The re-election of Obama - Another sour fruit of Vatican II?

[zeland]

Many people were shocked and saddened by the results of the election. Many have commented that we are no longer a Christian nation, and they are most likely correct. The main problem, however, is the weakness of the American Catholic Church. A common theme I heard, by many people calling into Catholic talk shows, was their complaint against the many priests and bishops who failed to speak out about the issues in this election.

In an address he gave at the University of Toronto in Feb. of 2009. Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia said the following. “The Church in the United States has done a poor job of forming the faith and conscience of Catholics for more than 40 years. And now we’re harvesting the results – in the public square, in our families and in the confusion of our personal lives. …. And unless Catholics have a conversion of heart that helps us see what we’ve become – that we haven’t just “assimilated” to American culture, but that we’ve also been absorbed and bleached and digested by it – then we’ll fail in our duties to a new generation and a new electorate. And a real Catholic presence in American life will continue to weaken and disappear.”

How true. We have had decades of poor leadership from our shepherds with the result that most Catholics do not know their faith and many really don’t care. We have had a weak, do-nothing Church that is afraid to preach the truth about sin. I saw a news report, which said that, while Hispanic people are generally pro-life and pro-traditional marriage, 71% of Hispanics voted for Obama. Obviously the Church failed to reach this group.

The re-election of Obama is just another sour fruit of Vatican II, and it would seem that the president’s followers are more capable of spreading his false doctrines, than our shepherd’s are at spreading the truths and teachings of the Church. Obama has fooled the country twice now with his pack of lies and misinformation, and the American people bought into it.

American society is declining and going the way of the Roman Empire, and the American Catholic Church is going with it. One of the greatest Fathers of the Church, and Patron of all Catholic Preachers, Saint John Chrysostom (347 A.D. to 407 A.D) said: “Many priests are damned and few bishops are saved”.

As for the true Church, it will, most likely get smaller and smaller. For the true Catholic, our goal must be to persevere in the faith and try to evangelize as many as we can. Our hope is in the orthodoxy of the new, young priests who are coming up. Perhaps, once all of the dead, drift-wood remnants of the false “Spirit of Vatican II” are dead and gone, we can then begin to build a new strong Church in this country – if there is any America left by then.

Viva Cristo Rey!

 

[Mar044]

:coffeeread:uch::dts::banghead::choocho::whackadoo::takethat:

my reaction…honestly no empire stays number 1, you an list them all, what can you do, you voted for the decline, just be happy barbarians arnt at the walls. and rome isn’t being looted on the way out like what happened with rome.

 

[robwar]

Many people were shocked and saddened by the results of the election. Many have commented that we are no longer a Christian nation, and they are most likely correct. The main problem, however, is the weakness of the American Catholic Church. A common theme I heard, by many people calling into Catholic talk shows, was their complaint against the many priests and bishops who failed to speak out about the issues in this election.

In an address he gave at the University of Toronto in Feb. of 2009. Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia said the following. “The Church in the United States has done a poor job of forming the faith and conscience of Catholics for more than 40 years. And now we’re harvesting the results – in the public square, in our families and in the confusion of our personal lives. …. And unless Catholics have a conversion of heart that helps us see what we’ve become – that we haven’t just “assimilated” to American culture, but that we’ve also been absorbed and bleached and digested by it – then we’ll fail in our duties to a new generation and a new electorate. And a real Catholic presence in American life will continue to weaken and disappear.”

How true. We have had decades of poor leadership from our shepherds with the result that most Catholics do not know their faith and many really don’t care. We have had a weak, do-nothing Church that is afraid to preach the truth about sin. I saw a news report, which said that, while Hispanic people are generally pro-life and pro-traditional marriage, 71% of Hispanics voted for Obama. Obviously the Church failed to reach this group.

The re-election of Obama is just another sour fruit of Vatican II, and it would seem that the president’s followers are more capable of spreading his false doctrines, than our shepherd’s are at spreading the truths and teachings of the Church. Obama has fooled the country twice now with his pack of lies and misinformation, and the American people bought into it.

American society is declining and going the way of the Roman Empire, and the American Catholic Church is going with it. One of the greatest Fathers of the Church, and Patron of all Catholic Preachers, Saint John Chrysostom (347 A.D. to 407 A.D) said: “Many priests are damned and few bishops are saved”.

As for the true Church, it will, most likely get smaller and smaller. For the true Catholic, our goal must be to persevere in the faith and try to evangelize as many as we can. Our hope is in the orthodoxy of the new, young priests who are coming up. Perhaps, once all of the dead, drift-wood remnants of the false “Spirit of Vatican II” are dead and gone, we can then begin to build a new strong Church in this country – if there is any America left by then.

Viva Cristo Rey!

I think that you are correct in that there has been very poor formation in the past 40 years and that the Bishops as a whole (not all) should have been much more proactive in informing Catholics about what was at risk in this election and pushing on this more aggressively. I am not sure if you can blame this decline on Vatican 2. We are a much more diverse society and you could say that evangelical Protestants did the same thing and their leadership was not out their in force. A last minute pitch by a 90+ Billy Graham is not going to cut it anymore. You just have too many Americans who just don’t go to Church at all. With this HHS coming to a head, sadly the Bishops are going to have to make some tough choices and if they were slack in leadership will ultimately pay some big prices for their laxity. I heard an analogy to Hurrican Andrew after this election by Fr. Mitch Pacwa and he pointed out that in one town that was wiped out, the only buildings left standing were the small homes made with nails, the big ones were wiped out. You are right, the small dedicated Catholics are what is going to be left standing and the rest who have not followed or built big mansions based on ala cart Catholism will be blown away.

 

[peterorigenes]

As for the true Church, it will, most likely get smaller and smaller. For the true Catholic, our goal must be to persevere in the faith and try to evangelize as many as we can. Our hope is in the orthodoxy of the new, young priests who are coming up. Perhaps, once all of the dead, drift-wood remnants of the false “Spirit of Vatican II” are dead and gone, we can then begin to build a new strong Church in this country – if there is any America left by then.

Here in Europe we have already done that. Our hope is Africa, The Far East and Latin America. Here up north in Sweden we just got our big hope - a Nigerian Priest ! He is wonderful, low spoken and orthodox on every important catholic point of faith !

 

[coachdennis]

If it makes you feel better to blame Vatican II, go right ahead.

But maybe to get a broader perspective, you need to look at American society since 1960.
When you look at the historical and societal changes of this time period, you might gain a better perspective on how “little” Vatican II had an influence on the sweeping changes of American society.

 

[RPRPsych]

If it makes you feel better to blame Vatican II, go right ahead.

But maybe to get a broader perspective, you need to look at American society since 1960.
When you look at the historical and societal changes of this time period, you might gain a better perspective on how “little” Vatican II had an influence on the sweeping changes of American society.

Well said, Coach!

The problems with American society and American Catholics run far, far deeper than Vatican II. (In fact, if properly interpreted, Vatican II would be part of the solution, not the problem.) There is not a single word in the Vatican II documents, to my knowledge, that would justify voting for a pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage candidate.

 

[Crescentinus]

Well said, Coach!

The problems with American society and American Catholics run far, far deeper than Vatican II. (In fact, if properly interpreted, Vatican II would be part of the solution, not the problem.) There is not a single word in the Vatican II documents, to my knowledge, that would justify voting for a pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage candidate.

 

[aicirt]

Well said, Coach!

The problems with American society and American Catholics run far, far deeper than Vatican II. (In fact, if properly interpreted, Vatican II would be part of the solution, not the problem.) There is not a single word in the Vatican II documents, to my knowledge, that would justify voting for a pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage candidate.

There aren’t many Catholics who have read the Vatican II documents.

I don’t see the difficulty of equating what is happening with Nazi Germany. Hitler brought in the VW and the autobahn but also killed millions of innocents. No Catholic would think that he would have been capable of supporting Hitler back then. The comparison needs to be made from the pulpit. You can’t go for the good by allowing the bad. Yet, I’ve been informed that it is okay for a Catholic to vote for Obama as long as he wasn’t voting for the actual implemention of abortion, euthanasia, or HHS mandate. That’s cutting the baloney pretty thin don’t you think?

Also it is difficult for some of these cafeteria Catholics who have drifited away to take things seriously when they’ve been treated differently. Example: divorced no annulment and can’t recieve but see a number of Democrat so-called-Catholics who promote abortion still in the good graces of the Church e.g. Biden. I’m not saying they’re right, I’m just saying it is hard to defend.

On THE WORLD OVER, George Weigle was interviewed and said it was the laity’s duty to preach about the errors of these policies. We, supposedly, are the ones in error by not doing our duty. It is not totally up to the bishops. Really? How am I to state my views when the pastor is quiet or maybe even the bishop? My views would be totally negated because the come back would be, “Well your bishop/pastor isn’t saying anything.”

 

[coachdennis]

There aren’t many Catholics who have read the Vatican II documents.

I don’t see the difficulty of equating what is happening with Nazi Germany. Hitler brought in the VW and the autobahn but also killed millions of innocents. No Catholic would think that he would have been capable of supporting Hitler back then. The comparison needs to be made from the pulpit. You can’t go for the good by allowing the bad. Yet, I’ve been informed that it is okay for a Catholic to vote for Obama as long as he wasn’t voting for the actual implemention of abortion, euthanasia, or HHS mandate. That’s cutting the baloney pretty thin don’t you think?

Also it is difficult for some of these cafeteria Catholics who have drifited away to take things seriously when they’ve been treated differently. Example: divorced no annulment and can’t recieve but see a number of Democrat so-called-Catholics who promote abortion still in the good graces of the Church e.g. Biden. I’m not saying they’re right, I’m just saying it is hard to defend.

On THE WORLD OVER, George Weigle was interviewed and said it was the laity’s duty to preach about the errors of these policies. We, supposedly, are the ones in error by not doing our duty. It is not totally up to the bishops. **Really? How am I to state my views when the pastor is quiet or maybe even the bishop? My views would be totally negated because the come back would be, “Well your bishop/pastor isn’t saying **anything.”

So you bear no responsibilitty at all? I thought the command to evangelize to all nations was the charge to ALL believers.

Let me put it another way: If the building you worked in was on fire, and your boss chose to ignore the smoke and fire alarms, you don’t have any responsibility to try and save yourself and others around you? Or would say, well my boss will negate my attempts?

I know, a silly example, but we can challenge authority to speak up AND realize our responsibilities. It is not either/or.

 

[centurionguard]

If it makes you feel better to blame Vatican II, go right ahead.

But maybe to get a broader perspective, you need to look at American society since 1960.
When you look at the historical and societal changes of this time period, you might gain a better perspective on how “little” Vatican II had an influence on the sweeping changes of American society.

I wouldn’t have put the exclusive blame on the American society as it more having to do with the Age of Enlightenment and its prideful infectuous offspring Modernity on the entire Western World.

 

[Catherine_S]

I wouldn’t have put the exclusive blame on the American society as it more having to do with the Age of Enlightenment and its prideful infectuous offspring Modernity on the entire Western World.

How about going all the way back to the Garden !!
God’s way* or** our own way! Yes or** no!*
For in the **end **blaming others **in the hope of avoiding **
responsibility does* not** work!*

 

[Catherine_S]

I wouldn’t have put the exclusive blame on the American society as it more having to do with the Age of Enlightenment and its prideful infectuous offspring Modernity on the entire Western World.

How about going all the way back to the Garden !!
God’s way* or** our own way! Yes** or** no!*
For in the **end **blaming others **in the hope of avoiding **
responsibility does* not** work!*

 

[aicirt]

So you bear no responsibilitty at all? I thought the command to evangelize to all nations was the charge to ALL believers.

Let me put it another way: If the building you worked in was on fire, and your boss chose to ignore the smoke and fire alarms, you don’t have any responsibility to try and save yourself and others around you? Or would say, well my boss will negate my attempts?

I know, a silly example, but we can challenge authority to speak up AND realize our responsibilities. It is not either/or./QUOTE

:banghead: Voting for Obama is, to me, a sin because of the reason I stated. From what I hear and have read from some bishops, they too are saying that. HOWEVER, then I’m told that a person can vote for him as long as he is not voting for abortion etc. That to me is cutting the baloney very thin. Would you like to comment on that? How is the laity suppose to evangelize when wrong, apparently, isn’t always wrong???

 

[fom4life]

How about the fact that Mitt Romney wasn’t the greatest alternative to Obama. Better then Obama YES. But overall a great choice? If you want to encourage American Catholics to vote the way the bishops want them to vote it doesn’t help if main reason to vote for the other candadite is “He’s not Obama” You must have something more. Blaming it on Vatican 2 does not address the fullness of the problem.

Here are a couple of other perspectives on the problem having 4 more years of Obama…Their worth looking into anyway.

Consider it this way: liberal idealists love Obama. And moderate voters like him too. So Obama is the perfect candidate for the Democratic party. He consolidates the base while reaching beyond it. Conservative idealists (the ones who vote on principle alone—damn-the-torpedoes type people) hated Romney. Tea Party conservatives also disliked Romney. But the hold-your-nose-and-vote Republicans weren’t numerous enough to result in a Romney victory. They needed just one extra percent. Which they lost because they had ejected the grassroots core of their organization: the real idealists who would not vote for Romney on principle. And the answer is not to all rally around the jellyfish flip-flopping moderate. The answer is to rally around the people who stand firm like stone walls. (That sounds familiar somehow…)

Read more: politicaloutcast.com/2012/11/divided-gop-resulted-in-obama-victory/#ixzz2C17fxbax

And…

Romney was a terrible candidate. His campaign consisted, in large measure, of telling the rank and file to shut up and get in line. It consisted of ordering people to not believe their own two eyes when this cynical duplicitous liar claimed to be prolife and then made very clear that he supported abortion for “the health of the mother”. It consisted of telling the workihg class and troops living below the poverty line that this bought-and-paid-for plutocrat who dismissed them as part of the 47% cared about them. It consisted of telling people who knew perfectly well that this liar–who forced Catholic hospitals to dispense the morning after pill and assured women that no employer could stand in the way of their contraceptive candy–was serious about the HHS mandate.

patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2012/11/well-that-didnt-take-long.html

 

[Catherine_S]

* *
Mr. Bush is going to begin to look like he was a knight in

• shining armour *over the next four years!

 

[centurionguard]

How about going all the way back to the Garden !!
God’s way** or** our own way! Yes** or** no!
*For in the *end blaming others in the hope of avoiding **
responsibility does not work!

Your right! Our fall and folly of pride and disobedience separating us from God has been haunting us ever since. 25,000 - 30,000 years in guessimate and we still haven’t got it right.

 

[Ben_F]

Vatican 2 didn´t influence Americans. Americans influenced Vatican 2. God bless:thumbsup:

 

[Catherine_S]

Vatican 2 didn´t influence Americans. Americans influenced Vatican 2. God bless:thumbsup:

!!
They gladly took the ball and* ran with is!!
Things are not hopeless though! When they *
learn they will turn back and become be a* light***
to the world* again**!!*
**

 

[RPRPsych]

There aren’t many Catholics who have read the Vatican II documents.

I don’t see the difficulty of equating what is happening with Nazi Germany. Hitler brought in the VW and the autobahn but also killed millions of innocents. No Catholic would think that he would have been capable of supporting Hitler back then. The comparison needs to be made from the pulpit. You can’t go for the good by allowing the bad. Yet, I’ve been informed that it is okay for a Catholic to vote for Obama as long as he wasn’t voting for the actual implemention of abortion, euthanasia, or HHS mandate. That’s cutting the baloney pretty thin don’t you think?

Also it is difficult for some of these cafeteria Catholics who have drifited away to take things seriously when they’ve been treated differently. Example: divorced no annulment and can’t recieve but see a number of Democrat so-called-Catholics who promote abortion still in the good graces of the Church e.g. Biden. I’m not saying they’re right, I’m just saying it is hard to defend.

On THE WORLD OVER, George Weigle was interviewed and said it was the laity’s duty to preach about the errors of these policies. We, supposedly, are the ones in error by not doing our duty. It is not totally up to the bishops. Really? How am I to state my views when the pastor is quiet or maybe even the bishop? My views would be totally negated because the come back would be, “Well your bishop/pastor isn’t saying anything.”

Good points. The problem is not with the Vatican II documents (which I think should be read, at least in abbreviated form, by anyone who brings up the “Spirit of Vatican II” stuff), but with the fact that some parts of the Church have been silent where it would have been wiser and braver to speak out.

However, this is a problem all over the world. In India, for example, many Catholics voted for an openly anti-Catholic party in a recent state election, for reasons of local representation / community politics. I’m yet to see even one Church leader in that particular state make even the slightest murmur of dissent or disapproval. Why? They would rationalize it away by saying “we need to stay on good terms with the Government, and render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar.” Which, in plain English, translates to “We’ve got a good working relationship cough cough with the powers that be, why ruin it?”

The situation in America is at least a little better, because some Church leaders have spoken out strongly against voting a particular way, and have even issued guidelines for voters. The question then becomes: why do the voters not follow these guidelines and this advice? The answer to this is complex, and has a lot to do with the secular culture and modernist (yes, I said the “M” word!) reinterpretations of the Catholic faith that have nothing to do with Vatican I or Vatican II.

 

[chero23]

Zaland, you mention that its unfortunate that Obama won, but lets be tuthful. Romney was not a saint, nor was he a savior. This man was out to defend the rich, and no one can deny that, It’s funny now that i write that b/c yesterday in mass, the last reading was “were the lady only gave two coins, while the rich gave alot”. Idk if anybody remembers that, but then Jesus says,“That lady will be going to heaven b/c although she’s poor, she gave those 2 coins from the bottom of her heart”.
Another thing, I’m hispanic, with alot of family and friends who are here illegally. Yet the republican party who supposedly is “God fearing”, and talks about God all the time, wants these hard qorking ppl, deported back. Now the bible says that God loves each of us, for who we are, Romney and Ryan, as well as the whole Republican Party don’t have that attitude. Here ppl like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Bill O’Reilly. They always talk about how God is letting this country go into ruins, but their stance is that of a hypocrite. I say get your facts straight before you start condemning Obama’s victory, b/c had Romney won, this country would of favored the rich like in George W. Bush’s presidency