'No' is the answer to your question [you already knew that].... but your phrasing is pretty darn funny nonetheless!! Pax et bonum.
Posted on 09/07/2004 5:26:29 PM PDT by AskStPhilomena
It is kind of ironic, when you think about it, that the SchizTrads that criticize us so vociferously aren't actually real Catholics anymore themselves. Heh. They're a notch above Protestants on the Catholimeter.
So you attack the flock instead...
'No' is the answer to your question [you already knew that].... but your phrasing is pretty darn funny nonetheless!! Pax et bonum.
Hope the nuns do not make this political activity a habit :~)
You're right on the money. Imagine...
"...and when the remaining Apostles learned of Judas' betrayal, they parted from Peter, John, and Andrew to repair the commemorative Paschal sacrifice with the traditional lamb instead of bread and wine..."
It's their sin, not yours. You're called to be obedient in spite of it.
Silly woman! Either she doesn't KNOW about the Susan B. Anthony fund, which means she didn't do any research on the matter, or she's just spinning this because she wants to support liberal candidates. I'd suspect the latter because of the other political contributions they've made in the past.
The DFP mis-stated Cardinal Ratzinger's statement and I believe they did it intentionally to confuse Catholic voters. The Cardinal has said that Catholics should only vote for pro-abortion candidates if there is no other pro-life candidate in the race and that candidate is the less rabidly pro-abortion of the two, or if the candidate is a member of a party that is pro-life, and whose presence will increase the power of the pro-life party. These exceptions are mentioned because Catholics should always take part in elections; they should not disenfranchise themselves because of the candidates' positions.
Some bishops have taken Ratzinger's statement and altered it to say that it is ok to vote for a pro-abortion candidate instead of the pro-life one, if that candidate's other positions are in line with the Church, e.g. social justice, etc. They are WRONG!
This whole thread is a stitch.
Love to paint with a nice, broad brush, don't we?
Is the Pope a neo-Catholic? Is he corrupt?
Because that's where my loyalties lie. With the successor of Peter. Just as for millions of other Catholics.
Outside of those loyal to the Holy Father and the Magisterium are groups of various colors and persuasions. Including the nuns described in this article.
Take care that you too, don't find yourself amongst these groups. On the particularly dangerous and alluring pretext of finding a solution to the problems posed by such as these.
>> Then what do you think Cardinal Miada will do to these sisters??? How about Bishop Pilla and the Sisters of St. Joseph in Rocky River, Ohio?? <<
I'm not sure if Maida would be to blame if nothing were done. I've heard that O'Malley cannot do anything to the Paulist Center, short of petitioning Rome to banish the entire order from his diocese. But these are nuns, not priests, so they may be more under the bishop's jurisdiction.
>> Where did you learn how to spell "nuns"? Let me guess, a Catholic grade school. Were the "nones" too busy teaching sex-ed? <<
O for crying out loud, LOTI, it's a derogatory pun!
But the reality is that if you are following the "Vatican II Church," then you are not being faithful to the truth of the Catholic Faith as it has been taught for the past 2000 years. It is unfortunate that it has come to this pass at this point in history in which we are living, but you are forced to make a choice between the magisterium of the Catholic Church as it has taught the Faith for centuries, and the pied pipers of the "post-conciliar revolution." You're either following them or you're against them; there's no middle ground.
Compare you situation to these IHM nuns and all the other nuns in the world as well. They must choose. These IHM nuns have chosen the modernism of the Vatican II revolution. We are seeing the result -- utter and total collapse, both morally and physically. Other nuns have chosen Catholic tradition. There is no safe middle ground.
[As to your spelling of "nones," you should have said that it was because of your great learning, and that is the traditional spelling of "nun" as you will find in Chaucer and in placenames such as "Nonesetter."]
Thank you for the contact information! We all need to send them a message decrying their support of abortion with money and election of those who support abortion.
St. Michael, the Archangel, pray for us!
Thanks for the applause. But you misunderstand the argument. It's not that all nuns are pro-aborts, but that all nuns find themselves in the same intolerable situation. They are all left equally adrift by the Vatican II revolution. They are all dying off at virtually identical rates. And as far as abortion goes, they have all assimilated liberal ideas that are incompatible with the traditional Catholic faith, even if they have not gone so far as supporting pro-abortion organizations.
Can I then reason that all SchizTrads are insane based on the obsessive rantings of some of your friends here (particularly the one or two that spam the crap out of this board with the same article -just written differently- every day)?
Do I detect a hint of frustration? When one is unable to argue the question on its merits, they often turn to desperate strategies like vulgarity and abuse.
I don't think that's accurate. The Detroit Free Press has another article today which quotes new statements of Cardinal Ratzinger regarding "remote material cooperation." Surely the IHM nuns could claim that their donation to Emily's List is at worst remote material cooperation which was intended only to promote the feminism which is so highly regarded by JPII, and not to encourage their support of abortion.
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.