Why slam protestants?

[valentino]

There is no point in slamming a person of any faith or believe.Obviously they have there reasons for believing how they do.i believe that churches should preach their faith at the pulpit.Now if someone questions you on something or why you do this or that you should give an answer.Now in the US you are allowed to proselytize in the streets or carry banners and that is alright as long as you don’t interfere with others.That’s only because Americans have become so secular and societies evils are so apparent.God’s laws are the morals which keep countries free and peaceful.

 

[Kat127]

Again you failed to actually address what the daily or sunday reading in Church and their meaningfulness has to do with Apostolic Succession.

I have no issue being called protestant…I am. Luther essentially started the Protestant Reformation, so it would be silly to say I’m not Protestant. I have an issue with people assumeing that just because we are non Catholic we are all the same doctrinally. Doctrinally, the High Litergical Churches which trace their roots back to the 1500’s ARE much more similar today to the Catholics than they are to the non denominationals or fundamentalists.

I also take issue with the fact that you are continuing to attempt to make the entire 100 Year long Protestant Reformation of the 1500’s all about Henry VIII desire to do his own thing. It’s so much bigger than that, and the English Reformation was only a tiny piece of it. No one denys that Henry was acting like a dork…even his contemparies in the reformation didn’t take him seriously. He does not and has never represented the Protestant Reformation as a whole neither did he start it.

As to the doctrine of the Anglican Church they do believe that communion is the Body and Blood of our Lord just as the Lutheran (at least the MS) do as well. The entire transubstation (sp) vrs consubstantiaion (sp) is purely meta physical and really kind of silly in my mind. It’s his Body and Blood, it may look and taste like bread and wine, but he told us it’s his Body and Blood, he told us to continue the practice of communion…the actual process of it’s transformation is not important and part of the mystery in my mind. In this I would argue we are much closer to Catholics as communion is not just symbolic to us it is a vital part of worship and it is a sacrament, where as many other denominations do not believe in communion at all, or see it merely as a symbol and nothing more. As to whatever King Henry’s offspring said or did…not really applicable to Lutheran doctrine, but you do seem to be really hung up on him. He was an interesting character I’ll give him that.

Actually the Lutheran Church has 3 sacraments…Baptism, Confession, and Communion. Confirmation is regarded as a Sacramental Rite and the fulfillment of the Sacrament of Baptism. Holy Orders and Marriage are also Sacramental Rites as they existed prior to Christ and were not insituted by him. Also they are not something that all Christians are called to. Annointing of the sick…honestly no idea why this one was left out. Our pastors do visit the sick and shut ins, take them communion, and pray with them.

Ok, you are starting to drive me bananas so I’m going to help a fellow Catholic out. You are missing FAB’s point on the readings and the Apostolic Succession.

He (or maybe She- sorry FAB didn’t look at your profile) was trying to tell you it doesn’t matter that your service has the same readings as our Mass does. Because your Ministers do not have the authority our Priests have due to Apostolic Succession. Your service is not our Mass, your Eucharist is not our Eucharist because in order for these things to be the same there has to be Apostolic Succession.

(FAB- if I got that wrong, please correct me.)

Catholics know that protestants don’t all believe the same things. We do believe they believe different variations of a theme. When we talk to them they tend to have the same objections to Catholicism. Are you surprised we lump them together? In our experience with them, they tend to act the same.

I don’t think your problem is that we say protestants are the same. I suspect you understand why we do that. I think your real problem is you feel we should be giving your beliefs more respect than we do.

 

[FAB]

Again you failed to actually address what the daily or sunday reading in Church and their meaningfulness has to do with Apostolic Succession.

I did address that there is no difference in the meaningdulnees of the word being read, there is a difference as to the interpetation of the meaning which is effected by Apostolic Succession. I will grant that it hasn’t been since more reacent decades that the Church has move from that the the scriptures are all truth, i.e. the earth created in 7 days, etc. to the scripture contains all truth relating to God’s salvation for us.
Depending on which branch of protestism someone might belong, there is a strick this is truth, history and God said it this way, to a very loose interpetation. Apostolic successtion give the Catholic church a steady history of interpeting the reveltion of God as seen throught he scripture and as guded by the Holy Spirit.

I have no issue being called protestant…I am. Luther essentially started the Protestant Reformation, so it would be silly to say I’m not Protestant. I have an issue with people assumeing that just because we are non Catholic we are all the same doctrinally. Doctrinally, the High Litergical Churches which trace their roots back to the 1500’s ARE much more similar today to the Catholics than they are to the non denominationals or fundamentalists.

Certainly I don’t think that all protestant demoniations have the same doctrine or at time any at all. The term protestant is used in a general term to describe any Christian denomination that is not Catholic, since there all basically share the same or similar roots. Men who thought they knew better than the Church Christ established.
By the way, Martin Luther eventually retured to the Church.

I also take issue with the fact that you are continuing to attempt to make the entire 100 Year long Protestant Reformation of the 1500’s all about Henry VIII desire to do his own thing. It’s so much bigger than that, and the English Reformation was only a tiny piece of it. No one denys that Henry was acting like a dork…even his contemparies in the reformation didn’t take him seriously. He does not and has never represented the Protestant Reformation as a whole neither did he start it.

The English reformation had little to do about faith and all to about the monarchy, starting with Henry.
The Church at the time was also very political, instead of being spiritual.

As to the doctrine of the Anglican Church they do believe that communion is the Body and Blood of our Lord just as the Lutheran (at least the MS) do as well. The entire transubstation (sp) vrs consubstantiaion (sp) is purely meta physical and really kind of silly in my mind. It’s his Body and Blood, it may look and taste like bread and wine, but he told us it’s his Body and Blood, he told us to continue the practice of communion…the actual process of it’s transformation is not important and part of the mystery in my mind. In this I would argue we are much closer to Catholics as communion is not just symbolic to us it is a vital part of worship and it is a sacrament, where as many other denominations do not believe in communion at all, or see it merely as a symbol and nothing more. As to whatever King Henry’s offspring said or did…not really applicable to Lutheran doctrine, but you do seem to be really hung up on him. He was an interesting character I’ll give him that.

Although you may not see a real difference in the meaning, doctorally there is. It’s more than a mind game.

Actually the Lutheran Church has 3 sacraments…Baptism, Confession, and Communion. Confirmation is regarded as a Sacramental Rite and the fulfillment of the Sacrament of Baptism. Holy Orders and Marriage are also Sacramental Rites as they existed prior to Christ and were not insituted by him. Also they are not something that all Christians are called to. Annointing of the sick…honestly no idea why this one was left out. Our pastors do visit the sick and shut ins, take them communion, and pray with them.

Your beliefs seem to lean more toward the Catholic Church than I think you want to admit. There is certainly common grounds between us, which is why the Catholic church urges it’s faithfull to get past doctrial differences and to work for the betterment of all God’ Children.
Peace

 

[lisaraek]

I’m a convert from the Southern Baptist denomination and my experience while there was that the people in that denomination often referenced their beliefs to Catholicism. I heard people say that while Baptists believed in salvation by faith alone, Catholics put all their faith in good works. They said that Baptists embraced Bible study and sola scriptura (although they never used that term) while the Catholics actively discouraged Bible study and individual Bible reading. In addition, Catholics worshipped Mary, the Pope, statues, saints and other odd things and were, in general, simply an irrelevant, superstitious residue of the Middle Ages.
In short, the average Baptist’s lack of knowledge of Catholicism is breath-taking. Frequently, in Adult Bible Study I heard people earnestly requesting prayer for the salvation of their “unsaved Catholic” relative with the same fervor as if that person was unquestioningly damned–that being Catholic alone was sufficient enough to merit the “fast pass” to hell.
So, although referencing Catholicism to Protestantism is common on both sides, when we discuss our beliefs we all need to make comparisions based on a thorough understanding of each others core beliefs. My personal experience, after coming into the Church, is that Catholics take a far more charitable view of Protestants and Protestantism than the Protestants do of Catholics and Catholicism.

 

[BenedictOblate]

With regard to Apostolic Succession, there are some other Christians that lay claim to this as well and may have a valid argument.

They say the Holy Spirit guided them to claim that their path is correct. It is interesting that we use the same arguments to defend the same position. In short, we say we’re right, because the Holy Spirit guided our decision making and so do they.

 

[FAB]

With regard to Apostolic Succession, there are some other Christians that lay claim to this as well and may have a valid argument.

They say the Holy Spirit guided them to claim that their path is correct. It is interesting that we use the same arguments to defend the same position. In short, we say we’re right, because the Holy Spirit guided our decision making and so do they.

The Church does not deny that the Holy Spirit works in other congregations. Our belief is that the pope is the representative of Christ on earth and trace that succestion back to St. Peter.

 

[Alix1912]

I did address that there is no difference in the meaningdulnees of the word being read, there is a difference as to the interpetation of the meaning which is effected by Apostolic Succession. I will grant that it hasn’t been since more reacent decades that the Church has move from that the the scriptures are all truth, i.e. the earth created in 7 days, etc. to the scripture contains all truth relating to God’s salvation for us.
Depending on which branch of protestism someone might belong, there is a strick this is truth, history and God said it this way, to a very loose interpetation. Apostolic successtion give the Catholic church a steady history of interpeting the reveltion of God as seen throught he scripture and as guded by the Holy Spirit.

Certainly I don’t think that all protestant demoniations have the same doctrine or at time any at all. The term protestant is used in a general term to describe any Christian denomination that is not Catholic, since there all basically share the same or similar roots. Men who thought they knew better than the Church Christ established.
By the way, Martin Luther eventually retured to the Church.

The English reformation had little to do about faith and all to about the monarchy, starting with Henry.
The Church at the time was also very political, instead of being spiritual.

Your beliefs seem to lean more toward the Catholic Church than I think you want to admit. There is certainly common grounds between us, which is why the Catholic church urges it’s faithfull to get past doctrial differences and to work for the betterment of all God’ Children.
Peace

Thanks for the clarification on why you feel Apostolic Succession is important to the service.

Again your history of the Reformation is wrong. Luther never returned to the Catholic Church. He actually had to go into hiding as the Church basically called for his death after excommunicating him. Don’t know where you got the information that he returned to the church, but that would have required a recant of everything he said and wrote and he was unwilling to do this even to the end.

Now many of our LCMS pastors and theolgians will say that he probably would have had no or little issue with the Catholic Church as it is today since many of the abuses that were prevelant in his day have been corrected. That is different however than saying he returned to the church.

Everyone knows the English Reformation started over Henry VIII acting like a child. However even he wasn;t taken seriously by other reformers at the time. They saw him as using their legitimate spiritual desire for reform for his own personal gain.

And yes the Catholic Church at the time was VERY political and used that power for some not so good things. I’m very happy that it does not do the same thing today, and that the recent leaders of it are great and holy men.

The LCMS is very close doctrinal to the Catholic Church. Closer than probably 90+% of the protestant churchs out there. It’s why the continual lumping of protestants together annoys me, and the treatment of us like we are silly and stupid annoys me.

I believe that soon the more conservative high litergical churchs are going to come under attack for their social policies, and we are going to need to stand together or lose.

 

[The_Old_Medic]

Because of the same reasons that SOME Protestants slam all Catholics. Ignorance, a belief that “I am right and you are 100% wrong”, and an air of superiority.

 

[Alix1912]

Because of the same reasons that SOME Protestants slam all Catholics. Ignorance, a belief that “I am right and you are 100% wrong”, and an air of superiority.

Great point…I often find that when I step away from my pride for a minute I understand, maybe not agree with, but understand others views better.

 

[steve_b]

There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain
eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at allwho is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.

Pius IX, Quanto Conficiamur Moerore, 7​

great quote.
m:

Those who have never had the benefit of effective catechesis will be judged based upon what they know, not what they have never had a chance to know.

true

and it’s appropriate to add

**1791 **ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.” In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

That’s not just for Catholics to know but everyone,
m:

The Code of Canon Law does not apply to those who are not in the Latin Church:
Can. 1 The canons of this Code regard only the Latin Church.

Can. 11 Merely ecclesiastical laws bind those who have been baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it, possess the efficient use of reason, and, unless the law expressly provides otherwise, have completed seven years of age.

Can. 96 By baptism one is incorporated into the Church of Christ and is constituted a person in it with the duties and rights which are proper to Christians in keeping with their condition, insofar as they are in ecclesiastical communion and unless a legitimately issued sanction stands in the way.

Can. 205 Those baptized are fully in the communion of the Catholic Church on this earth who are joined with Christ in its visible structure by the bonds of the profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical governance.
Those who are not in ecclesiastical communion and who have never been are not subject to the Code of Canon Law. Including the canonical definition of heresy.

Yes, their beliefs are heretical. But they cannot be held liable for that heresy, unless they have been baptized into the Catholic Church and catechized or received into that Church.

Yes the definition of heresy from the CCC is also in canon law. I think there is a misunderstanding about heresy however. Heresy is not relegated to only canon law. It is a scriptural term also. (reference below) So let’s not isolate this term to canon law only, as if it can’t be used and applied in any way outside canon law.

True the 1983 code of canon law does not apply outside the Latin rite.

However, as we see in the following, heresy is not just in canon law.

example

1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers* among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. 2 And many will follow their licentiousness, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled. 3 And in their greed they will exploit you with false words; from of old their condemnation has not been idle, and their destruction has not been asleep. 2 Pet 2:]

Peter takes heresy to the extreme by saying, some of these sources of error, will “even” deny Jesus. Obviously he’s not saying all heresies go that far. But heresy is clearly applicable and understood as well, outside of canon law. Not to overstate what Peter is saying here, it’s perfectly reasonable to point out that while most Protestants don’t deny Jesus, some DO deny the Trinity, which denies who Jesus is. Like Mormons and JW’s and oneness pentecostals, unitarians etc. It’s also accurate to say, Protestants, depending on the denomination, deny some or much truth that Our Lord’s Church, the Catholic Church, teaches. How did Peter call it? False teachers will bring distructive heresies and exploit you and many will follow them. And did that happen over the last 2000 years particularly the last 500 years? Yes. Did the successors to St Peter ever teach heresy to the Church? No

Re: the title of the thread, I personally haven’t run into people who slam Protestants here. The moderators will stop that stuff anyway.

 

[steve_b]

With regard to Apostolic Succession, there are some other Christians that lay claim to this as well and may have a valid argument.

The EO have a valid claim
BO:

They say the Holy Spirit guided them to claim that their path is correct. It is interesting that we use the same arguments to defend the same position. In short, we say we’re right, because the Holy Spirit guided our decision making and so do they.

So how do YOU find out whose right?

 

[BenedictOblate]

The EO have a valid claim

So how do YOU find out whose right?

I am a practicing Roman Catholic. I continue to search for truth. I try really hard not to be concerned with what others are doing, but the sin of arrogance is something with which I struggle.

I pray everyday for my will to be aligned with the will of the Father. I hope that He reveals his truth to me and I try to be open to whatever He may tell me.

 

[asd72]

I agree with Alix1912 that is not always helpful to lump all Protestants together. Not if we are trying to discuss logically their objections to the Catholic church and work towards unity.

I don’t think we slam Protestants in general. This board seems quite well moderated to me.

 

[FAB]

I believe that soon the more conservative high litergical churchs are going to come under attack for their social policies, and we are going to need to stand together or lose.

Amen:thumbsup:

 

[BenedictOblate]

I believe that soon the more conservative high litergical churchs are going to come under attack for their social policies, and we are going to need to stand together or lose.

This seems likely to happen. I guess if political leaders continue to pass legislation that conflicts with our beliefs we may have to ask ourselves some hard questions.

1. Rather than overturning legislation, should our energies be more focussed on education?
2. If others are committing sinful, evil acts, can we continue to try to do the right things and put the other things in the hands of God?
3. Can we be OK when others are not?

With regard to abortion, I don’t think I can answer “yes” to any of the above questions, but with many other “social issues” I can.

 

[Alix1912]

This seems likely to happen. I guess if political leaders continue to pass legislation that conflicts with our beliefs we may have to ask ourselves some hard questions.

1. Rather than overturning legislation, should our energies be more focussed on education?
2. If others are committing sinful, evil acts, can we continue to try to do the right things and put the other things in the hands of God?
3. Can we be OK when others are not?

With regard to abortion, I don’t think I can answer “yes” to any of the above questions, but with many other “social issues” I can.

I think education is great, and living a model life…demonstrating that people can be happy anf fulfilled living moral lives is great. As you have stated in #2 we can only gently teach and model, we cannot force anyone to live a life they do not want to embrace.

However…if legislation for say Gay Marriage passes, then most conservative churchs are going to lose their tax exempt status and be labeled discriminatory. Do you have any idea how much the property taxes on St. Patricks in NYC alone would be? It sits on one of the most prime and valuable pieces of Real Estate in the ENTIRE country. Not to mention the churchs and Cathedrals across the country that sit on valuable and expensive Real Estate but pay not property taxes. It would essentially cripple not only the Catholic Chuch, but the LCMS, WELS, and conservative sects of the Anglican Church financially.

As for abortion…I really do wish that we could get some kind of ban…even if it was only to stop abortions for BC and culling it would still be better than nothing.

However, because we refuse to ordain women, and promote homosexual agendas and with the growing ris of the cult of enviormentalism and athiesm we are going to start being a persecuted religon again, we are in many ways already. It’s OK to wear a muslim head covering in our local schools, but kids get in trouble for wearing shirts that promote Christian Values. This will be espeically felt by the High Churchs that maintain traditions and refuse to bow to social pressure. There will come a time when we have to stand together or we will fall seperatly, if that time is not already upon us now.

 

[BenedictOblate]

I think education is great, and living a model life…demonstrating that people can be happy anf fulfilled living moral lives is great. As you have stated in #2 we can only gently teach and model, we cannot force anyone to live a life they do not want to embrace.

However…if legislation for say Gay Marriage passes, then most conservative churchs are going to lose their tax exempt status and be labeled discriminatory. Do you have any idea how much the property taxes on St. Patricks in NYC alone would be? It sits on one of the most prime and valuable pieces of Real Estate in the ENTIRE country. Not to mention the churchs and Cathedrals across the country that sit on valuable and expensive Real Estate but pay not property taxes. It would essentially cripple not only the Catholic Chuch, but the LCMS, WELS, and conservative sects of the Anglican Church financially.

As for abortion…I really do wish that we could get some kind of ban…even if it was only to stop abortions for BC and culling it would still be better than nothing.

However, because we refuse to ordain women, and promote homosexual agendas and with the growing ris of the cult of enviormentalism and athiesm we are going to start being a persecuted religon again, we are in many ways already. It’s OK to wear a muslim head covering in our local schools, but kids get in trouble for wearing shirts that promote Christian Values. This will be espeically felt by the High Churchs that maintain traditions and refuse to bow to social pressure. There will come a time when we have to stand together or we will fall seperatly, if that time is not already upon us now.

Thankfully we have the First Amendment and that may provide some protection from those who wish to fight churches.

The Lord told us we would be persecuted. Sometimes I think we cling too strongly to this world.

 

[Kat127]

I think education is great, and living a model life…demonstrating that people can be happy anf fulfilled living moral lives is great. As you have stated in #2 we can only gently teach and model, we cannot force anyone to live a life they do not want to embrace.

However…if legislation for say Gay Marriage passes, then most conservative churchs are going to lose their tax exempt status and be labeled discriminatory. Do you have any idea how much the property taxes on St. Patricks in NYC alone would be? It sits on one of the most prime and valuable pieces of Real Estate in the ENTIRE country. Not to mention the churchs and Cathedrals across the country that sit on valuable and expensive Real Estate but pay not property taxes. It would essentially cripple not only the Catholic Chuch, but the LCMS, WELS, and conservative sects of the Anglican Church financially.

As for abortion…I really do wish that we could get some kind of ban…even if it was only to stop abortions for BC and culling it would still be better than nothing.

However, because we refuse to ordain women, and promote homosexual agendas and with the growing ris of the cult of enviormentalism and athiesm we are going to start being a persecuted religon again, we are in many ways already. It’s OK to wear a muslim head covering in our local schools, but kids get in trouble for wearing shirts that promote Christian Values. This will be espeically felt by the High Churchs that maintain traditions and refuse to bow to social pressure. There will come a time when we have to stand together or we will fall seperatly, if that time is not already upon us now.

It is highly unlikely the Church will lose it’s tax exempt status even if Gay Marriage is made legal. It isn’t legal discrimination because of sexual ordination. A straight woman cannot marry a straight woman. A gay woman cannot marry a straight woman. Yet a Gay woman can marry a Gay man. You’d have better luck arguing it is discrimination because of gender and even that will fail.

Besides everyone agrees that sacramental marriage and legal marriage are not the same things. Historically, the law treated them differently. Now the law can always change but considering most people agree Churches have the right to set their own rules as to who can be married…a lot would have to change before a law like that would fly.

As another poster pointed out the 1st Amendment is also a protection against such a law. The power to tax is the power to destroy.

I don’t think Catholics refuse to work with Protestants on causes we have in common. You are our brothers and sisters in Christ and our Pope has told us to play nicely.

 

[Alix1912]

It is highly unlikely the Church will lose it’s tax exempt status even if Gay Marriage is made legal. It isn’t legal discrimination because of sexual ordination. A straight woman cannot marry a straight woman. A gay woman cannot marry a straight woman. Yet a Gay woman can marry a Gay man. You’d have better luck arguing it is discrimination because of gender and even that will fail.

Besides everyone agrees that sacramental marriage and legal marriage are not the same things. Historically, the law treated them differently. Now the law can always change but considering most people agree Churches have the right to set their own rules as to who can be married…a lot would have to change before a law like that would fly.

As another poster pointed out the 1st Amendment is also a protection against such a law. The power to tax is the power to destroy.

I don’t think Catholics refuse to work with Protestants on causes we have in common. You are our brothers and sisters in Christ and our Pope has told us to play nicely.

1st amemdment protects the freedom of speech, and the freedom to practice religon, it says nothing about the ability of a state (which controls property taxes) to tax a charitable insitution. We had a law come up in our state about 5 years ago on the ballot that almost won that would have stripped Churchs of their exempt status. Mass. had one debated as well. Did not they try to do exactly that to CAF about 1-2 years ago? Refusal to allow someone to hold a position in your organization based on sex or sexual preference can be considered discrimination. Non Profits that discriminate often lose their tax exempt status in certain states. The KKK doesn’t get tax exemption. Political organizations don’t get the same exemption status. It’s all in the details of each states specific laws.

The power to tax is very much the power to destroy. It is also in our current system the power to social engineer as well.

The concept of Churchs being tax exempt is not based on Freedom of Religon but on Non Profit Tax exemption laws. That is why religious organizations can’t endorse candidates or ballot initatives in most states. The LCMS leadership is already preparing plans on how to deal with losing that status if it happens. If you do not believe it could happen…you head is in the sand. There are groups out there actively working to try and make it happen.

 

[BenedictOblate]

1st amemdment protects the freedom of speech, and the freedom to practice religon, it says nothing about the ability of a state (which controls property taxes) to tax a charitable insitution. We had a law come up in our state about 5 years ago on the ballot that almost won that would have stripped Churchs of their exempt status. Mass. had one debated as well. Did not they try to do exactly that to CAF about 1-2 years ago? Refusal to allow someone to hold a position in your organization based on sex or sexual preference can be considered discrimination. Non Profits that discriminate often lose their tax exempt status in certain states. The KKK doesn’t get tax exemption. Political organizations don’t get the same exemption status. It’s all in the details of each states specific laws.

The power to tax is very much the power to destroy. It is also in our current system the power to social engineer as well.

The concept of Churchs being tax exempt is not based on Freedom of Religon but on Non Profit Tax exemption laws. That is why religious organizations can’t endorse candidates or ballot initatives in most states. The LCMS leadership is already preparing plans on how to deal with losing that status if it happens. If you do not believe it could happen…you head is in the sand. There are groups out there actively working to try and make it happen.

I think the 1st Amendment may be invoked, however, in this argument. The government has neither has the right to tell a religious organization how to practice its religion nor will it want to tax religious organizations. The line between the two would become extraordinarily fuzzy and I don’t think the government would want religious organizations suddenly having the right to become involved politically. THAT could be very detrimental to one side of the aisle.