Plea to Catholics of a Liberal Persuasion

[bellasbane]

In response, i pose the question , which side, liberal or conservative has challenged our catholic faith more. Which side is a proponent of free love which has created all sorts of great social reforms, which, with the help of their media friends have made it ok for such activity as children outside of wedlock , birth control, abortion, morning after pill, homosexuality, same sex marriage, etc etc. Nothing is taboo anymore. Its all good right. As long as i get to decide what is right and wrong, Im ok. Besides, once saved always saved so nothing i do in this life, will i have to answer for later. Its the “ME” society. I make the rules for my own life. No one should question what i do or tell me what is right and wrong. How dare anyone judge my behavior. Im sorry but Jesus, the bible, the church is all about telling us how we are to behave. Certain natural laws apply. Certain laws from God apply. When we make our own rules about what is right and wrong behavior we make ourselves gods.

While i agree with you that both political philosophies have its drawbacks and both sides view the other with disdain, I believe that the liberal agenda has done more to undermine the moral teachings of the Catholic Church than the conservative agenda. I say to beware of both sides but the battle before us right now is with the HHS and the mandate to provide birth control services. This battle is brought upon us by the liberal agenda. Therefore my plea to liberal catholics is for them to examine their thoughts on whose political philosophy best matches our Catholic teachings. The next election is so important and we all must try and choose the best person we can to lead this nation with respect for the constitution and rights of all its citizens.

Your post highlights another difference between “liberals” and “conservatives”. Liberals are not threatened by people who behave like Christians. They don’t get all bent out of shape when they witness someone performing an act of charity or forgiveness. They actually admire such behavior.

Conservatives, on the other hand, are threatened by anyone who does not conform to what they believe is the proper social order. Like the Pharisees of the New Testament, they believe they have it all figured out and anyone who challenges their view regarding the path to salvation is subversive and dangerous. So they respond by trying to impose their world view on others.

The language of your post reflects fear, but Jesus tells us not to be afraid. He does not tells us to wage “holy war” but rather go out into the pagan world and live and spread the Good News.

 

[scipio337]

Your post highlights another difference between “liberals” and “conservatives”. Liberals are not threatened by people who behave like Christians. They don’t get all bent out of shape when they witness someone performing an act of charity or forgiveness. They actually admire such behavior.

Bare assertion fallacy, and (lengthy) deflection from the simple question: “which side, liberal or conservative has challenged our catholic faith more?”

Who gave more to charity, liberal President Obama and VP Biden, or (semi) conservative Mitt Romney?

I would put my time and donated each year up against any member on this board. The difference between “liberals” and “conservatives” is that one of those doesn’t believe the goverment (under penalty of the law, not out of “charity”) to be the best source for helping those in need.

bellasbane:

Conservatives, on the other hand, are threatened by anyone who does not conform to what they believe is the proper social order. Like the Pharisees of the New Testament, they believe they have it all figured out and anyone who challenges their view regarding the path to salvation is subversive and dangerous. So they respond by trying to impose their world view on others.

The Church has its teaching on social order (including same sex marriage).

You can paint it as “intolerant” if you like, but it hasn’t changed. I would say yours is the side “trying to impose their world view on others”. See how many states have voted AGAINST same sex marriage for reference.

 

[iloveangels]

Forget liberal and conservative. That’s not the issue here. The issue is that the Obama administration is after us. They intend to punish us.

It’s not only Republicans or conservatives that they’re going to punish. No. They’re going to punish all of us, regardless of our political views. How, you say? By coming after our dioceses and parishes and schools and newspapers and every Catholic organization in the United States. The federal government will fine them millions of dollars if they don’t comply.

What does that mean in practical terms? That the Catholic organization cannot afford to employ as many people as before. So people will lose their jobs. Many liberals work for the church. These are exactly the jobs that are in danger of being lost. Moreover, many programs that liberals hold dear will be damaged if not destroyed by these fines. I urge liberal Catholics to think and think hard on these things.

Soup kitchens and food banks will close if this law goes into effect.

Teachers and administrators of all kinds will be in the unemployment lines.

 

[bellasbane]

Bellasbane,

I’d challenge you to look at these statements:

"675 Before Christ’s second coming the Church must pass through a final trial that will shake the faith of many believers.574 The persecution that accompanies her pilgrimage on earth575 will unveil the “mystery of iniquity” in the form of a religious deception offering men an apparent solution to their problems at the price of apostasy from the truth. The supreme religious deception is that of the Antichrist, a pseudo-messianism by which man glorifies himself in place of God and of his Messiah come in the flesh.576

676 The Antichrist’s deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment. The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism,577 especially the “intrinsically perverse” political form of a secular messianism."

These are from the Catechism of the Catholic Church. In fact, I got them from the Vatican website,
vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c2a7.htm

Trying to set up a secular utopia using political means is certainly what this refers to. Using medical or therapeutical laws to set up that utopia is certainly one of the ways for this to occur, and it may indeed be one of the most important ways that it is to occur, given the Church’s very strong and long-standing opposition to some medical technologies such as abortion.

According to the Catechism, the event described in paragraphs 675-676 is inevitable. But we have a duty to put off this inevitable event as long as possible in the same way that we have a duty to put off the inevitable deaths that we all must suffer at the ends of our lives. We don’t run in front of speeding trains for instance. By the same reasoning, we must also avoid participating in secular messianism. Secular messianism has no true messiah anyway. Christ is the only Messiah, and the only Redeemer and the only God.

How many words are there in the Catechism of the Catholic Church? Far more than those you choose to highlight. No - I will not take your “challenge”, but I will pray for you.

Bye the way…

“Who is the liar? Whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Whoever denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist. No one who denies the Son has the Father, but whoever confesses the Son has the Father as well.” 1 Jn. 2:22-23.

The mark of the Antichrist is that he will deny the Father and the Son. Barak Obama knows this and has repeatedly stated that he believes Jesus Christ is the Lord. He was baptized into the Trinity United Church of Christ. He may not be Catholic, but he professes his belief in the doctrine of the Trinity.

As a Mormon, Mit Romney believes that the doctrine of the Trinity is false. Instead, Jesus is regarded as a lesser “god” than “God the Father”. Two separate gods (maybe three, if you count the Holy Spirit - I’m not that well versed on Mormon theology). Thus, he does not believe that “whoever confesses the Son has the Father as well”.

So which of these two men is John more likely to be warning us about? Why do you think so many Christian conservatives are hesitant to vote for Mitt Romney? I don’t believe it is because he is not “conservative” enough.

I am not afraid of Mitt Romney or the Mormon Church. If the end of the world is upon us, because a Mormon became President of the United States, then I guess our time is up. I just don’t think that’s about to happen. The world is slowly, slowly becoming a better place for all sorts of people who were once marginalized, persecuted or suppressed, but we still have a lot of work to do. I would like to have more time to keep working on it.

 

[iloveangels]

How many words are there in the Catechism of the Catholic Church? Far more than those you choose to highlight. No - I will not take your “challenge”, but I will pray for you.

Bye the way…

“Who is the liar? Whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Whoever denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist. No one who denies the Son has the Father, but whoever confesses the Son has the Father as well.” 1 Jn. 2:22-23.

The mark of the Antichrist is that he will deny the Father and the Son. Barak Obama knows this and has repeatedly stated that he believes Jesus Christ is the Lord. He was baptized into the Trinity United Church of Christ. He may not be Catholic, but he professes his belief in the doctrine of the Trinity.

As a Mormon, Mit Romney believes that the doctrine of the Trinity is false. Instead, Jesus is regarded as a lesser “god” than “God the Father”. Two separate gods (maybe three, if you count the Holy Spirit - I’m not that well versed on Mormon theology). Thus, he does not believe that “whoever confesses the Son has the Father as well”.

So which of these two men is John more likely to be warning us about? Why do you think so many Christian conservatives are hesitant to vote for Mitt Romney? I don’t believe it is because he is not “conservative” enough.

I am not afraid of Mitt Romney or the Mormon Church. If the end of the world is upon us, because a Mormon became President of the United States, then I guess our time is up. I just don’t think that’s about to happen. The world is slowly, slowly becoming a better place for all sorts of people who were once marginalized, persecuted or suppressed, but we still have a lot of work to do. I would like to have more time to keep working on it.

You defy the Catechism??? That is posted the the Vatican website???

Here is what Obama really believes: abcnews.go.com/Blotter/DemocraticDebate/story?id=4443788&page=1#.TzmDhlGN-So

Here is John 1-2:22: 22Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

Obama is attacking the Body of Christ, which is the Church, and denying that what it teaches is true, trying to replace it with something else by FORCE. I think that qualifies as denying Christ.

 

[georgetowngrad]

My mistake, I meant to say that there is no such thing as “unintentional evil”, to quote your use of the term above. It is true that, colloquially, harms such as natural disasters are called “evils” but this is not an accurate use of the word in the context of Catholic theology.

And I am saying that Jesus scourging was torture but not because it was by a whip. Hence it is not relevant to your absurd equivalence to Jesus’ cleansing of the temple by use of a whip (whether or not he actually hit anyone with it).

But to be crystal clear, I am saying that:

You will not find any support within the Catholic faith for your claim that it is ok to do evil in order to do good.

You will not find any support within the Catholic faith for your claim that Jesus tortured the money lenders or in any way did evil to do good or advocated the doing of evil to do good.

We aren’t talking about “natural” evils we are talking about war. When war happens innocents die. Just as surely as night follows day. Killing of innocents is evil, yet war can be considered just and a good. I know per Catholic teaching the end doesn’t justify means. The idea of “just war” doesn’t square with it.

Why was Jesus’ flagellation torture?

 

[iloveangels]

Is this on topic??? NO. The topic is "PLEA TO CATHOLICS OF A LIBERAL PERSUASION. Please stay on topic. There are other threads to discuss these pet agendas. This thread is about the HHS Mandate.

 

[ivebeenshown]

I am saying whipping people and the threat of physical violence is torture. That’s why I sited the catechism.

Whipping can be torture, but it is not necessarily torture under each and every circumstance!

If I asked if Jesus was tortured when scourged, you most likely say yes.

Of course I would! Scourging is a severe, brutal, and torturous form of whipping. That doesn’t mean all whipping is torture, or that all physical violence used as punishment is ‘torture’. Seriously, man. Quit thinking in black and white.

 

[iloveangels]

We aren’t talking about “natural” evils we are talking about war. When war happens innocents die. Just as surely as night follows day. Killing of innocents is evil, yet war can be considered just and a good. I know per Catholic teaching the end doesn’t justify means. The idea of “just war” doesn’t square with it.

Why was Jesus’ flagellation torture?

Is this on topic??? NO. The topic is "PLEA TO CATHOLICS OF A LIBERAL PERSUASION. Please stay on topic. There are other threads to discuss these pet agendas. This thread is about the HHS Mandate.

 

[iloveangels]

Whipping can be torture, but it is not necessarily torture under each and every circumstance!

Of course I would! Scourging is a severe, brutal, and torturous form of whipping. That doesn’t mean all whipping is torture, or that all physical violence used as punishment is ‘torture’. Seriously, man. Quit thinking in black and white.

Is this on topic??? NO. The topic is “PLEA TO CATHOLICS OF A LIBERAL PERSUASION.” Please stay on topic. There are other threads to discuss these pet agendas. This thread is about the HHS Mandate.

 

[bellasbane]

You defy the Catechism??? That is posted the the Vatican website???

Here is what Obama really believes: abcnews.go.com/Blotter/DemocraticDebate/story?id=4443788&page=1#.TzmDhlGN-So

Here is John 1-2:22: 22Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

Obama is attacking the Body of Christ, which is the Church, and denying that what it teaches is true, trying to replace it with something else by FORCE. I think that qualifies as denying Christ.

If you are going to quote the Bible to a Catholic, you should know better than to use the King James version. It might be a pretty translation, but it was commissioned for two reasons. 1) To undermine the spiritual authority of Rome, and 2) To support the secular authority of the King of England.

I recommend the USCCB website for your biblical quotes:
usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/

 

[iloveangels]

If you are going to quote the Bible to a Catholic, you should know better than to use the King James version. It might be a pretty translation, but it was commissioned for two reasons. 1) To undermine the spiritual authority of Rome, and 2) To support the secular authority of the King of England.

I recommend the USCCB website for your biblical quotes:
usccb.org/bible/books-of-the-bible/

I probably should use the USCCB version especially since this is about being a recusant and being fined for my faith by the federal government, just like Henry VIII did to the Catholics in England, right???

How topical of you to suggest it.

 

[georgetowngrad]

Is this on topic??? NO. The topic is “PLEA TO CATHOLICS OF A LIBERAL PERSUASION.” Please stay on topic. There are other threads to discuss these pet agendas. This thread is about the HHS Mandate.

It is on topic - if a greater good is served a lesser evil can be done.

The Catechism on just war

2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

• the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;

• all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;

• there must be serious prospects of success;

-** the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.**

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the “just war” doctrine.

The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.

 

[iloveangels]

It is on topic - if a greater good is served a lesser evil can be done.

The Catechism on just war

[BIBLEDRB]2309 The strict conditions for legitimate defense by military force require rigorous consideration. The gravity of such a decision makes it subject to rigorous conditions of moral legitimacy. At one and the same time:

• the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
• all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
• there must be serious prospects of success;

-** the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.**

These are the traditional elements enumerated in what is called the “just war” doctrine.

The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good.[/BIBLEDRB]

And that applies to the HHS Mandate exactly how?

 

[scipio337]

I probably should use the USCCB version especially since this is about being a recusant and being fined for my faith by the federal government, just like Henry VIII did to the Catholics in England, right???

How topical of you.

Good catch. This does seem to be Obama’s “Act of Supremacy”.

 

[Cursilista]

Originally Posted by bellasbane
Your post highlights another difference between “liberals” and “conservatives”. Liberals are not threatened by people who behave like Christians. They don’t get all bent out of shape when they witness someone performing an act of charity or forgiveness. They actually admire such behavior.

What an absurd statement. Where do you get this opinion? Most of the chaitable contibutors in my community are small business plp and the avg. hard working folks. they donate their time, resources and money. They do so and dont want recognition for their efforts. That my friend is true christian charity. If what your referring to in others performing acts of charity being the govt being charitable with our tax dollars? Well read up a few post and see what most conservatives feel about that. We are not threatened, we feel that the govt’s aim is to keep those receiving charity dependent on the govt not to get them back on their feet. Cut the waste, clean up the system, get plp back to productivity and stop giving them crutches. The Gov’t’s charity system should serve as a safety net not as a way of life.

Conservatives, on the other hand, are threatened by anyone who does not conform to what they believe is the proper social order. Like the Pharisees of the New Testament, they believe they have it all figured out and anyone who challenges their view regarding the path to salvation is subversive and dangerous. So they respond by trying to impose their world view on others.

What a laugh, if you would get your head out of the sand you would realize that the most intolerant group there is, is the liberals. disagree with a liberal and you are branded a racist, or right wing fanatic, uncaring, bigots, or worse. The LIberal Media is trying to do away with any dissenting viewpoints. Points to the effort to do away with conservative news networks and radio talk shows. The Liberal Media frames the news as they see fit. Mark my words, before this HHS thing is over with, Obama and the media will have painted the Catholic church in a position of it is us against them. Forcing us to provide the coverage in question without having to pay for it will make everyone think that they are having to subsidize all Catholic women for their birth control. Obama is doing the old divide and conquer on Catholics.

The language of your post reflects fear, but Jesus tells us not to be afraid. He does not tells us to wage “holy war” but rather go out into the pagan world and live and spread the Good News.

The Pagan world? thats exactly what my plea to liberals is all about. Get out of the Godless Liberal agenda Pagan world that has been created while you can and make your voice as a devout Catholic heard. Tell them that You will not stand for the immorality that the liberal agenda is trying to force down our throats. As a liberal Catholic you should be trying to convince the others in the liberal camp how wrong they are about, same sex marriage, abortion, birth control, homosexuality and the list goes on. Your in the same camp as those who fight for these things. Your also in the same camp as the atheist , convert their thinking while your at it.

 

[scipio337]

What an absurd statement. Where do you get this opinion? Most of the chaitable contibutors in my community are small business plp and the avg. hard working folks. they donate their time, resources and money. They do so and dont want recognition for their efforts. That my friend is true christian charity. If what your referring to in others performing acts of charity being the govt being charitable with our tax dollars? Well read up a few post and see what most conservatives feel about that. We are not threatened, we feel that the govt’s aim is to keep those receiving charity dependent on the govt not to get them back on their feet. Cut the waste, clean up the system, get plp back to productivity and stop giving them crutches. The Gov’t’s charity system should serve as a safety net not as a way of life.

From an article posted in another thread:

In the process, the leaders of the American Catholic Church fell prey to a conceit that had long before ensnared a great many mainstream Protestants in the United States – the notion that public provision is somehow akin to charity – and so they fostered state paternalism and undermined what they professed to teach: that charity is an individual responsibility and that it is appropriate that the laity join together under the leadership of the Church to alleviate the suffering of the poor. In its place, they helped establish the Machiavellian principle that underpins modern liberalism – the notion that it is our Christian duty to confiscate other people’s money and redistribute it.

ricochet.com/main-feed/American-Catholicism-s-Pact-With-the-Devil

 

[iloveangels]

Cardinal Mahoney from Los Angeles is protesting the mandate.

He wrote, “Freedom of conscience and religious liberty are not concessions grudgingly granted by the Federal Government–either directly, or by way of exemption or exception. Our nation was founded on those basic and inalienable rights as the bedrock of who we are as Americans. Our Constitution was written precisely to reject and to avoid the dreadful English model whereby the king and the government are the granter of all rights, including religious rights–as well as the single power to withdraw, limit, or negate those rights.”

He also wrote: “Your “accommodation” actually makes the entire matter far worse. Every effort must be undertaken to reverse your ill-conceived revocation of our Constitutional rights.”

And: “I fear, Mr. President, that you are knowingly and intentionally trampling upon and reversing our Constitutional rights.”

cardinalrogermahonyblogsla.blogspot.com/2012/02/just-minute-mr-president.html

 

[georgetowngrad]

And that applies to the HHS Mandate exactly how?

No one is asking If the greater good is being served or not. People hear “contraception” and get up in arms and don’t ask questions. If more people get health care and better heath care does it serve a greater good if some babies aren’t conceived.

 

[iloveangels]

no one is asking if the greater good is being served or not. People hear “contraception” and get up in arms and don’t ask questions. If more people get health care and better heath care does it serve a greater good if some babies aren’t conceived.

Who made you God???