Posted on 02/11/2012 2:47:00 PM PST by tcg
As Rick Santorum surges in popularity people may be scratching their heads about his Catholic faith. The American public are used to Catholic politicians, but not this kind of Catholic politician.
I grew up as an Evangelical Protestant. We were prejudiced against Catholics. In our mind, Catholics were Democrats--and that was not good. We knew many of the blue collar folks were Catholics, but Catholics were also fat cats.
The Kennedys were Catholics and we had no respect for old Joe Kennedy who made his money as a bootlegger, nor for his philandering sons with their assumed air of American royalty. ... The Catholics did all that bad stuff.
I know now that my prejudices were just that. Among the worldly and sinful Catholics were many good and holy Christians. Likewise, among us Puritanical Protestants it turned out that there were many fallen and hypocritical Christians. That is really not the issue here. What my Protestant prejudices reveal is what Protestants in America have long thought about Catholics...
Protestant Evangelicals combined their theological disagreements with Catholicism with the bad example of Catholics in public life. Every time a Kennedy misbehaved the Protestants sneered and had their suspicions confirmed.
Whenever Catholic politicians like Pelosi and Biden and Kerry stood against their own church in public, the Protestants pointed fingers. When the Catholic bishops did nothing to discipline the wayward politicians Protestants raised a knowing eyebrow saying, "That figures."
Furthermore, the Kennedy Catholics in Washington were put there by the Kennedy Catholics in their own neighborhood. When they met local Catholics, more often than not they met lukewarm, badly catechized, non church going people who were only Catholic because they were Irish or Italian.
Now along comes Rick Santorum.... (READ MORE!)
(Excerpt) Read more at catholic.org ...
I’d really, really like to continue this discussion, but I started sipping a lovely wine after Sarah’s speech, and I’ve noticed that I’m typing more words with fewer consonants. It’s a matter of putting the wine away or copping out on the arguments. With what’s gone on in the past two days, I think I deserve the wine. So, bye for now.
You contradict yourself. If you have the “right one”, you don’t believe either that what you have is equal to every other belief. And my comment about the REAL Baptist was an insult against other Protestants. My criticism of Catholicism was limited to... Catholicism. Not to individual Catholics, as you have repeatedly accused me of.
This is the main kind of Catholicism I know about, as a convert and Catholic homeschooling parent. I like this piece because it kind of explains how so much of the anti-Catholicism is based on a stereotype and on people who never really followed the teachings of the Church to begin with. I have seen a lot of anti-Catholicism this week on TV, here on FR, and on Rush Limbaugh's show.
You wrote:
“You aren’t understanding.”
I am understanding.
“I said each individual Christian is a part of the Body of Christ. The Body of Christ IS the Church.”
A church is not the Church. What part of that do you not understand?
“And as for the Priesthood. The Priest-system cannot be found in the NT,”
False. Again, just look at John 20:19-23.
“but only in the traditions men have put together to establish a Priest-system,”
False. Protestantism, which denies the priesthood Christ established, is the man-made tradition - which is exactly why it never showed up until invented in the 16th century.
“based on obscure scriptures like the one stating that a leader of a group of Christians must be a “husband to one wife”, which are then interpreted to mean that a Priest ought not be married since they are married to the Church.”
Except no on really does that.
“But yet, we have these words from Christ Himself on the matter:Obviously, Christ wasn’t visible EVERYWHERE,”
Who expects Him to be? Did anyone claim He was? No.
“and there would come a time when Christ would NO LONGER be visible. And yet, blessed are they who have NOT SEEN, AND YET HAVE BELIEVED.”
And yet they only believed through the preaching of the Church. That’s the whole point. Christ sent the Church.
“To have Christ is not dependent on what has been seen or not seen, therefore.”
But Christ was still visible.
“I’ll hit you with this scripture again:...
If God is a Spirit, and God is not seen, what does it mean to worship God “in spirit and in truth?””
God the Father and God the Holy Spirit are spirits and always will be. God the Son has not been a spirit alone for 2,000 years.
“It can only mean that true worship is also unseen.”
False reasoning. The truest worship was the sacrifice of the Son - and that was most definitely visible.
“It isn’t in the physical motions, but in the heart of the individual, which no man sees except for God.”
Again, you were wrong about the truest worship. Jesus was physical and not just spiritual. Don’t feel bad. Protestants are often afflicted with dualistic like hatred of the physical. It is a product of their heresy.
Then try to explain WHY such a staunch, pro-life Catholic could support, not once but twice in 1995 and 2004, one of the most pro-abortion liberal candidates and slimes, as A.Specter?
Probably because here in PA, Santorum needed Specter’s endorsement to squeak by in a state that leans Democrat. It was just a matter of political horse-trading. There are good reasons to support RINOs in states where conservative Republicans can’t win. Some votes for our legislation are better than no votes. There’s no good reason to support a RINO on the presidential level because that severely moves your party to the left in every way imaginable.
Spector was a Republican at the time and Santorum supported a fellow republican. Sort of like I held my nose and voted for McLame in the last election and as much as I didn’t care for him, I was NOT going to vote for Obimbo. Politics is often the art of the possible.
I agree, it’s a great article
But that's what Santorum was and did during his career as Congressman. He voted for rising taxes, for big spending and huge earmarks ($3.5 billion alone for his state.
He trafficked with K Street and lobbyists, and got pecuniary advantages for himself.
For instance:
"In the years before he lost his Pennsylvania Senate seat in 2006, Rick Santorum worked hard to win hundreds of millions of dollars in additional Medicare money for hospitals in Puerto Rico.
He sponsored at least two Senate bills and pushed to amend a mammoth Medicare overhaul to include the extra spending, which would have benefited Universal Health Services, a Pennsylvania-based hospital management company with facilities in Puerto Rico. It seems at odds with the small-government philosophy Mr. Santorum now espouses in his presidential campaign ...
After Santorum severely lost his Senate seat 41% to 59% in 2006, Universal Health returned the favor:
"Within months of leaving the Senate, Mr. Santorum joined the board of Universal Health Services, where he collected $395,000 in director’s fees and stock options before resigning in 2011. He also became a consultant to Consol Energy, after years of advocating drilling and extraction policies helpful to the company, a Pennsylvania gas and coal producer. And he consulted for the American Continental Group, a lobbying firm whose clients won earmarks he sponsored."
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/06/us/politics/after-senate-santorums-beneficiaries-became-benefactors.html?pagewanted=all
Please take the time to look up the phrase “in persona Christi”. When I go to Confession (a Sacrament I am extremely grateful to Our Lord, Jesus Christ for giving to us) a priest is there in persona Christi. I am speaking DIRECTLY to Christ in the Confessional thru the priest.
As a grateful convert to the Catholic Church who was raised in the Church of Christ tradition I can assure you that assertions such as yours about the Church have little to no basis in fact. Peace of Our Lord, Jesus Christ be with you now & forever.
Well seeing as neither the SBC or the TBC has made any official pronouncements on it, and none of your advisory board have spoke out against it I would have to say that they are 100% behind it, or have their usual answer of "Once saved always saved do what ever you think."
Care to try again with a direct answer? Don't be afraid speak up name names. be specific.
What is your Church’s position on the Obama mandate about contraception and abortion?
Is your pastor speaking out about it? Which one of your church leaders is saying that the President is trampling on religious freedom? Has any of your church leaders agreed to stand with the Catholic church in defense of life and religious freedom?
“Here’s a Catholic politician who doesn’t speak down to the working classes, but speaks up for the working classes.”
One of the many reasons why Rick is connecting with the people!
“There are not over a 100 people in the U.S. that hate the Catholic Church, there are millions however, who hate what
they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing.” — Bishop Fulton J. Sheen
I don’t know who these advisory boards or whatnot even are. I do not know who are on these boards, or what they do, or what they say.
I know from my local church that we are all hardcore conservative, and every congregation I’ve come into contact with are also hardcore conservative, and I have not spoken with any pro-abortion, or pro-Obama individuals.
If you really want to use this as some kind of “Seeee, we’re superior”, keep in mind how many leftist Priests and Bishops you guys have infesting your church. The Pope does not behave as a Pope, but instead allows all these corrupt/leftist people in positions of power remain there for years and years. And when he DOES strike, it takes years and years of investigation, and then they don’t even bother to repudiate him with extreme anger. They asked this one Bishop in Australia, who had been advocating for years for women priests, to retire peacefully.
The Pope has condemned communism and your Catholic Liberation theology that is really strong in South America and here in the United States. Yet, all these people, whom you all should consider heretics, walk around quite openly mocking your “Church” teaching and your dogmas.
Your “leadership” usually hobnobs with the Libs, except for a few good guys like that one Bishop (Olsted? I think is his name) who took some damage for repudiating a pro-abortion Catholic Hospital and letting a Feminist nun know she had incurred excommunication.
Such men of action are a rare minority amongst your leadership. Sure, they’re pushing back with the contraception thing... but there are so many other things they DON’T push back on.
I would respect the Papists more if they knew how to rule their own household. I guarantee they’d even bring in a lot more converts if they actually had the guts to stand up for things.
As a Baptist, I am pretty independent. There is no Southern Baptist Pope I’ve ever met. The comparisons are completely irrelevant. I know from friends and family that we oppose it. That’s really as far as my knowledge cares to extend. I don’t get involved with anyone who claims to be in charge of anything.
Why do you even bother to talk about Santorum’s platform when you wouldn’t support the guy no matter what he proposed, just because he is a Catholic? Why the need to justify your intolerance?
Bookmark for later.
Most freepers will support him or Newt instead of Romney but his denomination seems to only matter to some Catholics here as a chauvinistic bragging right...
truth is a majority of Catholics vote Democrat...and almost always have...I think Reagan was an exception in 1980..Bush 2004 too
Catholics are no longer some persecuted species...our Supreme Court is ALL Catholic and Jewish...entirely....I think 6 Catholics and 3 Jews...one Catholic a diehard leftist and another a moderate
and Congress is around 30% Catholic
and this latest forced contraception hoopla has united Catholic clergy and Evangelical laity in a coalition whilst many and even according to a recent PPP poll Catholics in the general population off this board support Obama's contraception mandate
so playing up this Catholic angle like it's 1855 and the Irish (Catholics) are being treated like dogs and Santorum represents some Catholic phoenix is ..well..silly..and inaccurate
the only import Catholicism has here is that it appears Santorum is genuine in his Christian faith...and all the better.
you guys are trumpeting the Catholic angle for your own ends but it won't help get votes...liberal northern Union Catholics and latino Catholics are still gonna vote for the govt handout and political power...
Being a Catholic candidate does not by default mean that candidate will be a conservative anymore than Slick going to Southern Baptist church meant he would either
Santorum is a social conservative by and large because that is who he is...not just because he is Catholic...I wish it was that way...and if most Catholics voted as their dogma dictates this nation would have all it's ills cured overnight...but alas...that ain't the reality
“A church is not the Church. What part of that do you not understand?”
I have never once used the word “church” in reference to a building. I don’t think you’re disagreeing with what you think you’re disagreeing with.
“And yet they only believed through the preaching of the Church. That’s the whole point. Christ sent the Church.”
Preaching, which is what we are all commanded to do, and setting up a fancy building and requiring people to show up every sunday, going to a Priest to gain forgiveness, performing rituals over and over again as a condition of salvation, are not the same things.
The emphasis in scripture is one of true spirituality and holiness. That means, stuff you don’t see, not an emphasis on what you can see.
Your emphasis is on worldly buildings, visible rituals, and methods that one must follow to gain favor with God.
That is one of the reasons why you keep flipping out whenever I use the word “Church” to refer to two or three people gathered together, as opposed to the Pope’s residence in Rome.
“Why do you even bother to talk about Santorum’s platform when you wouldn’t support the guy no matter what he proposed, just because he is a Catholic? Why the need to justify your intolerance?”
Why do you even bother to insult me with these accusations, when I have been all over this website promoting Newt Gingrich, a freaking Catholic? When are you going to get off the victim routine “Ohhh, you’re persecuting me!! Waaahh!” when I state that your theology is wrong? This is starting to get obnoxious after the 3rd or 4th time I’ve been insulted in this way.
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.