Plea to Catholics of a Liberal Persuasion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cursilista
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Indeed, but the Church does not teach that violence is inherently evil, only that violence against the innocent is inherently evil.
But the Church does teach that you are unable to judge. YOU doing violence is sin. Peter sought to protect the only perfectly innocent man who ever lived with violence, and was stopped. And the act undone.
 
Jesus doesn’t need *me *to justify him. But I do understand the moral distinction between attacking the innocent and attacking the guilty.
No, I don’t think you do. Jesus Christ is Lord, and He made no distinctions. What part of turn the other cheek or if they take your cloak give them your tunic, also, makes you think it’s ok to attack the guilty?

What did Jesus say? Not what do you say, what did He say you should do?
 
Douay-Rheims: "And when he had made, as it were, a scourge of little cords, he drove them all out of the temple, the sheep also and the oxen, and the money of the changers he poured out, and the tables he overthrew. "

ESV: “And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables.”

Not much difference between translations. It’s pretty clear.
 
It troubles me greatly and is one reason I’ve split with the Republican party; it is not a truly conservative position, but there is no moral equivalency to this and the deliberate intent to terminate life as it grows in the womb.
War is worse, much much worse.
 
But the Church does teach that you are unable to judge. YOU doing violence is sin. Peter sought to protect the only perfectly innocent man who ever lived with violence, and was stopped. And the act undone.
We are not to judge who is good and who is evil, who will go to heaven and who to hell, but we do and must make all sorts of judgements about people every day.

The simplest example of legitimate use of violence is self-defense, which the Church has never condemned. See also Just War.
 
Than abortion?

In just the year 2003, more children died from abortion than Americans died in the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, World Wars I and II, the Korean, Vietnam and Gulf Wars combined. Only abortions have been going on at that rate since 1973.

One occurs about ever 25 seconds on average every day in the United States. Nearly half of all abortions are repeat abortions. Some people use it as birth control and do it over and over.

nrlc.org/abortion/facts/abortionstats2.html
 
War is an awful thing and indeed innocent people are killed. But going to war, while to be condemned in many cases, is not one of the five non-negotiables that have been given us.
I have absolutely no idea what point you could possibly be trying to make.
 
Not trying to start some new argument here, but the above is not a “given”. People have different opinions about it…
People have different opinions about when abortion is justified, or when a soul is somehow “implanted” in the unborn. Here’s the deal: taxpayers provide the means whereby bombs are exploded that turn small children, women who are pregnant and the fetuses they carry and hopeful almost-grandparents into masses of instant roadkill.

This is against my religious belief. When all the Bishops tell us all to quit paying taxes until they stop doing that, I’ll be more impressed with some stand on paying for the pill.
 
People have different opinions about when abortion is justified, or when a soul is somehow “implanted” in the unborn. Here’s the deal: taxpayers provide the means whereby bombs are exploded that turn small children, women who are pregnant and the fetuses they carry and hopeful almost-grandparents into masses of instant roadkill.

This is against my religious belief. When all the Bishops tell us all to quit paying taxes until they stop doing that, I’ll be more impressed with some stand on paying for the pill.
The Church actually does NOT have different opinions about when life is created. The Church has always taught that life begins at the moment of conception.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2319 Every human life, from the moment of conception until death, is sacred because the human person has been willed for its own sake in the image and likeness of the living and holy God.
 
What did Jesus say?
Here is your answer:
35 Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?”
“Nothing,” they answered.
36 He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37 It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’[a]; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”
38 The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.”
“That’s enough!” he replied.
Luke 22:35-38
 
We are not to judge who is good and who is evil, who will go to heaven and who to hell, but we do and must make all sorts of judgements about people every day.
Yes, we sin every day. You don’t get to decide who is evil or not evil or should have some sort of violence committed against them because THAT’S NOT WHAT JESUS SAID TO DO.

In fact, that’s what Jesus said to not do. So, tell you what. When you pass, and Jesus asks what you were thinking and you wave the CCC at Him and He points to His Own words in Scripture, who you think is going to prevail in that argument? “The CCC said so” is not going to fly. Because He’s going to point to the part about your conscience and your own responsibility for your own actions no matter what anybody says ever.

Jesus said … Jesus said… it’s the only answer to any question. Now you justify your position from what Jesus told us to do. I don’t want to hear some junk about money-changers, no matter what happened, He’s Jesus: we’re not.

What did Jesus tell us to do? There’s only one answer to all questions and He IS it.
 
Here is your answer:
Luke 22:35-38
The subtext of this conversation seems to be that Jesus was some kind of pretty boy, an ineffectual peace freak, a wistful but wimpy philosopher. This is not the case. He was dirty and rough. He traveled all over the country and spoke to anyone who would listen.
He himself said,

34“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn
“‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
36a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.

This is not the USCCB version, because that version is copyrighted… but they’re all very much alike on this quote…

This is Matthew 10:34-36.
 
He himself said,

34“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn
“‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
36a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.

.
Do you think He was saying they were supposed to beat each other up?

Which part of “turn the other cheek” supports whatever you are trying to justify by misusing the Words of God?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top