Posted on 03/05/2012 6:31:33 AM PST by marshmallow
There is much to discuss in the feature story on Rick Santorum’s faith that has been served up by The New York Times. There is lots of interesting information, some questionable information and then a pretty large chunk of missing information.
However, I think many traditional Catholic believers will start reading this piece — after all, it’s the story of how one normal American Catholic turned into a traditional Roman Catholic — and then find themselves stuck right about here.
As members of St. Catherine of Siena, a parish here in the wealthy Northern Virginia suburb of Great Falls, the Santorums are immersed in a community where large families are not uncommon and many mothers leave behind careers to dedicate themselves to child-rearing, as Mrs. Santorum has. Mr. Santorum has been on the church roster as a lector, reading Scripture from the pulpit.
The parish is known for its Washington luminaries — Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court is a member — as well as its spiritual ardor. Mass is offered in Latin every Sunday at noon — most parishes have Mass only in English — and each Wednesday parishioners take turns praying nonstop for 24 hours before a consecrated communion wafer, a demanding practice known as Eucharistic adoration.
First of all, I think it would be more accurate to say that parishioners take part in a 24-hour cycle of unbroken prayers, with most participating for an hour — a short period of devotion that, for a traditional believer in a number of different traditions, would not be all that “demanding.” The wording in the story is a bit unclear. What does it mean to “take turns praying nonstop”?
However, the fingernails-on-chalkboard moment in this passage for many readers will be the return of the W-word — “wafer.”
(Excerpt) Read more at getreligion.org ...
News flash, Newt’s a Catholic, too. Name one thing Santorum is campaigning on, AND that he has voted for (actions+words), that brings back our Constitutional Republic, and he hasn’t flip-flopped on. Just one.
Kind of a shame they didn’t go full metal Klan with the headline and use the word “cracker” - always amusing when people who claim to be Christians demean the Lord so.
News flash, Newt’s a Catholic, too. Name one thing Santorum is campaigning on, AND that he has voted for (actions+words), that brings back our Constitutional Republic, and he hasn’t flip-flopped on. Just one.
Santorum has not flip flopped on anything. He is principled. Now ask me about Newt’s flip flops and I can go on all day. One of the problem people have with Santorum is that he is too moral, too principled, too honest.
We still do, at my nondenominatinal Protestant church. A couple of times a month.
I took communion a few years ago at the Falls Church in Virginia when I was visiting there. They serve real sacramental wine, not grape juice, but I didn’t realize it until it I’d already taken a sip. That was a shock to my taste buds!
WHAT is that, please? Who defines it?
Wow, Churchill was right. In any event, I’m not interested in reading your apologetics. You’ve stated your opinion, and we disagree. Have a good one.
Have a good one.
You too. Happy Monday.
I define it as wine, not grape juice. Would it be better if I took the word “sacramental” out?
He's been around for decades and suffers from the OLDER POLITICIAN PROBLEM, OPP ~ that in his earlier career he worked on behalf of ideas now seen to be outside of the Conservative Main Stream.
Santorum finds himself in the same fix, and even Paul can't 'splain all his votes ~ he doesn't even REMEMBER them!
Romney totally betrayed the movement in Massachusetts. They'd impeached and removed him if he hadn't. But I'll tell you what, he'd have a much better claim to be President if he'd been persecuted by the godless, soulless demons who run the Mass legislature.
I’ll tell you what is interesting...we have two Catholics and a Mormom, fighting for the chance to go up against a Muslim...What’s going to happen when all those eyes suddenly turn toward non-denominational/Protestants for support?
Right. Good call.
He's a faker. Completely.
He has only seven kids, so his pro-life stance is clearly just talk. His recent hiatus in campaigning to be by the side of his sick, handicapped daughter was clearly just another ruse to fool the gullible public.
The "walk the walk" example of those who truly believe has always produced calls of "holier than thou" from secularists who sense that the subject's religion might actually really mean something and might actually animate and inform his morality and political ethos.
'Twould be better to take the alcohol out.
#32 bumpus maximus
My present church uses non-alcoholic grape juice.
The church in Virginia is Anglican. They separated from the Espiscopal church several years ago.
They still do wine.
My advice would be to support the Christians, that is to say one of the Catholics. Mormons are not Christians, and Hussein isn’t either, Jeremiah Wright notwithstanding, that was all just role playing.
When did forcibly taking people money and making them do the “right thing” with it become a conservative principle? I think you’re misguided and are trying to turn this into a very limited reductio ad absurdum argument. But I’m not biting. Take care.
As far as Santorum goes, I find that to be a rather accurate description of him. The Left is absolutely going out of their way to get Santorum nominated. There is a strong push for them to crossover on Super Tuesday to stop Romney and Gingrich. (And they certainly won't vote for Santo in the General.)
Well, if you're pulling the 2-3 AM shift it could be. And good prayer is sometimes very strenuous, especially if you are going through a spiritually dry period. Prayer doesn't always come easy, does it?
Looks to me like the NYT is trying to reassure Cafeteria Catholics that there’s no reason for them to pay attention to or side with the Bishops by painting anyone who actually believes the Dogma and Doctrines of The Church as some sort of radical traditionalist. I especially like the “wafer” and “24 hours of prayer” stuff and expect the NYT to get back to their 1870s standard of slander directed towards the Catholic Church before long.
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.