Skip to comments.Gingrich Represents New Political Era for Catholics [ecumenical}
Posted on 12/17/2011 4:58:13 AM PST by Cronos
click here to read article
“In the speech to the prayer breakfast, Mr. Gingrich cited Mr. Weigels book, The Cube and the Cathedral. He said that it captured the crisis of European civilization as militant, government-imposed secularism undermines and weakens Christianity.”
THIS is a very good sign for me....because it shows that Speaker Gingrich has the right ideas about the real causes of most of these problems.
The “powers that be” will NOT like this.
Another thought: In view of the quote you referenced: “conservative Catholics and evangelical Protestants have joined forces in what they see as a defining struggle against abortion, same-sex marriage and secularism”
...I don’t know much about the author....but coming from the New York Times, I imagine that this was meant to be a negative.
Lol....I think it will have just the opposite effect.
I think it was a genuine conversion, said Robert L. Livingston, a lobbyist and former Republican legislator who tangled with Mr. Gingrich in Congress but is now supporting him for president. Ive heard him talk about how its given him a lot of peace. Hes getting hammered these days, and I think hes been able to absorb the onslaught a lot better than he might have 10 years ago.
I agree — libs have NO idea — they think it’s a negative that CAtholics and Evangelicals are getting together.
Both Kennedy and Gingrich use the Catholic church as a shield. Neither cares/cared about truth. Furthermore, approaching our world problems by enlistment of the church in political problems is like eating with your butt - wrong approach, indeed. We need revival - all else is a holding action in what is essentially a spiritual war.
Newt’s position is signifying the final break of Catholics from the Dims towards teh GOP — just as in Canada
Correct. In some cases, it is people breaking with the Democrats because they realize what is actually going on. But in most cases, it is that the aging oldsters are dying off and being replaced by conservative, orthodox adults who both embrace Orthodoxy in the Church and conservatism in politics, finance, and social matters. Which amounts to the same thing.
These words struck me:
Mr. Gingrich said he saw the same process happening in the United States, where American elites are guided by their desire to emulate the European elites, and as a result, anti-religious values and principles are coming to dominate the academic, news media and judicial class in America.
I´m in Spain right now and this morning I went to the Cathedral in Madrid and attended the beatification of 23 Spanish martyrs, members of the Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate (as well as one married layman who worked at their school), who were dragged out of their school and seminary in Madrid and shot to death in a field and a park by the ¨Republicans¨ (aka, Communists) in 1936. And this had the full support of the labor unions and other working class groups because the attitude of the leftist intellectual aristocracy for decades had not only been non-religious but anti-religious.
The thing that I find a little frightening is that we have many of the same conditions in the US today: a leftist government and radical leftist Dem leader (Obama), a seething anarchist movement with lots of well-off ¨students¨ who have nothing better to do than sit around and proclaim their manifestoes, in between trashing the ¨kulaks¨ (small businesses), and a large conservative population that is completely intimidated and marginalized even though it probably represents the majority of Americans.
I think Gingrich is saying ¨Wake up!¨ He obviously had a wake-up call himself.
We need to reclaim our religious foundations and the foundation of Western culture and proclaim and enact them before the left gets so powerful that someday we´ll be the next set of martyrs.
That article is spot on! It shows how Gingrich is dead center between the far left and the far right. My observation would be that he is the only person running who will appeal to both those Democrats who have seen their party drift too far left and the Republicans who think their party may be drifting too far right.
Reagan, Thatcher, and the Pope all helped bring down Communism especially in Poland and the other countries that were behind the iron curtain. Yet communism was not and is not dead. There are still Nazis in the world, and Marxism is alive and well in Liberation Theology - not to mention at the highest levels of our Government.
The attacks on Religion have increased, because the Churches are a Bulwark against those who would like to destroy us from within. That is why they have been infiltrating the Churches with Liberation Theology and doctrines about social justice etc.
the crisis of European civilization as militant, government-imposed secularism undermines and weakens Christianity.
Not to mention the flood of Muslims coming in.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
I’ve been of the opinion since his intent to convert was first publicized, and the notion of his mounting a presidential campaign at that time was derided as ridiculous, with replies to that effect posted right here on FR, that the ambitious schemer was scheming ambitiously once again. He’d worn out his welcome on the southern evangelical coattails that he rode upon to prominence two decades ago, and he’s prematurely cogitated plopped himself astride another set in order to ride once again, to the pinnacle of political prominence in this nation.
Too bad he’s counted his amnesty chickens before they hatched, though. That’s the flaw in his calculation. Timing. All those newly-minted voters, not there, not yet. Alas.
He will embarrass Catholics before the primary is done, imho. Every motivation he’s ever exhibited is driven by self. He’s already gone against his newfound church on conception at birth. Fancy rationalizations have always been his justification, and that has not changed, at all.
Look at the string of betrayals public and private with this man, and see that it continues after converting to your church. Supporting him on that basis has no basis in reality. It’s stagecraft.
So, yes, it’s a new political era for Catholics to an extent, but perhaps not to the extent intended by the author. Overt pandering during a Presidential election is a new experience.
You can’t really expect Life, Libery and the Pursuit of Happiness to survive if Truth, Goodness and Beauty fall entirely by the wayside. Same goes for Liberté, fraternité et egalité. Things rapidly become their opposite.
The real danger is becoming co-opted because Christianity prizes peace, brotherhood, forgiveness... and that is fertile ground for deceit and half truths.
Peter Cardinal Turkson, President of the Vaticans Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, has a message for Catholics in America, particularly those involved in social justice ministry, that could put a damper on the political machinations of the Shadow Party.
The message? Social justice is about relationships, not socialism. This clarification may very well be the catalyst to set the Catholic Church in America back on course with authentic Catholic teaching on hot-button issues involving massive government entitlement programs and other forms of overreach. If nothing else, it will almost certainly jump-start the social justice debate among Catholics. Cardinal Turkson, you see, is scheduled to deliver the plenary address at the 2011 Catholic Social Ministry Gathering in February.It would be useful if we just observed our sense of justice as our ability to fulfill the demands of the relationships in which we stand.Whether he intended to or not, Cardinal Turkson has now echoed what many conservative Catholics in America have been calling for repeatedly subsidiarity in economic policy. More importantly, the Cardinal observes the heart of the matter in noting that a handout and a gift are not at all the same, with the latter being more in keeping with the Gospel message.
This is in contrast to socialism, he explained, which is an ideology in which private property and private interests are totally placed in the service of government policies. What the Pope proposes in Caritas in Veritate, said Cardinal Turkson, is achieving the common good without sacrificing personal, private interests, aspirations and desires.
Cardinal Turkson said the Council was also surprised that the Popes concept of the gift, was perceived in some circles as encouraging government welfare handouts. In Caritas in Veritate, Pope Benedict described the concept of gift as a way to understand Gods love for men and women in his gift of life and his gift of Jesus.
One of the key principles of Catholic social thought is known as the principle of subsidiarity. This tenet holds that nothing should be done by a larger and more complex organization which can be done as well by a smaller and simpler organization. In other words, any activity which can be performed by a more decentralized entity should be. This principle is a bulwark of limited government and personal freedom. It conflicts with the passion for centralization and bureaucracy characteristic of the Welfare State.You may remember that Pope John Paul II worked closely with President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher to bring down communism in the Soviet Union and Marxist governments in Latin America. With the worldwide Left now in such kinship with Islam, and with no modern-day Reagan or Thatcher in sight, Pope Benedict XVI certainly has his work cut out for him. If they recognize that America has become polarized, perhaps Americas Catholic bishops will bite the bullet and commit themselves to following in the footsteps of the just-beatified Pope John Paul II to morally undermine the Left as he morally undermined the Soviet Union.
Have you read Gingtich’s book about John Paul II? I think he knows what the truth is?
Great perspective! Thanks for sharing about the beaitification of these people.
Catholic social ministry begins and ends with Jesus Christ, he said. If it doesnt, it isnt Catholic.
“I think Gingrich is saying ¨Wake up!¨ He obviously had a wake-up call himself.
We need to reclaim our religious foundations and the foundation of Western culture and proclaim and enact them before the left gets so powerful that someday we´ll be the next set of martyrs.”
This is precisely why I hope Speaker Gingrich is strongly relying on God. If he *fully* recognizes the danger we are really in as a nation...it will be more than a human battle against his election.
What is the deal with the liberal media's obsession with making an effort to find columnists completely unqualified to write about things they don't understand, and then explain them to us ignorant folk? For all I know, Ms. Goodstein is a devout Catholic, but few liberals, even Catholic ones seem to bother learning what the faith is all about.
Divorce is forbidden to Catholics, but it is not the sin, in and of itself. Adultery is. And the Kennedys knew all about it. If the writer accepts Mr. Gingrich's conversion, she should know that he now rejects the option of divorce himself, if he wants to remain a Catholic. That's how we roll.
Furthermore, Catholicism continues to embrace labor unions, where they are called for. The mistake the author is making is the idea that Catholics see things in black and white terms, and would ever favor corruption of any sort.
This website presents a fine example of the fact that anti-Catholic bigotry is alive and well, even in Conservative circles. The main reason that Gingrich's religion has not been much of an issue in this upcoming election probably has something to do with the even more exotic faith of the establishment candidate. All things being equal, the right still prefers a white male protestant candidate.
The major political difference that Catholicism has to address today is abortion. Kennedy was president ten years before the Roe decision. Had it happened under his watch, he would have been under pressure from the Church to actively oppose it.
Just not on this website, right?
I’m sure you see the irony in your completely un-Catholic conclusions.
Ecumenical thread, presidio9. I sense antagonism.
Let me put it another way: Saying that you are not a Catholic yourself disqualifies you from rating the Catholicism of others.
How do you rate the Catholicism of Newt Gingrich, presidio9? Purely in the spirit of ecumenism, of course.
As our Lord commanded, I am not in a position to be worrying about anyone’s religious convictions but my own.
I believe that Newt Gingrich has asked for and was given forgiveness by Christ. Until he starts behaving in such a way to make me doubt his sincerity, I am obligated to accept his transformation.
There are those of us who believed the same of him twenty years ago as well. Doubt has been removed regarding his sincerity in that regard.
Be wary. He will embarass Catholics before the primary is done. He’s already gone against his new church on life beginning at conception.
I am a Baptist, but I admired Pope John Paul II. I also admire my Catholic friends and their commitment to their faith. Much good is accomplished when the Churches unite against tyranny.
I don't, obviously.
And I think you need to grow up.
Oh? How so? I've stated my position without malice toward anyone posting to this thread including yourself, and have kept the tone respectful despite no reciprocation in kind, but have continued to make clear my distaste for certain habits and behavior patterns of longstanding with Mr. Gingrich. It's been consistent, calm and not juvenile in the least.
If one disagrees, one can always respond to the points with which one disagrees, rather than attempt to disparage the individual with whom one disagrees, presidio9.
and I supported Cain (a Baptist) first. While we may disagree on much, we must be politically united against those who support free-for-all abortion, the destruction of marriage and the destruciton of our economic system (in that order)
sadly, true... sometimes I wonder if those who continuously smear us are not working for the Dim party and want to practise the Dim divide and rule tactics
Totally agree these three are of utmost importance.
Catholics accept the teachings of the Catholic Church. If you want to know more, here is an excellent resource
It appears to be becoming something of a moot point, with Gingrich dropping like a rock in the polls.
It is an ecumenical discussion, and should be for everyone participating.
Wrong. You admitted that it was a political discussion for you when you brought up polling data.
This Religion Forum thread is labeled “ecumenical” meaning no antagonism is allowed on this thread. Do not refer to another poster as a “troll.”
Maybe yes maybe no. It was my contention that were WAS no "new political era for Catholics," and that this was a construct of the NYT's liberalism. For that you repeatedly tried to bait me into a conversation that stated I had no interest in having. If that's not "trolling," I guess I don't know the meaning of the term after ten years and 30,000 posts.
And let's just say that I find it convenient that our dedicated friendly neighborhood RM suddenly made a appearance here to delete my innocuous posts. The both of you feel free to debate whatever aspects of Catholicism you find objectionable. I won't be participating.
I don’t make the rules, presidio9. Understand them better, and your posts won’t be deleted.
>>>>>The both of you feel free to debate whatever aspects of Catholicism you find objectionable.
The entire Religion Forum routinely debates all the aspects of Catholicism that non-Catholics find objectionable. Catholic comments are typically found to be offensive in some way or another. I see little point in participating during what is supposed to be a season of peace on earth. Some Christians are more equal than others. If you hsve no organized church, and only listen to your private version of the Holy Spirit for correct understanding of Scripture, then you are somehow holier than Catholics and can say whatever you please.
Actually, I have no interest in debating the merits of Catholicism with no Catholics. For what its worth, I don’t believe that you have to be Catholic to get to Heaven, so, by all means, find any fault you like with Catholicism. I won’t waste my time telling you what is wrong with the way you pray either.
My interest in this thread was in correcting an inaccuracy in the Time’s reporting. The person who kept doing something that I am not supposed to correctly identify as trolling has a history of that type of behavior, with myself and others. He also seems to have a history of calling the moderators for help.
I have found that the easiest way to deal with such people is to ignore them.
That is an inaccurate characterization, presidio9. If this reply of yours is deleted as well, it won't be due to any action of mine, it'll be due to continuing the behavior that is not permitted on this type of thread.
I have a Catholic question. Some years back, my brother in law was taking the program to convert to Catholicism. As I recall (it was @ 10 years ago), about halfway thru the program, the priest told him he couldn’t join the Church because he was ‘living in sin’ with my sister to whom he was married civilly, both having been divorced.
Because my brother in law had been married in a church of another religion (from which he was planning to convert) he was still married ‘in the eyes of the Church.’ There was no way #1 would allow an annulment. So he was in a very difficult spot.
As fate would have it, that was my last conversation with my sister, who had the good grace to drop dead a few weeks later, relieving my brother in law of his ‘living in sin,’ and he went forward with the conversion. He subsequently married another woman with whom he is presumably ‘living in sin.’
So, my question is: did Newt and Callista Gingrich get married by a priest in the Catholic Church? If so, how?