E
estesbob
Guest
I dont agree that Cardians Ratziner left a loophole. The proportional reasons is contained only in one brief footnote.
Heres the best explanation I have read on it:
tldm.org/News7/Myers.htm
- Status
Heres the best explanation I have read on it:
tldm.org/News7/Myers.htm
S
SoCalRC
Guest
But there is no reason to suspect that the analysis is in unity with the Mother Church. The Church, after all, rejected the CAF voting guide.
A better resource would be the Holy See. As Peter’s rightful successor, the Pope is the undisputed moral leader of our Church. And, again, the Holy see explains the Church’s position on these issues here:
vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html
The document is not simple, but the Church is concerned with correctness, not good sound bites or simplicity of application.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
If Catholics had steadfastly opposed abortion from the beginning, abortion would be neither lawful nor common in this country.
G
gkroeger
Guest
Is this true? I have not heard that. Please direct me to the location of this information.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
I, too, await a cite for the rejection of the Voters Guide.
M
mary_bobo
Guest
S
SoCalRC
Guest
To be fair, I’ve been studying this a long time. I’ve also had a lot of help, not just discussions with my Pastor and Bishop, but considerable help from the Archdiocese and even instructors at our local seminary.
I’ve also been an ‘ultra conservative’ Catholic for a long time (at least 1968). So some of the things that can be hard to come to terms with, I have been struggling with for a very long time.
If it is any consolation, what is happening here is very common. Even though I am an extremely conservative Catholic, I often find that I can communicate and relate more easily with so-called “liberal” Catholics than folks who expouse a very narrow brand of “true” conservatism.
I think part of it is the corrupting influence of politics. Certainly there are many highly hypocritical “pro life” politicians - and plenty of ‘values voters’ who are willing to turn a blind eye to their hypocrisy. But I also think it is a true clash of ideologies. That is, I think it is more accurate to describe the right wing of the Republican party as Evangelical Protestantism than by more generic names. This also better matches the histories of the factions involved.
I appreciate you taking the time to read the documents. If you are interested in more books or references for study, just PM me.
G
gkroeger
Guest
I left voice and email messages at CAF to deny or confirm. Their offices are closed until Monday.I, too, await a cite for the rejection of the Voters Guide.
L
LCMS_No_More
Guest
A simple google search is all it takes.
cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=31706
lifesite.net/ldn/2004/aug/04082610.html
E
estesbob
Guest
Though the USCCB has discouraged use of this new guide, it has been circulated by at least one major archdiocese and thousands of parishes, according to the publisher.
That hardly qulkfies as “rejected by the Church:” . Even in thae article you linked to one can see there was much of more criticism of the wishy wasy USCCB
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Now there’s a smokescreen!!
Wasn’t there someone on this thread accusing other people of “twisting” and “misinterpreting” things?
E
estesbob
Guest
Of course the main complaintnat about the guide was Ann Stone of “Catholics” for Choice(now there is an oxymoron if ever there was one.! You think some in this thread equate Ann Stone with the Church?Now there’s a smokescreen!!
Wasn’t there someone on this thread accusing other people of “twisting” and “misinterpreting” things?
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
I think some on this thread equate anyone who agrees with** them **as the Church.
Of course the main complaintnat about the guide was Ann Stone of “Catholics” for Choice(now there is an oxymoron if ever there was one.! You think some in this thread equate Ann Stone with the Church?
Have we not been called “schismatics” and “heretics” and threatened with anethema for daring to dispute the interpretations of some?
M
mary_bobo
Guest
I read it and did not get the same impression as some. Perhaps I should read it again.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Our friend is only pretending the Catholic Church rejected it.
As the story makes clear, the USCCB lawyers advised that it might run afoul of Campaign Finance and cause the Church to lose its tax exemption – a far cry from claiming it was doctrinally correct.
(I believe these lawyers are descended from those who advised Perpetua to go ahead and burn the pinch of incense.)
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
One wonders where doctrine comes from when it seems Bishops are routinely rejected as apparently incompetent on such matters. I’m sure the publisher has much to gain by touting how its the hottest item on market today. I continue to see a definite bias against US authorities of any kind–priests, religius and bishops are regularly decried as teaching incorrectly. I’ve been told very severely that LG set out a hierarchy in which bishops are to be followed. It seems you don’t agree?
L
LCMS_No_More
Guest
First, the word is complainant.
Of course the main complaintnat about the guide was Ann Stone of “Catholics” for Choice(now there is an oxymoron if ever there was one.! You think some in this thread equate Ann Stone with the Church?
Second, this allegation (unsubstantiated since you provide no evidence) was not part of the article.
Third, I provided a link that speaks what SoCalRC said. I may have been wrong in terms of the article. So be it.
On the other hand, hmmm…who to listen to…the Princes of the Church or a lay ministry that wrote a voter guide that reads as though it were written speficially to gain Republicans votes (yes, I know it says that we shouldn’t vote party line, but that’s what the line). I, for one, look at the Republican platform that pays lip service to anti-abortion (NOT pro-life) and see a party that has every motivation to keep abortion legal so it can condemn it and keep us voting them in year after year so they can nibble around the edges and make hollow claims to being pro-life because they “don’t support taxpayer funding of abortions.” Yeah…like that means anything when they don’t support taxpayer funding of anything but prisons, executions and war.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Or lawyers afraid that if the Church takes a position, it will lose it’s tax exempt status.
To pretend the Church “rejected” the Voter’s Guide because it was theologically or morally incorrect is – to put as kindly as I can – sophistry of the worst kind.
G
gkroeger
Guest
Come on, as sad as it is, anyone who does not understand that the US Bishops are treading lightly because of the tax exempt status issue is not paying attention.
And to use this as proof that their pro abortion stance is legitimate is just dishonest.
- Status