PRUDEN: The ignorance of Rick Santorum

The Washington Times ^ | February 28, 2012 | Wesley Pruden

[RobbyS]

There is noi marxist part of the Church. There are only marxists who claim to be acting like Catholics when they are going against the social teachings of the Church. The social encyclicals of Leo XIII are anti-marxist but also anti-statist treatises.The pope had to address the anti-Catholic policies of the Bismarck Regime and of the socialists, too.

[SaraJohnson]

I know. But they are in the church power structure. You will see in time.

[RobbyS]

Interesting to compare Mr.Justice Storey’s commentary on the Constitution with what passes as constitutional ,law today. He was a unitarian, but his views, which were similar to those of aristocrats such as John Quincy Adams, take a very different view of the First Amendment than Black does in Everson. As to the Baptists, there is a difference between those influenced by the evangelicalism of the 18th Century and the older, more conservative congregations..

[RobbyS]

Interesting to compare Mr.Justice Storey’s commentary on the Constitution with what passes as constitutional ,law today. He was a unitarian, but his views, which were similar to those of aristocrats such as John Quincy Adams, take a very different view of the First Amendment than Black does in Everson. As to the Baptists, there is a difference between those influenced by the evangelicalism of the 18th Century and the older, more conservative congregations..

[allmendream]

Twain said of Wagner’s music “It is better than it sounds.”

[RobbyS]

Guy Fawkes and his fellow conspirators wanted to blow up the entire government of England because of James vacillated on removing the disabilities on Catholics, even though he, unlike Elizabeth, was recognized as a lawful rule by Rome. A colossal blunder, of course. James had a nasty habit of bait and switch. He disappointed the Purtitans even more.

[RobbyS]

But so are atheists,protestants, and whatever. The Church rules by consensus, however, and the orthodox’s hope that the dissenters and unbelievers don’t cause too much trouble. The barque of Peter is guaranteed only not to sink. But the ship looks pretty derelict at times. When Napoleon took the pope prisoner, it was widely predicted that the papacy would end at the same time that the Holy Roman Empire actually did.

[GilesB]

You are confusing Church and church. Santorim plainly meant church - generically, you are implying he meant Church, as an institution. I heard what he said, he did NOT say or mean what you are implying he said or meant.

You have a larger agenda here, obviously.

[GilesB]

You are wrong - “Church” means as you have described. “church” means the whole body of believing Christians, not a particular institution.

Santorum was obviously using “church” and its “body of believing Christians” meaning, not “Church” meaning a specific (in his case Catholic) institution.

[GilesB]

I’m not a Romney supporter, I support Santorum. But your statement about Romney could be said about any Christian - any Christian is bound by his belief and his profession to do as God directs him, he cannot serve two masters either.

[RoosterRedux]

But God is true...the President of the (LDS) Church is the leader of a cult!

Who would you rather serve? Jesus or the President of the LDS?

[darrellmaurina]

123 posted on Wednesday, February 29, 2012 3:36:38 PM by RobbyS: “Interesting to compare Mr.Justice Storey’s commentary on the Constitution with what passes as constitutional law today. He was a unitarian, but his views, which were similar to those of aristocrats such as John Quincy Adams, take a very different view of the First Amendment than Black does in Everson. As to the Baptists, there is a difference between those influenced by the evangelicalism of the 18th Century and the older, more conservative congregations.”

115 posted on Wednesday, February 29, 2012 10:52:09 AM by Hemingway's Ghost: “Great stuff. Thanks for the education.”

Glad to help, or at least try to do so.

I believe it is important that we understand the potential for the internet as a venue for education. Politics in the days of the Lincoln-Douglas debates assumed a high level of knowledge on the part of the hearers — knowledge not only of current issues of the day but also of American history and principles of political theory and constitutional law.

We can't assume that today, but what we **CAN** do is use the question-and-answer format of internet discussions to try to bring back some of what we have lost through a dumbed-down education system.

[writer33]

We can't assume that today, but what we **CAN** do is use the question-and-answer format of internet discussions to try to bring back some of what we have lost through a dumbed-down education system.

Hold up, darrell. You're making too much sense. Just calm down. LOL!

[GilesB]

Your point was about serving two masters, not the qualities thereof. So my point was addressing serving two masters - not about which is a better master to serve.

Your argument with Romney is not that he would serve two masters, but with the master he serves - make THAT point, and leave alone the “two masters” red herring.

[RobbyS]

On a comparable note, it is said that during the cHristological disputes of the 5th century, the common people had a sophisticated knowledge of theology. The blacksmith and the baker in Constantinople could argue intelligently over the issues of Chalcedon, and while they might comes to blows when they reached impasse, they each knew that they were talking about and were not afraid tio take a stand. I dare say that our present college graduates cannot hold a candle to their grandfathers/grandfather’s peers who graduated from college, and in matters of politics probably not to the storekeepers of that time with a solid elementary education.

one of my favorite presidents is Cal Coolidge, who affected the pose of a New England farmer. May be if that farmer could read the New Testament in Greeks as Coolidge could.

[RoosterRedux]

Red herring?

You are obviously unaware of the book about Romney on this subject, Can Mitt Romney Serve Two Masters?

[RoosterRedux]

My point is PRECISELY about serving two masters...or in this case probably serving the LDS instead of the Country or the Constitution.

[samtheman]

Rick says the right thing — he’s definitely correct on this issue — but he doesn’t say it very well. He’s not a Great Communicator, by a longshot. But he is right on this issue.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

We can't assume that today, but what we **CAN** do is use the question-and-answer format of internet discussions to try to bring back some of what we have lost through a dumbed-down education system.

100% correct.

And I think one of the ways in which American students of the 20th century have been short-sheeted in an educational sense, myself included, is in the ecclesiastical history of the United States. We focus all our energy on the secular history, and completely ignore what was going on historically in the church. But what was going on historically in the church is really the key, say, to understanding what begot the American Revolution, especially here in colonial Massachusetts.

Thanks once again.

[GilesB]

Look, if your point is about serving two masters, then you would have an objection to the Christian candidate who must serve God and his country - and you obviously don’t have a problem with that Christian candidate.

Your problem is not about serving two masters, it is about which master the candidate is serving - as you said, the LDS. THAT is your issue.

While I don’t agree with the teachings of the LDS, I don’t think there is any more danger of Romney serving the LDS ahead of or instead of the country or the Constitution than there is of Santorum or Gingrich serving the Pope ahead of the country or Constitution.