Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush Becoming a Catholic?
Newsmax.com ^ | June 16, 2008 | Jim Meyers

Posted on 06/16/2008 6:16:35 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks

President Bush may follow in the footsteps of his brother Jeb and convert to Catholicism, several European papers are reporting.

In the wake of the president’s visit to see Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican, Italian newspapers, citing Vatican sources, said Bush was open to the idea of converting to Catholicism.

The Italian newspaper Il Foglio referred to such talk about Bush’s possible conversion and stated that “anything is possible, especially for someone reborn like Bush.”

Noting that Tony Blair converted to Catholicism after leaving office as Britain’s prime minister last year, the paper also stated that “if anything happens, it will happen after he finishes his period as president, not before. It is similar to Blair’s case, but with different circumstances.”

President Bush welcomed Pope Benedict XVI warmly when he visited the U.S. in April. And Vatican watchers noted that Bush met privately with the pontiff in the private gardens of the Vatican last Friday — an unprecedented place for the Pope to meet a head of state. Typically, the Vatican gardens are used by the Pope for private reflection.

A Vatican spokesman said the Pope used the unusual locale to reciprocate for the “warmth” Bush showed when the two met in Washington.

Though the Catholic Church has criticized the U.S. war in Iraq, Bush has been an ardent supporter of pro-life issues; he has staunchly opposed stem-cell research; and he opposes gay marriage — all issues important for Rome.

Currently Bush belongs to a Methodist church in Texas and attends an Episcopal church in Washington, D.C.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Mainline Protestant; Moral Issues; Religion & Science
KEYWORDS: abortion; catholicism; catholics; conversion; drunkensailor; episcopalians; evangelicals; gaymarriage; georgewbush; herewegoagain; homosexuality; jebbush; methodists; notconservative; popebenedict; presidentbush; prolife; protestantism; protestants; religion; stemcells; tonyblair; vatican
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-153 next last

1 posted on 06/16/2008 6:17:09 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 3D-JOY; abner; Abundy; AGreatPer; Albion Wilde; AliVeritas; alisasny; ALlRightAllTheTime; ...

PING!


2 posted on 06/16/2008 6:21:08 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Drill Here! Drill Now! Pay Less! Sign the petition at http://www.americansolutions.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

After hearing about how they refuse to marry people who are paralyzed I have lost all respect for the Catholic Church. Canon does not trump the Bible.


3 posted on 06/16/2008 6:24:02 PM PDT by LukeL (Yasser Arafat: "I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

if Newsmax is reporting it...ugh.. I just wished they hadn’t.


4 posted on 06/16/2008 6:28:29 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (" ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LukeL

I read once about a high school classmate of mine who was wheelchair-bound. She got married. I don’t see the problem here (but the Church does, for some reason).


5 posted on 06/16/2008 6:28:47 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (Drill Here! Drill Now! Pay Less! Sign the petition at http://www.americansolutions.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LukeL
After hearing about how they refuse to marry people who are paralyzed I have lost all respect for the Catholic Church. Canon does not trump the Bible.

whaaaa?

6 posted on 06/16/2008 6:29:50 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (" ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

If a person cannot perform the physical act of sex, the church will not marry you.


8 posted on 06/16/2008 6:30:55 PM PDT by LukeL (Yasser Arafat: "I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LukeL
Re: "refuse to marry people who are paralyzed"

I've never heard this... looking for detail on this please.

9 posted on 06/16/2008 6:32:19 PM PDT by Trajan88 (www.bullittclub.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

That would be so sad. But it can’t be ruled out; with his “we all worship one God” garbage, and his un-Biblical optimism about unredeemed human nature, you know W’s grasp of the Bible is (to be charitable) uneven.


10 posted on 06/16/2008 6:34:38 PM PDT by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trajan88

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=7581


11 posted on 06/16/2008 6:38:47 PM PDT by LukeL (Yasser Arafat: "I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: LukeL
After hearing about how they refuse to marry people who are paralyzed

Never heard that before. Have a link?

12 posted on 06/16/2008 6:40:42 PM PDT by Pontiac (Your message here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LukeL; NYer; Salvation; narses; Coleus; Petronski; trisham; Tax-chick
After hearing about how they refuse to marry people who are paralyzed I have lost all respect for the Catholic Church.

Whoever told you this was terribly mistaken, it is totally false.

13 posted on 06/16/2008 6:43:41 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Right, this makes sense as he is preparing to have his presidential library located at Southern METHODIST University.


14 posted on 06/16/2008 6:45:47 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

One has to admit that he has always been a bit of a follower.


15 posted on 06/16/2008 6:48:00 PM PDT by buck jarret
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LukeL; Trajan88; Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Canon 1084.1 of the Code of Canon Law of the Catholic Church states that "antecedent and perpetual impotence to have sexual intercourse, whether on the part of the man or on that of the woman, whether absolute or relative, by its very nature invalidates marriage." However, Canon 1084.2 adds that "if the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether the doubt be one of law or one of fact, the marriage is not to be prevented nor, while the doubt persists, is it to be declared null."

It would have been wise for the priest not to raise the question at all, but once the answer is there and is an objective fact, indeed the couple should not marry as they cannot consummate the marriage.

It is no different than any other impediment to marriage, for example, a prior marriage not dissolved in the eye of the Church, or a vow of celibacy, or marrying a close relative.

16 posted on 06/16/2008 6:58:33 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LukeL

I never heard of such a thing. Are you sure?


17 posted on 06/16/2008 7:02:11 PM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

To put it delicately, women who have spinal cord injury do not suffer from the same malady that prevents men with the injury from having a church marriage. The question is whether or not the marriage can be consummated. Women with SCI are still able to consummate the marriage, wheras some men with the injury (depending on where the lesion falls) are often not able to consummate the marriage.

The inability to consummate a marriage is one of the primary grounds for annullment within the church. The church does not want to be in the position of officiating in a marriage where the grounds for annullment exist from the onset.

We may not agree with it, but that is the rationale.


18 posted on 06/16/2008 7:04:36 PM PDT by Burkean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: annalex

Sometimes you gotta wonder if lawyers weren’t writing these laws.

This is actually pathetic, IMHO. Why shouldn’t they marry? There are instances when a couple marries and later on through illness, a tragic accident, or whatever, one of the two could certainly become paralyzed or impotent and it doesn’t matter THEN, so why should is matter before?

Oy!


19 posted on 06/16/2008 7:05:58 PM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: annalex
A good resource on canonical impedimants to marriage is right with the article about the paraplegic.

See Wikipedia. It is by the way, identical to the list of reasons when an existing marriage can be nullified. Not all can.

20 posted on 06/16/2008 7:06:20 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Burkean

Gotta love the Catholic Church. The guy can beat the living daylights out of his wife every day for years but THAT isn’t grounds for annulment, but if he couldn’t consummate the marriage, THAT is.


21 posted on 06/16/2008 7:07:21 PM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: annalex

Oh yea, “Wikipedia,” the most reliable and scholarly information site on the internet.


22 posted on 06/16/2008 7:07:59 PM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Paved Paradise

Well, that is your opinion. A marriage must be valid when the vows are said; that includes intention and ability to consummate.

The proper question is, why should they marry? They can live together and receive all sacraments as a chaste couple.


23 posted on 06/16/2008 7:08:34 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

I’m not saying I think these reports are true, but if they are, then it explains GWB’s immigration ideas - they are fully in line with those of the Catholic Church.


24 posted on 06/16/2008 7:10:37 PM PDT by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paved Paradise

Abuse is grounds for separation, but alone it does not invalidate the marriage. In order to be invalid, the marriage must begin invalidly.

The Wikipedia article has footnotes to the actual canon law; if you doubt its accuracy, you can check the canons directly.

Looks like we found a better topic that the supposed conversion of the President.


25 posted on 06/16/2008 7:10:53 PM PDT by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

He’s gonna take orders from the Pope now!


26 posted on 06/16/2008 7:11:16 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Are you ready to pray for Teddy?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex

This topic is certainly worthy of discussion.

While I do check Wikipedia for some quick references, I can’t really rely on it; too much room for error since anyone can add to it. In college, the profs will not allow you to cite it in any research or other scholarly papers.

I knew that abuse is not grounds for invalidating a marriage, but that’s why this is just so crazy. Two people love each other but cannot consummate the marriage, but they could be devoted and share sexual love in other ways; yet, a man could be horribly abusive and they don’t seem to think that’s bad - it just frustrates me.

FWIW, I do understand that there is a spiritual component to marriage and that it is much more than what most of us think, yet.....

I can’t help but think on some level this is just, well, stupid (?)


27 posted on 06/16/2008 7:19:59 PM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Paved Paradise

It’s the elevation of the “traditions of men”. Mt 15.


28 posted on 06/16/2008 7:20:28 PM PDT by uptoolate (The Republican fear of Liberalism is why we are in this predicament)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: annalex

You have GOT to be kidding? Why should they marry?

Did you ever think that they love each other and want to have the benefits of legal marriage, etc.? Or that maybe they want to adopt kids or a host of other issues.

Oy. This is legalism at its finest and Christ condemned the legalists of his day and rightfully so.


29 posted on 06/16/2008 7:21:57 PM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: uptoolate

You are so right. I just posted to another Freeper on there that, to me, this is just legalism at its finest and how Christ really hammered on the legalists of his day.

So much for Christian “charity” and the commandments that ALL the laws are based upon, which are to love the Lord Thy God and to Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself.

So much for love, eh?


30 posted on 06/16/2008 7:23:59 PM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Burkean

I still find it hard to believe that the Catholic church truly doesn’t believe in miracles any more. How could they possibly know that the man might not recover from his spinal cord injury or any couple couldn’t overcome their infertility for that matter and couples are often blessed with children against medical odds. New medicines and treatments for things are being developed all the time. The entire idea of them denying a marriage on those grounds really upsets me. It sounds like something Muslims would come up with, not otherwise civilized people like Catholics.


31 posted on 06/16/2008 7:24:38 PM PDT by CatherinePPP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: LukeL

Oh, who wants to marry the church anyway? Most people want to marry another person.

I couldn’t resist.


32 posted on 06/16/2008 7:24:44 PM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CatherinePPP

Good points, all. If true, it seems almost diabolical.


33 posted on 06/16/2008 7:26:21 PM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CatherinePPP
or any couple couldn’t overcome their infertility for that matter and couples are often blessed with children against medical odds.

Exactly! Did not Abram marry a "barren" wife? They had that miracle happen!

34 posted on 06/16/2008 7:30:50 PM PDT by uptoolate (The Republican fear of Liberalism is why we are in this predicament)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Paved Paradise

Positive. The Church would have no problem marrying a serial killer (in prison) to a woman on the outside, yet a man with irreversible impotence cannot.


35 posted on 06/16/2008 7:31:40 PM PDT by LukeL (Yasser Arafat: "I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Burkean

I love how the malcontents have hijacked the thread.


36 posted on 06/16/2008 7:40:05 PM PDT by Norman Bates (Freepmail me to be part of the McCain List!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: CatherinePPP

“I still find it hard to believe that the Catholic church truly doesn’t believe in miracles any more.”

Huh?


37 posted on 06/16/2008 7:41:27 PM PDT by Norman Bates (Freepmail me to be part of the McCain List!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: annalex
The proper question is, why should they marry?

Maybe they think that God might grant them a baby despite the man's physical ailment? It would hardly be the first time a couple has conceived against surprising medical odds?

This is ugly bureaucracy and is horribly arrogant besides. How could some bishop possibly think he knows the future like that and rule out the possibility of a miracle or even a minor medical breakthrough that would help this couple.

Ugh, this poor couple. I feel awful for them knowing their own priest told them to give up and be quiet because God will never hear their prayers anyway. :-(
38 posted on 06/16/2008 7:47:48 PM PDT by CatherinePPP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Norman Bates

It bothers me that the Catholic church refuses to let an infertile man get married because they are so certain that means he will never have children. How can they possibly know that? More impressive miracles than that happen all the time. Every year there are people who are infertile and conceive anyway, either through prayer or medical treatment or both. I think it’s horrible for a church to slam the door on that possibility so cruelly. It seems backwards to me. Sorry but that’s how I feel.


39 posted on 06/16/2008 7:53:17 PM PDT by CatherinePPP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: LukeL

The person who told you that must have had a paralyzed brain and the person who believed it without proof, well, I don’t know.


40 posted on 06/16/2008 7:54:10 PM PDT by tiki (True Christians will not deliberately slander or misrepresent others or their beliefs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Paved Paradise

Because at that point, the marriage has been consummated. If it happens before, the marriage cannot be consummated.


41 posted on 06/16/2008 8:10:06 PM PDT by murron (Proud Marine Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Paved Paradise

I suppose it depends on the laws of each state, but they can still get legally married in a civil ceremony and derive all the benefits of a legal marriage. Getting married in the Church wouldn’t have any effect on that.


42 posted on 06/16/2008 8:12:41 PM PDT by murron (Proud Marine Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: LukeL

“The Church would have no problem marrying a serial killer (in prison) to a woman on the outside, yet a man with irreversible impotence cannot.”

Do you know of a case where that happened?


43 posted on 06/16/2008 8:14:23 PM PDT by murron (Proud Marine Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Paved Paradise

Legalism is alive and well on the FR religion thread. Jesus only had to deal with 6000 Pharisees. There are more than that here.


44 posted on 06/16/2008 8:17:01 PM PDT by norge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

His two-steppin’ with the philistinians ought to give him some pause.


45 posted on 06/16/2008 8:21:00 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Is GWB now saying that Methodism is uninspiring to him?


46 posted on 06/16/2008 8:29:09 PM PDT by Theodore R. ( Cowardice is still forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BibChr

I think Bush changed over the years. He allowed Washington to get the best of him. Sad! We really need someone who is immuned to the lust of power in Washington and will do God’s will for the American people even if it is the hard road.


47 posted on 06/16/2008 8:31:24 PM PDT by Buddygirl (Jesus said, I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. No man comes to the Father except through Me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LukeL

>> Positive. The Church would have no problem marrying a serial killer (in prison) to a woman on the outside, yet a man with irreversible impotence cannot. <<

Try checking your facts before making a fool of yourself.


48 posted on 06/16/2008 8:33:04 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: LukeL

The paralyzed thing - it means that if a person cannot consummate the marriage, they cannot be married sacramentally in the church. Merely being paralyzed does not translate into the inability to consummate the marriage.


49 posted on 06/16/2008 8:38:24 PM PDT by Gumdrop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gumdrop

To me a man being paralyzed usually means he is impotent and for a woman sex may or not be possible as I am unsure if those nerves would be involved.


50 posted on 06/16/2008 8:44:10 PM PDT by LukeL (Yasser Arafat: "I'd kill for a Nobel Peace Prize")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-153 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson