Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Salvadoran Catholic Church asks President Funes to veto Bible reading in schools (Translated)
La Prensa Grafica (El Salvador) ^ | July 11, 2010 | Stefany Jovel with reporting from Loida Martínez

Posted on 07/11/2010 12:05:34 PM PDT by ConservativeMind

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-156 next last
To: Salvation

You’re welcome. I sympathize with the government of El Salvador. Crime and violence, especially gangs, are a serious problem in El Salvador, and of course among Salvadorans in the US as well. However, having students read, perhaps, the Sermon on the Mount - with no discussion, no examples, no effort to apply the words to the problem of violence in their society - seems likely to be of little effect. Maybe they’d learn a new vocabulary word.

It’s almost magical thinking ... *just* listening to a few words from the Bible is expected to address a serious societal issue.


51 posted on 07/11/2010 2:45:12 PM PDT by Tax-chick (We made a proactive decision to postpone the originally scheduled nightlife activities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

I agree. There is no such thing as “values free” or “religion free” education. The default position now, pretending to be neutral, is aggressive atheism with subsequent hedonism, marxism, etc - all based on atheism.

I’m not opposed to government schools in the sense of very local community government - town, or sections of town. Blocks. But no fedgov or entire state controlled schools, no no no.


52 posted on 07/11/2010 3:02:31 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Not all Protestant churches have caved on these matters. Not by a long shot. To say “educate yourself” on that shows ignorance, or a desire to do away with the truth.


53 posted on 07/11/2010 3:10:33 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

“Because it opens the door for mandatory reading of the Koran too. “

Not necessarily.

It could; but also, it could be the best weapon against Al Qaeda we’ve seen in a long time.


54 posted on 07/11/2010 3:11:44 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

What one officially teaches is one things; what they effectually convey is another. As long a church does not actually Biblically discipline (1Cor. 4:21; 5:9-13; Rm. 16:17; 2Thes. 3:6,14,15; 1Tim. 1:20; 6:5; 2Jn. 1:10) those who promote immorality, from Kerry to Pelosi to the commoners in the pews, but treat them as members, then it effectively is a liberal church, as that is what predominates wherever it reigns for long, in contrast to its evangelical adversaries, even in their present condition. .Differences Between Denominations

4

    Evangelicals versus Catholics, from various formal studies, spanning 1992 to 2009 (see sources here).

  • 73% (highest) of Pentecostal/Foursquare believers strongly affirm that Christ was sinless on earth, with Catholics, Lutherans and Methodists being tied at 33%, and the lowest being among Episcopalians with just 28%

  • 64% of those in Assemblies of God churches (versus only 9% of Catholics) strongly DISAGREE that if a person is generally good, or does enough good things for others they will earn a place in Heaven [salvation on the basis of merit].

  • 56% of Assemblies of God (versus 17% Catholics) Christians strongly DISAGREE that Satan is just a symbol of evil [rather than a real being].

  • Catholics and Mainline Protestants tend towards more belief in a more Distant God.

  • Evangelical Protestants and Black Protestants tend towards belief in a more Authoritarian God.

  • Among 7,441 Protestant pastors. Asked if they believed that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of God: 87% of Methodists said no. 95% of Episcopalians said no. 82% of Presbyterians said NO. 67% of American Baptists said no

  • Bible Reading: the highest was 75%, by those going to a Pentecostal/Foursquare church who reported they had read the Bible during the past week (besides at church), while the lowest was among Catholics at 23%

  • Volunteer church work (during past 7 days): Assemblies of God were highest at 30%, with the lowest going to Catholics at 12%.

  • Donating Money (during the last month): Church of Christ churches were the highest at 29%, with Catholics being the lowest at 12%

  • American evangelicals gave four times as much, per person, to churches as did all other church donors in 2001. 88 percent of evangelicals and 73 percent of all Protestants donated to churches.

  • By denomination, 61% of the those associated with an Assemblies of God church said they had shared their faith at least once during the past year, followed by 61% of those who attend a Pentecostal/Foursquare church, and ending 14% among Episcopalians and just 10% among Roman Catholics

  • 25% of Evangelical Christians read the Bible on a daily basis along with 20% of other Protestants. Just 7% of Catholics do the same. At the other extreme, 44% of Catholics rarely or never read the Bible along with only 7% of Evangelical Christians and 13% of other Protestants.

  • 91% of Evangelical Christians and 63% of other Protestants and 25% of Catholics consider themselves to be born again,

  • 44% of Evangelical Christians reflect at least daily on the meaning of Scripture in their lives. 36% of other Protestants and 22% of Catholics do the same.

  • 52% of Evangelical Christians have had a meaningful discussion about their faith with a non-Christian during the past month. 28% of other Protestants and 18% of Catholics also have held such a discussion.

  • 68% of Evangelical Christians attend a regular Bible Study or participate in some other small-group activity. 47% of other Protestants take part in small groups related to their faith, along with 24% of Catholics.

  • 39 percent of Catholics affirmed not attending church is a sin, versus 23 percent of Protestants.

  • Weekly Church attendance: Evangelicals showed the highest participation of approx 60 percent (30% more than once a week). Catholics were at 45 percent (9% more than once a week), and Jews 15 percent.

  • The highest percentage of those who strongly agree they have a personal responsibility to share their faith was found among believers in Pentecostal/Foursquare churches (73%)

  • 81% of Pentecostal/Foursquare believers strongly agree that the Bible is totally accurate in all that it teaches , followed by 77% of Assemblies of God believers, and ending with 26% of Catholics and 22% of Episcopalians.

  • 40% Roman Catholics vs. 41% Non-R.C. see abortion as "morally acceptable"; Sex between unmarried couples: 67% vs. 57%; Baby out of wedlock: 61% vs. 52%; Homosexual relations: 54% vs. 45%; Gambling: 72% vs. 59%

  • Committed Roman Catholics (church attendance weekly or almost) versus Non-R.C.:

  • Abortion: 24% R.C. vs. 19% Non-R.C.; Sex between unmarried couples: 53% vs. 30%; Baby out of wedlock: 48% vs. 29%; Homosexual relations: 44% vs. 21%; Gambling: 67% vs. 40%; Divorce: 63 vs. 46%

  • Catholics broke with their Church's teachings more than most other groups, with just six out of 10 Catholics affirming that God is "a person with whom people can have a relationship", and three in 10 describing God as an "impersonal force."

  • Only 33% of Catholics strongly affirmed that Christ was sinless on earth

  • 88% of Catholics believe that they can practice artificial means of birth control and still be considered good Catholics.

  • 70 % of all Catholics in the age group 18 to 44 believe the Eucharist is a "symbolic reminder" of Jesus [it is, of His death], indicating they do not believe it is Jesus actual body and blood

  • Only 30% of Catholics said believe they are really and truly receiving the body, blood, soul and divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine.

  • 26 percent of Catholics polled strongly agree with the Church's unequivoval position on abortion

  • Catholic women have an abortion rate 29 percent higher than Protestants.

  • 46 percent of Catholics who say they attend mass weekly accept Church teaching on abortion; 43 percent accept the all-male priesthood; and 30 percent see contraception as morally wrong.

  • 31% of faithful Catholics (those who attend church weekly) say abortion should be legal either in "many" or in "all" cases.

  • 73 percent of Catholics rejected Catholic teaching artificial methods of birth control.

  • Only 20 percent strongly agreed with the Church teaching that only men may be ordained.

  • 59% of all Catholic women of childbearing age practice contraception—a rate of usage statistically equivalent to that of the general population (60%).

  • 66% of Catholics supported women's ordination to the priesthood, and 73% approved of the way John Paul II leads the church.

  • 80% of Catholics believe it is possible to disagree with the pope on official positions on morality and still be a good Catholic.

  • 77 % of Catholics polled "believe a person can be a good Catholic without going to Mass every Sunday, 65 percent believe good Catholics can divorce and remarry, and 53 percent believe Catholics can have abortions and remain in good standing.

  • 30% of Roman Catholic priests described themselves as Liberal, 28% as Conservative, and 37% as Moderate in their Religious ideology. 53 percent responded that they thought it always was a sin for unmarried people to have sexual relations; 32 percent that is often was, and 9 percent seldom/never.

  • 44 percent of the priests said "definitely" a homosexual subculture'--defined as a `definite group of persons that has its own friendships, social gatherings and vocabulary'--exists in their diocese or religious order

  • 50 percent of Protestants affirmed gambling was a sin, versus 15 percent of Catholics; that getting drunk was a sin: 63 percent of Protestants, 28 percent of Catholics; gossip: 70 percent to 45 percent: homosexual activity or sex: 72 percent to 42 percent.

  • 39 percent of Roman Catholics and 79 percent of born-again, evangelical or fundamentalist Americans affirm that homosexual behavior is sinful.

  • 79 percent of American Jews, 58 percent of Catholics and 56 percent of mainline Protestants favor acceptance of homosexuality, versus 39 percent of members of historically black churches, 27 percent of Muslims and 26 percent of the evangelical Protestants. U.S.

  • Evangelical Churches (17%), had the lowest percentage of souls aged 18-29, versus Unaffiliated (31%), Muslims (29%), Historically Black Churches (24%), Mormons (24%) and Other Faiths (24%). Mainline Churches had the greater percentage (23%) of souls 65 and older.

  • 2% of Mainline Churches, 77% of Catholics and 53% of Evangelical Churches affirmed, "There is MORE than one true way to interpret the teachings of my religion."

  • 50% of Evangelicals considered themselves Republican or leaned toward that party, 34% Democratic or leaned thereto; 9% Independents.

  • 48% of Catholics considered themselves Democrats or leaned toward that party, 33% Republican or leaned thereto; 10% Independent.

  • Based upon exit polling, 74 percent of Evangelicals voted for McCain in 2008, with 25 percent for Obama. (Another measure put the percentage of evangelicals at 23 percent, with 73 percent voting for McCain, 26 percent for Obama.)

  • Catholics overall supported Obama over McCain by a nine-point margin (54% vs. 45%)

  • 37% of Catholics were registered as Democrats, 27% Republican, and 31% as Independents.

  • 77 percent of Black Protestants said they vote Democratic, whether they attended weekly services or not.

  • The 16 most Catholic states contain 24 of the most liberal cities. Excluding (Maryland 26th), predominately Roman Catholic states contain all but one (Seattle WA) of the 30 most liberal cities. Of states in which S. Baptists are the single largest denomination none (of the 30 cities) were found (the term “liberal: being defined according to individual contributions to PACs, election returns and the number of homosexual households:

  • (See HERE for Table of casual Religio-Political relations. And HERE for Correlation between faith, ideology, politics, environment, money.)


http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html#5

4


55 posted on 07/11/2010 3:12:22 PM PDT by daniel1212 ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out " (Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

“State imposition of any religious practice is unsuitable. “

Firstly, the American public schools had Bible reading for decades, many decades. My pastor grew up in a Maine public school where the Bible was read every day, and they all stood and recited the Lord’s Prayer.

Secondly, the state imposes religious practice every day. Everything they teach has a religious component in one way or another. The ABSENCE of Scripture is in itself a state imposition of religious teaching. It teaches that we can all get along without the Bible just fine; that it has no impact on anything we learn; and that we are the final arbiters of truth, right and wrong.

So, the school will always impose religion. The question is, which religion?


56 posted on 07/11/2010 3:14:35 PM PDT by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: elpadre; ConservativeMind; narses

Even the Unitarian (a religion that effectively denied Christ and the Divine authority of the Bible, but, unlike its later form, at that time overall upheld general Biblical morality) “Father of the Common School,” Horace Mann (May 4, 1796 — August 02, 1859), who became Massachusetts Secretary of Education in 1837, not only understood the impossibility of separating education from religious moral beliefs, but held that it was lawful to teach the truths of the general Christian faith, asserting that the “laws of Massachusetts required the teaching of the basic moral doctrines of Christianity.” Mann, who supported prohibition of alcohol and intemperance, slavery and lotteries, (http://www.famousamericans.net/horacemann) dreaded “intellectual eminence when separated from virtue”, that education, if taught without moral responsibilities, would produce more evil than it inherited. (William Jeynes, “American educational history: school, society, and the common good,” p. 149, 150)

Mann evidenced that he rightly understood that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment did not prohibit officially favoring the general, common Christian faith and its morality, but that it forbade official sanction of one particular sect by distinctively favoring its doctrinal distinctions, stating that “it may not be easy theoretically, to draw the line between those views of religious truth and of Christian faith which is common to all, and may, therefore, with propriety be inculcated in schools, and those which, being peculiar to individual sects, are therefore by law excluded; still it is believed that no practical difficulty occurs in the conduct of our schools in this regard.” (Stephen V. Monsma, J. Christopher Soper, “The Challenge of Pluralism: Church and State in Five Democracies”, The Unites States, cp. 2, p. 21) To critics who were alarmed at the concept of secular schools, he assured that his system “inculcates all Christian morals; it founds its morals on the basis of religion; it welcomes the religion of the Bible...,” but he did exhort that Bible reading be without comment to discourage sectarian bickering. (Mann, Twelfth Annual Report for 1848 of the Secretary of the Board of Education of Massachusetts. Reprinted in Blau 183-84.

Considered second to Mann in his schooling endeavor was Henry Barnard, who was raised in a deeply religious family, and who saw his involvement in education “as part of the providence of God”. Like the majority of Americans, he believed that democracy and education went together in “the cause of truth—the cause of justice — the cause of liberty— the cause of patriotism — the cause of religion.” (Jeynes, p. 154)

By 1890, schools nationwide saw 95 percent of children between the ages of five and thirteen enrolled for at least a few months out of the year, though less than 5 percent of adolescents went to high school, and even fewer entered college. In addition, while there existed thousands of local schools, nearly one thousand colleges and universities (or varying quality), and scores of normal schools which trained teachers, a nationwide educational “system” had yet to be realized by the end of the 1800’s. Education was largely locally managed, as the federal bureau of education, while collecting information about the condition of education, possessed no control over local schools. Education agencies on the state level were small, and its few employees had little or no power over local school districts. School systems in large cities could also function with little oversight, such as in Baltimore, where the public schools in 1890 employed only two superintendents for the entire district of 1,200 teachers. Despite this, public schools across America were notably similar, with children learning both the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic, and the basics of good behavior – the latter being enforced when necessary by corporal punishment. Schools were important community institutions, and reflected the values of of parents and churches, such as honesty, industry, patriot-ism, responsibility, respect for adults, and courtesy. Memorization, recitation, chants and rhymes were often used in teaching subjects, while solving mathematical problems in one’s head was promoted. This inculcation of basic education and self-discipline was purposed to promote good moral citizenry, people who would be honestly employed, and make wise and informed choices, and overall progress in an individualistic, competitive and democratic society, and who would contribute to the vitality of their community and country. (Diane Ravitch, “Left Back A Century of Failed School Reforms” Simon & Schuster)

As regards higher education, the overwhelming majority of the first private colleges of this country were founded as Christian institutions to teach the Gospel. (http://www.faithofourfathers.org/essays/ivyleague.html, “How Christians Started the Ivy League”) Harvard, Yale and Princeton are three examples. All three were established to teach young men to be pastors. The founders of Harvard College, established in 1636, professed that, “All knowledge without Christ was vain.” After requiring literacy in Latin, the second requirement in “Harvard Lawes” of 1642 was that “Every one shall consider the main end of his life and studies to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life. (Joh. 17:3) The overall religious nature of colleges and universities continued at least until the Civil War. Even State colleges had significant religious (most always Christian) components, such as mandatory religion courses and attendance at chapel services, while large numbers of their faculties had formal religious training. (Ringenberg, 1984; Marsden and Longfield, 1962; Ronald W. Fagan and Raymond G. DeVries, “The practice of sociology at Christian liberal arts colleges and universities”; The American Sociologist, June, 1994)


57 posted on 07/11/2010 3:14:55 PM PDT by daniel1212 ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out " (Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Persevero
State-sanctioned secularism as religion

It is perceived by some that outlawing formal religion results in replacing it with a functional ideological equivalent. Secularity as a condition of a non-ecclesiastical state may be distinguished with secularism as an ideology, with key Supreme court decisions being used to infer state favor toward the nonreligious, resulting in a "religion-free education" which "indoctrinates" the young into viewing secularism as the only frame of reference.[45]

Paul G. Kussrow and Loren Vannest ask, Is a religiously neutral public school education an oxymoron?, and see notable Supreme court Establishment Clause decisions (such as Engel v. Vatale, l962) as in essence creating "a legal fiction--a myth of religious neutrality." They argue that "Philosophy and religion blur when dealing with these basics, such as truth, while pointing to the ultimate questions and answers in life," and that, "Any discussion of a secular-religious distinction is self-refuting. For someone's values are always being advocated even in so called "neutral" settings."

Removing formal God (and morality) based religion from the public schools is seen to have the effect of supplanting it with Secular Humanism. This in turn promotes pantheism, the worship of nature with its evolutionary hypothesis, and the rejection of moral absolutes (especially those of the Bible), resulting in a dangerous ever-morphing morality and decline of beneficial traditional morality.[46]

In support of this understanding, declarations by humanists such as John J. Dunphy, are often invoked:

I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith...These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach,...The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new—the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism...[47]

Kussrow and Vannest argue that "since atheism is a religion under the establishment clause, (Malnak v. Yogi, l977), given the above facts, secular humanism must be considered a religion for the purposes of the First Amendment (Gove v. Mead School District, l985)", noting that "the American Humanist Association even has a religious tax exemption status approved by the Federal government."[48] In United States v. Kauten (2d Cir. 1943), conscientious objector status was granted to Mathias Kauten, not due to his belief in God, but on the basis of his “religious conscience.”[49]

Other evidence indicates that U.S. courts have moved from a generally substantive definition of religion, in which the religion affirms a transcendent deity, to a functional definition of religion, which Secular Humanism has been defined by some courts to be. In the Torcaso v. Watkins case in 1961, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Maryland notary public who was disqualified from office because he would not declare a belief in God. The Court argued that theistic religions could not be favored by the Court over non-theistic religions.

In the light of such, James Davison Hunter argues that,

To be legally consistent the courts will either have to articulate a constitutional double standard or apply the functional definition of religion to the no establishment clause just as they have to the free exercise [clause]. The latter would mean that secularistic faiths and ideologies would be rigorously prohibited from receiving even indirect support from the state, which needless to say would have enormous implications for public education.[50]

See http://www.conservapedia.com/Separation_of_church_and_state


58 posted on 07/11/2010 3:18:19 PM PDT by daniel1212 ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out " (Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

RE: “And in the bigger picture, the insinuation of government into ever more areas of life that should be the private preserve of individuals, families, congregations and communities is something that all conservatives should oppose.”

Yet the evidence of this thread is that many of the posters on this thread will welcome that as long as it offers them an opportunity to poke the Catholic Church in the eye. It really outs their actual agenda. Shows you how shallow they hold conservative values. Liberals at heart.


59 posted on 07/11/2010 3:20:56 PM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("Anyone pushing Romney must love socialism...Piss on Romney and his enablers!!" ~ Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Salvation you are being too all inclusive here...besides the catholic church leadership may stand on these issues but I assure you it's membership does there own thing as they want and will...they just don't seek anyones approval on it. Generally their abortions are private or and hidden as are most of the activities (sins) committed because they are told if they don't stay with the catholic church their salvation is lost or affected...so they hide and lie...maintaining their church affiliation. Their sins they keep hidden.
60 posted on 07/11/2010 3:21:24 PM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

Some of us get notes and smiles from those who are leaving....guess it works both ways.


61 posted on 07/11/2010 3:22:31 PM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

RE: Differences Between Denominations

Well that basically says this source has no credibility. The Catholic Church is not a denomination, it is a church. Protestants have denominations, upon denominations, upon denominations,upon denominations, upon denominations, upon denominations, upon denominations....


62 posted on 07/11/2010 3:23:27 PM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("Anyone pushing Romney must love socialism...Piss on Romney and his enablers!!" ~ Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: caww

**there own thing** Where is there own thing?

**Their sins they keep hidden.**

Huh? That’s what Confession is for — so they don’t remain hidden.

LOL!

And lastly, the Catholic Church IS inclusive! One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic.


63 posted on 07/11/2010 3:25:57 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: caww

You know better than to say “it works both ways.”

Catholics who are baptized Catholics will Alwyas be Catholics, even if they choose to be inactive. They are always welcome back.

Many share their stories about coming back at this site: http://www.chnetwork.org/


64 posted on 07/11/2010 3:28:47 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Persevero

Most have — unless you are more specific — I judge that most have.


65 posted on 07/11/2010 3:30:05 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

Quoting from a non-Catholic, anti-Catholic site, I see.


66 posted on 07/11/2010 3:31:42 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind
"It’s bizarre."

The last people I would want teaching my children about the bible is any public education system.

67 posted on 07/11/2010 3:35:57 PM PDT by Natural Law (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Persevero

The fact that state imposition of religious practice is common does not make it acceptable. Education should be private.


68 posted on 07/11/2010 3:37:12 PM PDT by Tax-chick (We made a proactive decision to postpone the originally scheduled nightlife activities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Persevero; Tax-chick
From the book "Ellery's Protest", the kid who protested Bible-reading in American public schools---Abington vs. Schempp (1963): <>
69 posted on 07/11/2010 3:45:28 PM PDT by saltus (God's Will be done)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: saltus

Sorry—used an html symbol...

From the book “Ellery’s Protest”, the kid who protested Bible-reading in American public schools-—Abington vs. Schempp (1963):

“The Catholic position in 1958 was rather strange. Many people are surprised to learn that Bible-reading in the schools was controversial 160 years ago. In 1844 there were riots in Philadelphia over the practice; men were killed, churches were burned——over Bible-reading. This was much mixed up with anti-immigrant feelings, the newer immigrants being mostly Irish and Italian Catholics, and they objected to the Protestant practice of individual Bible-reading in the schools. In fact this issue became the primary motivation for the Catholic church to start the institution of Parochial schools. By 1956, however, the Church’s position had shifted——their objection was to secularism, to secular humanism, and their goal was to make secularism the enemy.”


70 posted on 07/11/2010 3:47:08 PM PDT by saltus (God's Will be done)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper

Many people believe that, if *something* is a good thing - Bible-reading, for example, or libraries - then it is appropriate for government to mandate the activity or compel its funding by the citizens. I do not agree. Even if I agree about the positive value of the *something*, I generally believe it should be conducted and funded voluntarily.

It is on this principle, I believe, that the line is drawn between “social conservatives” and “economic conservatives,” so called. A type of “social conservative,” just as a type of “social liberal,” believes that government should compel and/or fund what he believes is beneficial. The ... “other conservative,” perhaps, such as myself, believes that free citizens should pursue their own goods, in most cases, with their own resources.

An attempt is made to draw the line so that legal abortion is “economically conservative.” However, prohibiting abortion does not cost money, particularly, and it can easily (if not inarguably) be shown to benefit the economy. In addition, it is much more a function of government to prevent harm to individuals and to society than it is to compel “good.”


71 posted on 07/11/2010 3:54:31 PM PDT by Tax-chick (We made a proactive decision to postpone the originally scheduled nightlife activities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212
I clicked on your link and this is what I came across almost immediately:

# 70 % of all Catholics in the age group 18 to 44 believe the Roman Catholic Eucharist is a "symbolic reminder" of Jesus [it is, of His death], indicating they do not believe it is Jesus actual body and blood [as Rome erroneously teaches]. New York Times/CBS News poll, Apr. 21-23, 1994, subsample of 446 Catholics, MOE ± 5%

That's enough to put into doubt the objectiveness of any information to be found on that page.

72 posted on 07/11/2010 4:08:21 PM PDT by Lorica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: saltus
Many people are surprised to learn that Bible-reading in the schools was controversial 160 years ago. In 1844 there were riots in Philadelphia over the practice; men were killed, churches were burned——over Bible-reading.

Those riots "over Bible-reading" were instigated by the anti-Catholic nativists who were afraid that Irish immigrants were going to help the Pope take over the country:

On Friday, May 3, 1844, the American Nativist Party, (aka American Republican Party), set up a platform in the almost one hundred percent Irish Third Ward of Kensington, a Philadelphia suburb. Speakers delivered tirades against the Irish, the Pope, the Catholic Church, and the immigrants. The theme was that "a set of citizens, German and Irish, wanted to get the Constitution of the U. S. into their own hands and sell it to a foreign power. " The crowd jeered and began to tear down the platform. The Nativists retreated temporarily.

Philadelphia was a hotbed of nativism for years. The American Nativist Party allied itself with the American Protestant Association in propagating a conspiracy theory: the Pope was planning to take over America. The Irish were considered the most dangerous immigrants since they had demonstrated loyalty to the Pope through centuries of persecution and might rise on a signal from Rome for either a bloody conquest or a political takeover at the ballot box.

the Nativist press called on all good Americans to defend themselves against the "the bloody hand of the Pope."


73 posted on 07/11/2010 4:15:47 PM PDT by Lorica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
I feel more strongly than that... The true conservative believes that free citizens should pursue their own goods, in most cases, with their own resources.
74 posted on 07/11/2010 4:21:27 PM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("Anyone pushing Romney must love socialism...Piss on Romney and his enablers!!" ~ Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper

Yes, that’s kind of what I was aiming to convey. I did get a little turned around in my categorizing, between media descriptions - or self-descriptions of people I don’t think are truly conservative (Mike Huckabee) - and what I really think is Conservatism.

I would add, and I expect you agree, that free citizens should also personally, or with voluntary contributions, bear the consequences of decisions that turn out poorly.


75 posted on 07/11/2010 4:24:33 PM PDT by Tax-chick (We made a proactive decision to postpone the originally scheduled nightlife activities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper

Please. “No credibility” is what pertains to your attempted dismissal. Change the word if you will to “faith groups,” yet the sources are many and the stats are overall consistent and credible, even if you do not like them.


76 posted on 07/11/2010 4:26:24 PM PDT by daniel1212 ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out " (Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law
The last people I would want teaching my children about the bible is any public education system.

How ironic to think that there are probably many non-Catholics cheering this development who wouldn't allow their children in American government schools.

And if they're going to start reading the Bible, I think they ought to start with something like, say... Wisdom, or Maccabbees.

77 posted on 07/11/2010 4:27:08 PM PDT by Lorica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Lorica

Governments don’t like the Maccabbees ;-).


78 posted on 07/11/2010 4:28:30 PM PDT by Tax-chick (We made a proactive decision to postpone the originally scheduled nightlife activities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

OK, Maccabbees first, then Wisdom.


79 posted on 07/11/2010 4:30:12 PM PDT by Lorica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

This is a poor but typical attempt to blithely dismiss evidence you do not like. As said above, the sources are many and the stats are overall consistent, and are sometimes quoted by Catholic outlets, and or come from some. If you dispute it, go find comparable stats that show the opposite.

This is part of a larger work . See the whole of it here: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/RevealingStatistics.html


80 posted on 07/11/2010 4:33:21 PM PDT by daniel1212 ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out " (Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Lorica

Words in brackets [ ] are generally recognized to denote editorial additions not in the original, which sources are carefully and very evidently provided, which is what your contention should be with as far as accuracy is concerned. But unless you are given to believing there are powerful conspiracies controlling everything, it is best to acknowledge the evidence and work from there.


81 posted on 07/11/2010 4:47:04 PM PDT by daniel1212 ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out " (Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212
Words in brackets [ ] are generally recognized to denote editorial additions not in the original, which sources are carefully and very evidently provided, which is what your contention should be with as far as accuracy is concerned.

No, sorry, that just won't work. Your source site is not objective, not at all. The bracketed text inserted by your source merely illustrates that fact. I went to the source home page as well. Whether or not the statistics are correct is not my focus, my focus is the objectiveness of the source providing the statistics.

82 posted on 07/11/2010 4:53:30 PM PDT by Lorica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

I don’t know why you keep misrepresenting things, but you do.

You wrote:

“When your own article post shows that’s not the case at all, you then add that “teachers will answer questions - and that will mean interpretation.” Uh, yeah, right. Do you realize 90 percent of those teachers will be Catholics?? I don’t even care if they give the CATHOLIC version on that—just get the actual BIBLE read in the darn classes and let’s see what happens.”

False. Nothing in the article showed that I was wrong in the least. All the articles shows is that the law does not foster interpretation. I am saying it will happen anyway. Also, I doubt that 90% of the teachers are FAITHFUL Catholics. I don’t care if they call themselves Catholics. You seem desperate.

“Man, how can you be against 9 out of 10 teachers giving the CATHOLIC version of how to interpret that stuff?”

What on earth mankes you think that that will happen? First of all you were insisting just a minute ago that no interpretation was going to take place. Now you’re insisting - without a shred of evidence - that it will be ONLY Catholic interpretation 9 out of 10 times. I have no reason at all to believe that interpretation will NOT take place and no reason at all to believe it will be only Catholic interpretation when it does.

“So, you are the anti-Catholic here, not me, it would appear.”

No, I am just the one armed with reality. You are armed with fantasies.


83 posted on 07/11/2010 5:04:44 PM PDT by vladimir998 (Part of the Vast Catholic Conspiracy (hat tip to Kells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Lorica

Well then you will live in a very sterile world. You cannot believe Fox News or CNN or the AP on anything, as both have definite ideologies. While i certainly believe in comparing sources, when you have consistent statistics over a number of years from a multiplicity of sources, as is the case here, and nothing of substance in opposition, from polling data to answers from regular church attendees, then you must assume a vast evangelical power over all such media, even though it is demonstrable that they are very anti-evangelical Christian.

In addition, you have my word that i did not fabricate stats or sources, but am more careful then many in providing such. And in length, i think you will find me to be one of the more objective of your adversaries.


84 posted on 07/11/2010 5:10:21 PM PDT by daniel1212 ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out " (Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

You wrote:

“I’m thinking you’re just worried that more people will find out that the real church is not the Catholic religion...”

No, but I freely admit that I believe Catholics might be mislead by Protestants or Jehovah’s Witness or Mormon or secularist teachers. I believe it is better for children in such a society to be catechized by their churches than their state. Don’t you?


85 posted on 07/11/2010 5:11:34 PM PDT by vladimir998 (Part of the Vast Catholic Conspiracy (hat tip to Kells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212
No, it just means I'll get my stats from other sources.

I did not say the numbers were fabricated, by the way. As a Catholic, I know how dismal some of them are.

Is it your web page?

86 posted on 07/11/2010 5:13:18 PM PDT by Lorica
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Lorica

Web site and page, yes, by the grace of God, for whatever is good.


87 posted on 07/11/2010 5:18:33 PM PDT by daniel1212 ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out " (Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Lorica
"How ironic to think that there are probably many non-Catholics cheering this development who wouldn't allow their children in American government schools."

How many of the "shocked" anti-Catholics would be equally shocked of the government instructed that a Catholic teacher in the US read and explain the bible to their children.

88 posted on 07/11/2010 5:24:27 PM PDT by Natural Law (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

RE: Change the word if you will to “faith groups,”

The Catholic Church is not a “faith group”. Faith groups, denominations or whatever you want to call them are what you get when the smoke of Satan causes blinded men and women to abandon Christ’s Church in favor of theology based on the whims of men.

You can keep your satanic faith groups. I’ll stick with Christ’s Church.


89 posted on 07/11/2010 5:27:15 PM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("Anyone pushing Romney must love socialism...Piss on Romney and his enablers!!" ~ Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Lorica

We read Maccabbees at home about every other year ... politics, religion, espionage, blood and gore ... what’s not to love?


90 posted on 07/11/2010 5:38:36 PM PDT by Tax-chick (We made a proactive decision to postpone the originally scheduled nightlife activities.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

Ohhh no... someone might actually be saved ...we just can not have that


91 posted on 07/11/2010 5:48:28 PM PDT by RnMomof7 ( sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

The Bible speaks for itself ... so you ban teachers from teaching their preferred doctrine and stick to just what it says


92 posted on 07/11/2010 5:50:27 PM PDT by RnMomof7 ( sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: elpadre

`That was when kids really learned to read..


93 posted on 07/11/2010 5:53:41 PM PDT by RnMomof7 ( sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

I will say again...catholics leave the church as much as those who enter...it works both ways...now the catholic church might think once a catholic always a catholic....the Mormons say the same thing as do other faiths...that does not make it so. It does work both ways and you should know better than to say it doesn’t.

Better to say one is Christian...believes in Christ and follows Him.


94 posted on 07/11/2010 5:56:36 PM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
It’s almost magical thinking ... *just* listening to a few words from the Bible is expected to address a serious societal issue.

Ya sorta like say a few words over a cracker and it becomes the "body of Christ"

"So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."Romans 10:17

95 posted on 07/11/2010 5:56:54 PM PDT by RnMomof7 ( sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

Interesting read


96 posted on 07/11/2010 5:59:47 PM PDT by RnMomof7 ( sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: big'ol_freeper

Call it what you will, the evidence remains the same. As for your claims for Rome, by what means are we to know that Rome is the one true church?


97 posted on 07/11/2010 6:00:32 PM PDT by daniel1212 ("Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out " (Acts 3:19))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Huh? That’s what Confession is for — so they don’t remain hidden.

They don't all go to confession and you know this...I know this...and yes they remain hidden from the church and from those of the church....they do the deeds outside and away from the church. And there are plenty out there to see them thru.

I was going to state you misunderstood my speaking of inclusiveness...but you and I both know that it's fruitless to continue this conversation...there are some catholics I respect as individuals regardless of their affiliation to the church...so better this ends here. We just do not see eye to eye in matters of the faith.

98 posted on 07/11/2010 6:03:08 PM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

RE: As for your claims for Rome, by what means are we to know that Rome is the one true church?

I read AND UNDERSTAND the Bible, and am not subject to the whimsical wishes of fallen men who have established their own self-centered traditions.


99 posted on 07/11/2010 6:03:18 PM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("Anyone pushing Romney must love socialism...Piss on Romney and his enablers!!" ~ Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: daniel1212

RE: the evidence remains the same

And you have no evidence but from an anti-Catholic rant site, the spawn of Satan no doubt.


100 posted on 07/11/2010 6:04:47 PM PDT by big'ol_freeper ("Anyone pushing Romney must love socialism...Piss on Romney and his enablers!!" ~ Jim Robinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-156 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