Posted on 05/18/2009 9:49:29 AM PDT by Zakeet
“So yes, a Catholic can vote for abortion, homosexual marriage, and euthanasia and still be a Catholic in good standing.”
________________
In your list of offenses you fail to mention standing in judgement of others as forbidden by the teaching of Christ.
When John F. Kennedy was running for president, he had to convince the country that he would not answer to Rome, rather to the Constitution. Now you are demanding that Catholic politicians look to Rome in decision making. What a difference 40 years makes.
The problem is that appearance is all, as Bambi well knows. His entire campaign was made up of carefully staged images, and he was really eager to get this one, of him standing there, wearing the robes of a Catholic institution and being honored by it PARTICULARLY in defiance of the bishops.
This means that the bishops lost and he won.
The average Catholic, obviously, does not feel this way (although clearly a lot of them at the graduation did), but in reality, it is now clear to all Catholics that the bishops are not the ones who call the shots in the Church. And while it is true that they haven’t been in charge for a long time, this was a defining moment.
It is the result of a much longer process, of course, which is the toleration of dissent and heresy by the bishops and their failure to demand that their clergy and institutions teach only the truth and live by it as well. ND had already defied its local bishop on other matters such as “Gay Day” and the Vagina Monologues, at absolutely no cost to either ND or Fr Jenkins. Bambi just took advantage of their weakness and used this moment to kick sand in their teeth and show exactly who he thinks is in charge of the Church.
It is the duty of a bishop to judge by their actions and words whether or not people adhere to the doctrine of the Church (which is salvific, not just a “better” option). Jesus specifically gave the Apostles and their successors that power and the duty to do that, in fact.
No one is “looking to Rome” for decision making. Abortion is a moral matter, it violates the Church’s teaching on the taking of innocent human life, and this is as true in the US as it is in Timbuktu, in Buenos Aires, in Hong Kong - or in Rome. That’s the only connection with Rome here.
Ah, the sin of "judgementalism," The greatest sin of all for those who like to misread Scripture. I often hear this from homosexuals trying to excuse their own guilt. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
"Judge not, lest ye be judged" doesn't mean that we are not allowed to identify sin. It means that we must use the same standard in judging others that we use for ourselves.
demanding that Catholic politicians look to Rome in decision making.
Wrong again. I expect Catholic politicians who cannot refrain from promoting murder to refrain from riding their Catholic identity to electoral victory. I expect Catholic politicians to refrain from promoting anti-Catholic ideas as Catholic. I expect Catholic institutions to refrain from lionizing enemies of the Church.
I fully expect for there to be a shake-out; it has been a LONG time coming. I'm just glad that it is happening when there is a new crop of Bishops who came up during the modernism and feminism of the 70's and 80's, and saw how their predecessors weakened the faith of Catholics by giving in to the criticism of liberals who wished only to change the Church to suit their own personal opinions. These new Bishops don't seem to be afraid to speak up in defense of the Church and the teachings of Jesus, as witnessed by their vocal opposition to pro-abortion politicians in general before the election, and the honoring of That One in particular.
I've even noticed that younger priests, and by that I mean those under the age of 50, also seem to be less liberal than their older brother priests, which will help move the CCD programs and Catholic Schools back toward faithfulness, which will educate future generations of Catholic kids.
Not all older priests are liberal, though. My b-i-l is a priest, going on 68, and is as faithful as they come, teaches the faith in an unapologetic way, but without what he calls 'pious piffle', and most of the kids in the regional Catholic high school he promoted and helped raise funds for, LOVE him for it.
Yes, there are good new bishops and young priests, but it’s very difficult because so many bad things have been allowed to take root in the Church. Maybe there will be a division in the Church as a result of this; the idea of schism is awful, but it’s certainly possible. I think it will be somewhat like living during the time of Henry VIII (hopefully without the persecutions...).
Some of the older priests are very good. I always admire them, because it certainly couldn’t have been easy remaining faithful when everybody around them was going nuts!
Do you think this gnat buzzing around God's littlest toenail is of any consequence?
I said earlier that Obama would crash and burn in a spectacle that would make 9/11 look like grass growing -- simply because they all flame out.
But he might just fade away, being just so much vapor.
It's an interesting thesis, would love to see it developed.
My favorite blog talks about the Obama-Planned Parenthood-nominal Catholic Axis. It is certainly feasible that the mob would be in the abortion business.
Incorrect. You're getting caught up in linguistic literalism. One's particular judgment after death; that judgment which will determine one's eternal destination, belongs to Almighty God. However, we are all called upon to judge the actions of the disorderly and separate ourselves from same.
"And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received of us." 2 Thessalonians 3:6
Stupid white guilt ridden lefty twit ping.
Babies die because of Obama.
Every one of those babies is of ultimate consequence to Christ.
Thus, Obama’s negative impact cannot be dismissed as though he were just one mosquito in a wide Summer sky. He is the President of the United States, and he is dangerous.
Theological relativism equates to moral relativism.
Thus, the Church must teach that there is only one ongoing covenant and path to salvation, which is Christ.
obama is a gnat.
Then stop him as easily as that characterization suggests.
It does, and has done for over 2000 years. God made us with free will, however, and no matter what the Church teaches, there will always be those who think they know better.
Actually, many churches, both Protestant and Catholic, have been teaching dual covenant theology since World War II.
Dual Covenant theology is the premise that there are parallel tracks to Heaven, and thus parallel tracks to salvation: one being Christ, and the other being simply following Old Testament law and/or laying claim to an ethnic/religious covenant that doesn’t include Christ.
Yet what that widespread new theology is claiming is that Christ is not and never was necessary, since according to such new theology a person can have a path to Heaven & salvation without Christ.
Of course, if true, that would diminish Christ from being the universal savior needed for all and instead render him as simply an add-on extra path for gentiles. That in turn diminishes his sacrifice, upon which Christianity is founded, since if there was an alternate path to salvation then the sacrifice on the cross would not really have been necessary.
And both Catholic and Protestant churches have been teaching such parallel covenant theology for decades.
John Hagee is an example of it within Protestant churches.
In the Catholic church, it is enshrined via a document called Nostra Aetate, by way of Vatican II.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.