Skip to comments.A Catholic Wind in the White House
Posted on 04/13/2008 8:54:51 AM PDT by don-o
Shortly after Pope Benedict XVI's election in 2005, President Bush met with a small circle of advisers in the Oval Office. As some mentioned their own religious backgrounds, the president remarked that he had read one of the new pontiff's books about faith and culture in Western Europe.
Bush attends an Episcopal church in Washington and belongs to a Methodist church in Texas, and his political base is solidly evangelical. Yet this Protestant president has surrounded himself with Roman Catholic intellectuals, speechwriters, professors, priests, bishops and politicians. These Catholics -- and thus Catholic social teaching -- have for the past eight years been shaping Bush's speeches, policies and legacy to a degree perhaps unprecedented in U.S. history.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
The WaPo’s and Daniel Burke’s Papist bigotry is showing brightly.
“Bush also used Catholic doctrine and rhetoric to push his faith-based initiative, a movement to open federal funding to grass-roots religious groups that provide social services to their communities. Much of that initiative is based on the Catholic principle of “subsidiarity” — the idea that local people are in the best position to solve local problems. “The president probably knows absolutely nothing about the Catholic catechism, but he’s very familiar with the principle of subsidiarity,” said H. James Towey, former director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives who is now the president of a Catholic college in southwestern Pennsylvania. “It’s the sense that the government is not the savior and that problems like poverty have spiritual roots.”
“Nonetheless, Bush is not without his Catholic critics. Some contend that his faith-based rhetoric is just small-government conservatism dressed up in religious vestments, and that his economic policies, including tax cuts for the rich, have created a wealth gap that clearly upends the Catholic principle of solidarity with the poor.”
Bush has totally IGNORED the real separation of “church and state”. As it stands now, Muslims can get government money and “help” the poor. It is WRONG to use government money to further “religion”. THe money SHOULD come from the church and it’s givers - not the state.
TO my favorite Catholic apologist:
Please expound on the mentioned principle. Is there a difference in expectation from individuals as opposed to organizations - businesses, governments, etc?
The Catholic haters/bashers on FR are going to be seething with anger!
I stay off the religion forum, mainly for that reason. However, my better half has a very good style in dealing with such. I think this article merits a place in the News forum.
The “Know Nothings” ride again.
I believe Bush is a Christian who understands the salvation offered by Jesus Christ. But his religion doctrine is very muddled. Bush is genuine do-gooder with good intentions as opposed to Democrats who pretend to be do-gooders but have bad intentions. Neither political model offers the country much in the way of leadership.
Wow. I’m surprised.
I'm trying to remember the last time the MSM has referred to any slogan of the left as a "mantra." Using the term indicates contempt.
Some contend that his faith-based rhetoric is just small-government conservatism dressed up in religious vestments, and that his economic policies, including tax cuts for the rich, have created a wealth gap that clearly upends the Catholic principle of solidarity with the poor.
The idea of the "wealth gap" is a holy of holies to the Left. It's not enough to help the poor, we must punish the rich, an idea that seems strikingly un-Christian.
Yes, she does — I’ve noticed . . . though I’ve been less and less frequently on the religion threads myself — somehow they all sound like the same thread after a few posts . . . can’t think why! ;-)
I don’t think so. I don’t have anything against Catholics or any of the other traditional religions heretofore connected with American Politics. The only religion I’d have a real problem with in considering a connection to White House is Islam.
“I believe Bush is a Christian who understands the salvation offered by Jesus Christ.”
But he is totally ignorant or afraid, or both, of Islam and the menace it presents to the country he is supposed to protect against its enemies. I want to hear him expound that Christianity is a ROP.
I think you nailed it.
I agree. A non-story from the WaPo is still a non-story. Although, I would love to see the President cross the Tiber, I doubt that it will happen. I think Jeb is Catholic, and he might have been helpful in forming George W.'s non-combative stance toward Catholics in general; but that's a far cry from preferential hire or thoughts of conversion. As I said above, a meaningless non-story suitable only for taking up space in their dying paper.
“I believe Bush is a Christian who understands the salvation offered by Jesus Christ. But his religion doctrine is very muddled. Bush is genuine do-gooder with good intentions as opposed to Democrats who pretend to be do-gooders but have bad intentions. Neither political model offers the country much in the way of leadership.”
I agree. Bush is a genuinely good, Christian man. I doubt he will change his religious affiliation, though. The WaPo thinks that anyone, especially a Republican, who has strong Christian beliefs, is somehow strange, and this merits a story.
I would much rather the President cut taxes so that the money can be donated by people to charitable causes — when taxes are raised, the first casaulty in our greedy society is charitable contributions. Lower taxes and open the pockets of people to charitable causes, and then those charitable causes (churches, etc.) can aid the poor.
However, if our government insists on spending giant amounts of money on the poor anyway (right or wrong), then it is better when that money is in the hands of local charities than government workers unwilling to solve a problem and thusly eliminate their guaranteed government jobs. Taking advantage of poor people in such a manner is something that Our Lord, I feel, would not look favorably upon.