatred and dissonance against the Chair of Peter.

The Church is the place people can find correction. We are all sinners. We shouldn’t be calling for the removal of any from His Church. We have Catholics in good standing and Catholics who are not. They will not receive correction through separation, and the Church doesn’t teach that.

Well, we’re hearing about it more and more from prelates who are suggesting that lapsed Catholics should have the maturity to leave the Church rather than cause harm to the faithful. I think you’re missing something here…….the discontents don’t want to be corrected nor do they want to hear anything we have to say! After all, the Church is still living in the dark ages and has nothing relevant to say to the modern world.

 

[Tampa_Dave]

I’ve tried to express the importance of civility and charity, and I’ve tried to convey the hurt I feel for the division and infighting in the Church.

“There is a divisive strategy at work here, an intentional dividing of the Church; through this strategy, the body of the Church is weakened, and thus the Church can be more easily persecuted,” the nuncio said. Archbishop Vigano observed that some influential Catholic public officials and university professors are allied with forces opposed to the Church’s fundamental moral teachings on “critical issues” like abortion, population control, the redefinition of marriage, embryonic stem cell research and “problematic adoptions.” He said it is a “grave and major problem” when self-professed Catholic faculty at Catholic institutions are the sources of teachings that conflict with Church teaching on important policy issues rather than defend it. – Archbishop Vigano

The divisive strategy implemented by the Obama administration and his adherents among Catholic public officials and professors is real. These people are acting in direct opposition to Church doctrine. Period. Are you willing to deny the words of the papal nuncio?

 

[Tigg]

Exactly. Now we have people dissenting and thinking the right thing to do is to remain Catholic, remain in the Church…and work to change it from within.

Much more insidious if you ask me.

Just the other day I found out a former colleague was a Catholic deacon and he went on about how the Church had deaconnesses early on…wink, wink. Uggh. Why do we have leaders in the Church who disagree with Church teachings? It truly angers me and I feel so helpless as I can do nothing to stop it.

It does have a silver lining though - heresy calls for the faithful to pray for the errant, study, and to submit and re-commit to truth.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Surely you jest……you were on one thread recently where the faith was roundly attacked……and conscious formation was their defense. One lapsed Catholic posted that since the word abortion cannot be found in the bible, we may not condemn it as an intrinsic evil.

It is legendary……look at the LCWR and their doctrinally unsound theology, and groups like Catholics for a Free Choice, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, Voice of the Faithful, Catholics United………thousands who are highly organized and politically strong, spewing hatred and dissonance against the Chair of Peter.

Well, we’re hearing about it more and more from prelates who are suggesting that lapsed Catholics should have the maturity to leave the Church rather than cause harm to the faithful. I think you’re missing something here…….the discontents don’t want to be corrected nor do they want to hear anything we have to say! After all, the Church is still living in the dark ages and has nothing relevant to say to the modern world.

I said I have not seen those things and I have not.

No one is teaching to having people leave the Church. There are teachings to convert, and correct.

We don’t know the intent of another person’s heart, and we certainly don’t know who can, or will, be corrected. I’m no better than another person and cannot say, ‘they are not as righteous as we are, and they never will be.’ That is against His teachings.

I have said more than I wanted to. I am not going to participate in these discussions anymore. They are too important to be treated as a game of I must win this discussion. That appears to be the norm for anonymous internet forum ‘discussions’. We are all called to love and charity in all things.

The answers are in scriptures and the Church.

 

[Lucky7]

Surely you jest……you were on one thread recently where the faith was roundly attacked……and conscious formation was their defense. One lapsed Catholic posted that since the word abortion cannot be found in the bible, we may not condemn it as an intrinsic evil.

It is legendary……look at the LCWR and their doctrinally unsound theology, and groups like Catholics for a Free Choice, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, Voice of the Faithful, Catholics United………thousands who are highly organized and politically strong, spewing hatred and dissonance against the Chair of Peter.

Well, we’re hearing about it more and more from prelates who are suggesting that lapsed Catholics should have the maturity to leave the Church rather than cause harm to the faithful. I think you’re missing something here…….the discontents don’t want to be corrected nor do they want to hear anything we have to say! After all, the Church is still living in the dark ages and has nothing relevant to say to the modern world.

Thank you for these comments Tigg. I am sitting here stunned at the ignorance regarding the vocal and obstinate dissidents in our Church. And, to be clear before I am accused of such, I am not using the word “ignorance” in an uncharitable manner.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Are you willing to deny the words of the papal nuncio?

Brother, I am denying nothing. I am not going to try and justify the division either.

My previous post was as nice as I could say, I’m not going to participate in these discussions, that amount to the very infighting causing the hurt, and disappointment I feel. Even if we lose one, I am saddened over it and will not call for it, hope for it, or express jubilation over it.

Prayers, please…

 

[JimR-OCDS]

This statement is secular in nature and speculation at best. Most Catholics can distinguish the supernatural from the human. According to church teaching, the merits of the celebrant have nothing to do with the efficacy of the sacraments – the grace conferred is independent of the priest and his personal sins. (Ex Opere Operato) It’s all about individual **faith **and the disposition in receiving the sacraments. (Ex Opere Operantis)

The article in the OP isn’t addressing devote Catholics who know the difference.

The fact is, marginal Catholics either walked away from the Church totally when the scandal broke, or just follow their own opinions when it comes to issues on morality. They in fact give support to politicians who will threaten religious freedom of the Church.

Jim

Jim

 

[wynnejj]

I’ve tried to express the importance of civility and charity, and I’ve tried to convey the hurt I feel for the division and infighting in the Church.

References to ‘Protestant’, because I cite my understanding of specific teachings in the Catechism, ‘Satanism’ because I asked questions and try and explain how millions may not have intentionally ‘sinned’ because of documents identified as ‘not very clear’ and ‘confusion’ by some of the men of the Church, and then there were ‘insinuations’ of attacking the men of the Church and the Church itself because I feel there is an obligation to have moral teachings spoken unified and clearly. We see passages of scriptures, by the author who also penned ‘be perfect in the same mind and judgment.’

Even though I’ve said, ‘I’m apolitical’, I am told I am being partisan.

Some things are ‘veiled’ and some things are more blatant. It’s not important; not as important as all the issues we discuss.

I appreciate those who spoke with genuine reason, and even those who didn’t. It has been frustrating, and edifying. I am turning to Him, who has no obligation, yet loves each of us beyond description. I am going to be still and know that He is God. I am going to listen, as best as I can.

As I’ve told some about things I have not experienced first hand, I have never experienced discussions like these when face to face with my extended family through the body of Christ. There seems to be something about being anonymous on an internet forum that emboldens people to act beyond their norm. Again, it’s not important, to me anyways.

I ask for prayers from those that would, and know that I pray often in general terms, for everyone.

When on a long trip and sitting in the back seat with tight quarters, it is always best to listen to dad & mom who tell you to stop bickering and give each other space. When you silly sissy complains “But he touched me”, and I complain “No, I didn’t”, the directions
I’m always given is the same … “ignore”. The elements are the same, silly accusations begging for a frustrated uncharitable response. Veiled attempts to get dad & mom to step in to chide your brother. If it works, then the “See. You’re bad.”.

 

[Mickey]

I am going to be still and know that He is God. I am going to listen, as best as I can.

Amen, brother.

And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord. And, behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the Lord; but the Lord was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the Lord was not in the earthquake:
And after the earthquake a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.

And it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle, and went out, and stood in the entering in of the cave.

 

[gnjsdad]

Brother, I am denying nothing. I am not going to try and justify the division either.

My previous post was as nice as I could say, I’m not going to participate in these discussions, that amount to the very infighting causing the hurt, and disappointment I feel. Even if we lose one, I am saddened over it and will not call for it, hope for it, or express jubilation over it.

Prayers, please…

I think some people like to come onto these forums to make sweeping denunciations of those Catholics who may have voted for Obama. How they can presume to know the motivations of each and every Catholic voter is anyone’s guess. I suspect that much of the fury stems from the fact that these votes didn’t go to the Republican party.

I believe, and as I think you and Al Moritz have pointed out, the situation is much murkier as far as voting, and voting’s effectivenness in furthering the pro life cause, goes.

For the record, I myself did not vote for either Obama or Romney. I left the top ballot blank, because, as someone who is Catholic and pro life and completely accepts the Church’s teaching on all matters of its social doctrine, I deemed that a vote for either would not advance the Church’s standing in this country.

I also believe that the signiifcance of what the Papal nuncio has said, why he said it, and to whom his comments have been directed (the faculty at so-called “Catholic” institutions like Notre Dame) has unfortunately been missed.

Basically the Papal Nuncio spoke from South Bend because certain “Catholic” faculty at Notre Dame joined with certain powerful Jewish organizations (ADL, NCJW, Bnai Brith) aligned with the Obama administration and in support of its HHS mandate, to demand an apology from the Ordinary of the Diocese of South Bend Bishop Jenky when Bishop Jenky, in opposition to the mandate, compared it to how Hitler and Stalin treated the Church. These “Catholic” intellectuals also began an effort to remove Bishop Jenky from his position as a member of the Board of Trustees at Notre Dame.

I also believe this is an extemely important statement from Archbishop Vigano. I read it as an affirmation of the Catholic understanding of religious freedom, not the American understanding. I have emphasized the point of fidelity to God and his Holy Church.
Archbishop Vigano:

Religious liberty is a human, civil and natural right that is not conferred by the state, he said, adding “religious freedom is the exercise of fidelity to God and his Holy Church without compromise.” “What God has given, the servant state does not have the competence to remove,” Archbishop Vigano affirmed.

 

[wynnejj]

Jeremiah 7 is all about giving “lip service” to the Lord when there are grave social justice issues for all that are rampant in society. It is about how such “lip service” renders temple sacrifices unacceptable to the Lord.

When the only indication that there is intentional divisive strategy to weaken the Catholic Church by forces fostering intrinsic evils as basic principles upon society comes from a non-descript emissary in a small venue covered by CNA and not CNS (the bishop’s news service) … well, shut my mouth and call me divisive and uncharitable … but I say “lip service”.

Time to take the lamp stand from out the basket, and place in a position where all can see clearly. Clarity is charity.

 

[wynnejj]

Basically the Papal Nuncio spoke from South Bend because certain “Catholic” faculty at Notre Dame joined with certain powerful Jewish organizations (ADL, NCJW, Bnai Brith) aligned with the Obama administration and in support of its HHS mandate, to demand an apology from the Ordinary of the Diocese of South Bend Bishop Jenky when Bishop Jenky, in opposition to the mandate, compared it to how Hitler and Stalin treated the Church. These “Catholic” intellectuals also began an effort to remove Bishop Jenky from his position as a member of the Board of Trustees at Notre Dame.

That is a very significant observation, yet it fails to address the more sweeping “lament” that denounces public support for a “major political party”. It explains the observation that explains why specifically this audience, but seems to say that the denunciation is not to be taken seriously. This “lament” holds regardless of the “fury” and any ascribed motivations used as an ad-hominem defense.