|
Published: January 4, 2010
“She never gets one Catholic fact right”
Pelosi admits she’s been counseled by archbishop and lobbied by hierarchy – but won’t change her mind on abortion, other moral issues
San Francisco Archbishop George Niederauer has personally counseled House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco, about her views on abortion and other moral issues, Pelosi revealed in a recent interview with Newsweek. But the Speaker apparently has no intentions of changing her opinions, regardless of the archbishop’s advice.
In an interview with Newsweek’s Eleanor Clift published on the magazine’s website on Dec. 21 and in the print edition dated today, Pelosi said, “I have some concerns about the church's position respecting a woman's right to choose. I have some concerns about the church's position on gay rights. I am a practicing Catholic, although they're probably not too happy about that. But it is my faith. I practically mourn this difference of opinion because I feel what I was raised to believe is consistent with what I profess, and that is that we are all endowed with a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions. And that women should have that opportunity to exercise their free will.”
Asked Clift: “Is it difficult for you to reconcile your faith with the role you have in public life?” Pelosi responded, “You know, I had five children in six years. The day I brought my fifth baby home, that week my daughter turned 6. So I appreciate and value all that they want to talk about in terms of family and the rest. When I speak to my archbishop in San Francisco and his role is to try to change my mind on the subject, well then he is exercising his pastoral duty to me as one of his flock. When they call me on the phone here to talk about, or come to see me about an issue, that's a different story. Then they are advocates, and I am a public official, and I have a different responsibility.”
Earlier in the interview, Clift asked, “It was reported that you were negotiating with the conference of bishops.” Pelosi responded, “I talked to one of the cardinals. I said to him that I believe that what we are doing honors the principles we talked about: we want to pass a health-care bill, we want it to be abortion neutral, and we want it to [have] no federal funding [for abortion], which is the law. And we believe that our language does that. They said, ‘We believe that it does not.’ I said, let's sit down at the table and our lawyers can compare language. That's what the meeting was about -- to make our case. Clearly, the people at that table were not willing to accept what we know to be a fact.”
Pelosi’s Newsweek interview brought scorn from at least one observer, who wrote an opinion piece for the website “Politics Daily” under the heading, “Nancy Pelosi, Catholic Without a Clue.”
Elizabeth Lev, an art historian and writer based in Rome and a contributor to “Politics Daily,” wrote in the Dec. 31 piece, “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi seems to be planning a second career as a theologian. Unfortunately, she never gets one Catholic fact right. Interviewed by Eleanor Clift for Newsweek's year-end issue, Pelosi capped an 18-month succession of clamorously incorrect public statements about what Catholics believe with her own take on the meaning of freedom.”
To read Lev’s full commentary, Click Here.
To read Clift’s full interview with Pelosi, Click Here.
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 1:06 AM By Sieber
When asked by Fox News about her conversation with the Pope, Pelosi said, "He shared his point of view."
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 1:30 AM By Central Valley
Eleanor Clift speaks with Nancy Pelosi, devils speaks to devil. What are the Archbishops of San Francisco and Washington doing? Nothing.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 3:14 AM By BJ
Nancy: no woman, or man, has 'the right to choose' to terminate innocent human life in the womb. Whether in order to salve your conscience you deny that life the dignity of the name 'baby',it is from conception 'human life', and proper Catholics know that from conception that human life has a soul and is a separate being, yet dependant for many years, on its mother. Thou Shalt Not Kill..... and No Nancy, you, do not have the authority to see that as a matter of 'choice' .
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 5:10 AM By Fomer Altar Boy
How much longer until she is excommunicated?
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 5:26 AM By Canisius
This fraudulent Catholic should be excommunicate immediately, she has already sold her soul to Satan
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 5:28 AM By 1abqdad
This is a perfect example of the fallout from the cowardice of many bishops. If they had followed the ORIGINAL directive of the USCCB to excommunicate ALL politicians that promoted abortion, this would NOT be an issue, as Pelosi would NOT be able to claim to be Catholic and Catholic doctrine would NOT be at risk from her heretic statements for she worldly have already been excommunicated! She has already been given far too much opportunity to admit her error. Her Bishop is guilty of failure to protect the credibility of the church by failing to respond to her PUBLIC heresy! (Pelosi has already admitted that she would re-think her positions if she was faced with excommunication! It is immoral for church leadership to fail to respond accordingly!) The promotion of "grave" (read 'mortal') sin has always been grounds for excommunication. Pelosi's abortion position, overt promotion of other forms of murder and gay marriage, and claims to be in communion with the Catholic Church cause tremendous harm and confusion, not to mention the insult to God... and pain and suffering of millions of souls. Too allow this to continue is a grave sin itself, as the church's leaders are called to protect the credibility of the church! Pelosi is an embarrassment and destructive force for evil. Her blasphemy and promotion of heresy is unacceptable to God. She is "free" to have her OWN beliefs, but NOT to associate those beliefs with God's when they are certainly NOT! To allow her to continue to associate her actions with the Church is immoral. Excommunication is the only answer at this point. The church has the obligation to excommunicate her no matter what the fallout, which I believe would ultimately be positive because MOST Catholics want decisive action and guidance!
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 5:29 AM By Thomas Edward Miles
Archbishop, it's a FREE COUNTRY! Should we place Nancy on the pre~Vatican ll ROASTING RACK in the basement of the ARCHBISHOP OFFICE?! Salt anyone?
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 5:44 AM By 1abqdad
Peolsi is basically thumbing her nose at the Church leadership because of their failure to take any action. She uses her association with the church to gain votes; yet, she is NOT Catholic! As I recall, they used to execute heretics like her for falsely using their association with the church for political and/or financial gain, and she is doing both. While I certainly do NOT promote hurting anyone for their beliefs, to allow her to use the church for financial and political gain while she is opposed to ALL of the 5 basic issues identified by the USCCB is WRONG and totally irresponsible! Her heresy demands action! She thinks that her association with the church is a "RIGHT" and that SHE can define her own church doctrine! It is the responsibility of her Bishop to protect the credibility of the church. He is failing miserably!
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 5:45 AM By ted
Madam Speaker has "concerns" regarding the Church's position on "a woman's right to choose."
That should read more like she puts her power, prestige, and popularity with the far left above all other concerns, including the right to life itself. She has sold her soul for that power.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 6:29 AM By Samuel Ferraro
The Church has exercised patience to a fault with Pelosi and other "Catholic" politicians who refuse to change their moral positions which contradict Catholic teaching. The only logical next step is public excommunication. Maybe that will bring these people to their senses, and if not, those who choose not to repent will no longer be the source of scandal that they currently are.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 7:37 AM By JLS
As long as Pelosi is the employer of the bishops, why should she change her views?
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 7:39 AM By John
Pelosi simply gives gives the Leftist spin that's been the way that U.S. bishops have been preaching for the last 30 years.
If the CA bishops really believed that abortion should NOT be part of any "health" plan, then why are they in bed with Kaiser Health Plan, an baortion provider?????
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 7:54 AM By Camille
Yes, Nancy, women should be allowed to exercise their free will, but mandating abortion and sex education in the schools from 1st grade (age appropriate of course, promotion and funding in legislation is not allowing free will to rise to its respected place of honor. You subconsciously even state it that way in your comments. How arrogant of you to say that its the church and not you that is in error on the question of the value of innocent human life. And, yes, as a legislator you have a responsibility to the governed, but it is to be exercised with prudence and wisdom, virtues which seem to evade you.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 8:22 AM By Linda
We are missing some 50 MILLION Americans who have been murdered in the womb through abortion. Can this woman be excommunicated? She certainly isn't Catholic.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 8:54 AM By junev
This woman gives scandal every time she opens her mouth. It is high time that the Bishops of the United States get their act together and publicly excommunicate this woman so that any parish she goes to knows that she is not to receive Holy Communion. The Catholic Church is ONE, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. When did the Bishops stop adherring to the ONE part???????
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 9:30 AM By JLS
No, tem, Pelosi should be placed in prison. You probably think I'm joking. After all, the devil's home is in Hell; therefore, its advocates should be placed likewise.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 9:35 AM By JLS
In a few years when Pelosi is old and decrepit (not long from now), maybe the Pope will invite her to come for a chat. But I would not recommend wasting the time. Did God waste any time with Jezebel before they threw her over the wall for the jackels to eat? No, in fact read the story and find that God was totally disgusted with the wretch. What difference is it now with Pelosi, who has raised herself higher than God, at least in her own eyes? Where is the history of any person of such rancor against God whom God has spared from His wrath? Same with that late gasbag, tedkennedy.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 9:41 AM By Peter
The scandalous behavior and rejection of Church teaching has gone on long enough as it has caused damage within the Church by furthering disunity. Any further action on the part of a bishop to change her mind is only an act in futility and is a scandal in itself. It is time for the bishops to sweep the dust of this scandalous women out of the Church. Excommunicate her!
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 9:50 AM By John Zakharia
Anyone who dares to defend that babies may be legitimately killed because another human being ‘chooses’ to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the name.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 9:59 AM By David
Faithful Catholics know Ms. Pelosi is wrong and that our Christian faith is not simply an individual "point of view." Unfortunately, the fact that Ms. Pelosi speaks as a political leader and not as a religious leader is lost on many, so she is tragically misleading people -- Catholics and non-Catholics alike who think she somehow represents legitimate Catholic belief. The consequences of her behavior are untold numbers of souls lost and, in the case of abortion, lives lost. It's hard to believe that she's not aware of this.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 10:21 AM By WOODY GUIDRY
CLOSE THE DOORS and explain with TRANSPARENCY that the Catholic "religion" she believes she practices doesn't exist. She has been practicing all the wrong notes on the keyboard.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 10:22 AM By Frank Rega
Mrs. Pelosi is a "Michael Corleone Catholic" For more on what that means, go to the home page of FrankRega. URL not allowed in these comments but I think you can figure it out.
Peace,
Frank
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 10:44 AM By Ron
Don’t expect any Bishop that allows the abomination of desolation at the Most (un)Holy Redeemer Church to continue to have any positive Catholic influence on Pelosi. They both should be excommunicated!
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 11:24 AM By St. Christopher
"Tabqdad" is correct: for the faithful, the bishops aid and abet abortion-minded politicians by dithering on the issue, milling around and sending out conflicting (and barely coherent) messages. Save for fear of Vatican discipline (which has also been lacking), the bishops would surely find a way to more overtly get in line at the Obama kissing both. It is the duty of the Church to seek reconciliation with a sinner of public celebrity, and then, if this effort fails, to excommunicate them. No one has the right to say that they are Catholic, when they insist on practicing the faith in their own way on matters of Church discipline, dogma, and teaching. The inheritance of President Kennedy on the issue of Church -- State relations is so entirely misused by Pelosi and her party. Certainly, the Pope cannot legitimately dictate nation policy to the President. However, the Pope can, and must, dictate matters of faith and morals to all Catholics, including the President. When the Catholic politician says, "I do not care about that" and choses to enable mortal sin, then that politician -- as a matter of faith only -- must be held accountable by the Church.
As the politicians sin-enabling legislation was public, so should the Church's punishment be public. Excommunication is intended, in part, to admonish the sinner and, it is hoped, make that person repent; it is also used to avoid, or correct, scandal. America's bishops, in large part, should be sacked. These men are derelict in their duty and are little more than "empty collars", whose inactions and, it must be believed, intended ambiguities and obfuscations, assisted in the creation of a socialist, amoral America. No wonder it has taken years to get even a correct translation of "pro multis" out of these Sanhedrin. They oppose Catholic tradition because it refutes their careers. Never fear Speaker Pelosi, you, the Good President, the many Catholic politicians will not be punished much from this crowd.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 11:39 AM By Carolina Geo
There comes a point when the inactions of the bishop become more scandalous than the actions of the person. We have already passed that point. Ms. Pelosi should have been excommunicated - for the good of her soul, mind you - a long time ago. That she has not been excommunicated is now a source of scandal for her bishop, and it is HIS soul that is similarly in danger. He needs the strength of our prayers to do what is right and just, as do all bishops who have heretical politicians in their jurisdiction.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 11:41 AM By Ski Ven
Some people seem to be more interested in episcopally adjudicating bloggers who are scandalized by the TK funeral than with sanctioning Catholic politicians who are publicly committing mortal sins against the fifth commandment. I am sure they have clever intellectual ways of explaining such behavior.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 11:52 AM By Carolina Geo
There comes a point when the inactions of the bishop become more scandalous than the actions of the person. We have already passed that point. Ms. Pelosi should have been excommunicated - for the good of her soul, mind you - a long time ago. That she has not been excommunicated is now a source of scandal for her bishop, and it is HIS soul that is similarly in danger. He needs the strength of our prayers to do what is right and just, as do all bishops who have heretical politicians in their jurisdiction.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 12:08 PM By A Lady
Ms. Pelosi doesn't listen to the public so why in the world would she deign to listen to the the Bishops?
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 12:26 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
As long as the great majority of the U.S. Bishops remain in the Party of Death, the Demoncrat Party, these miscreants will never be excommunicated!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 1:02 PM By Ralph
When is someone going to tell nancy that she is not a Catholic just because she says she is? You also must believe and follow the church laws of which she is not.Catholics do not have the free will to be in error.Liberal spin!!
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 1:55 PM By Life Lady
We are all seeming to be asking "How long, Lord, how long!" and the problem is not with God, but with us! Those people who voted for Pelosi, answer that question for yourselves. In her own way, Ms Pelosi is begging the faithful to answer "Who shall I send?" and we all have the opportunity to answer "I will go, Lord, send me!" So, answer the call, vote appropriately, and pray out in front of any and every abortion clinic near you, or at home. She will spew her venom, any chance she gets. It not for us to demand her excommunication, that is already something that is the responsibility of our bishops, who need our prayers. But be sure that when a non-Catholic ask those questions that her language brings, (is that what you Catholics really believe?) know your faith enough to be able to give a cogent respose, and continue to pray. God will do what He will, and we will look to Him, and only to Him, for the justice and relief that we all seek.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 3:09 PM By sal
A number of powerful Cardinals and Bishops have been trying for years to bully and marginalize Traditional Catholics who are literate, who live out and have been clinging to their Catholic Faith in obedience to the perennial teachings of the Church on life and sexuality. Foremost of their victims are Fr. Nicholas Grunner and the SSPPX.
But when it comes to people who weild vast political power and influence, and who are self-avowed promoters of murder of infants, these same Church officials all of a sudden lose their balls, and simply go down to advising and counselling, then fall silent, if not issue conflicting and obviously tangential pastoral letters . I say, Enough is enough! This cowardice and double standard has got to stop. An Archbishop who cannot or will not discipline a Catholic who sows scandal among the rest of his flock should either resign or be taken out of his positon. Too much of our Church leadership has lost much of its militancy. I have no illusion both the spirit and the phrase "Church Militant" will simply disappear in time under the present leadership.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 3:26 PM By Mark from PA
Instead of screaming for Mrs. Pelosi to be excommunicated, why don't you pray for Mrs. Pelosi to have a change of heart regarding our precious unborn? Do you believe that the power of prayer can change her heart? As laity, it is not our business to excommunicate people or tell bishops to excommunicate people.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 3:47 PM By Jon
The ball is in the Archbishop's court. Will he defend the faith or cower in fear?
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 4:37 PM By Elizabeth
I PRAY FOR MS. PELOSI EVERYDAY!!!!!
HER ARROGANCE IS BEYOND COMPARE.
SHE NEEDS TO BE PUBLICALLY EX-COMMUNICATED!!!!!!!!!!!
I PRAY SHE IS NOT APPROACHING OUR LORD IN HOLY COMMUNION!!!!!
I PRAY THAT AB NIEDERHAUER AND BISHOP WUERL INFORMED HER NOT TO ......WHAT A SACRILEDGE TO THE LORD, OH MY.........AND THE SCANDAL TO THE BISHOPS AND THE CHURCH, AND WE THE PEOPLE IN THE PEWS!!!!!!!!
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 4:41 PM By Jon
"As laity, it is not our business to excommunicate people or tell bishops to excommunicate people." - As laity we have the right to demand that our Bishops hold to and act on the faith. I take it you had nothing to say to our bishops concerning the sex abuse scandals?
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 4:41 PM By Laurette Elsberry
Pelosi is just reiterating what she knows from her Catechism: We are endowed with free will. She is exercising her free will to attain eternal damnation. Unfortunately, she is dragging down many others with her.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 6:07 PM By Abeca Christian
I think that we already know the reputation of Pelosi, nothing to be surprised at. It still does not mean that I am not disgusted with her work. Aye heck, I am pretty much darn tired of any news regarding her. She has and continues to keep doing a good job at what she normally does, offend Christ and His church. I kinda feel like we need a fresh start and hire someone new to replace her, someone faithful. But wait, who??
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 6:31 PM By JLS
Neither, Jon, he'll simply continue to collect the government money? Although it would be great news if he didn't.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 6:36 PM By JLS
PA, I thought you were opposed to abortion. But here you are advocating that pro abortion laws should not only be prolonged but that the govt should fund them. That is the outcome of placing a bet that prayer would change her stone cold heart. She is spiritually dead, as you would know had you only read the teachings of the Apostles instead of of the nuns who taught you in high school where the priest was sexually compromised which you brought out last month. It would help stop abortion for her to be excommunicated; any other gambit is only a gamble, with unborn babies as the poker chips. The buying and selling of souls ... that is the game of Pelosi. It is why she believes she is greater than God, because she knows that God does not buy and sell souls, and that since she does then she's that much greater ... that, PA, is what most of today's politicians are hooked up with, the buying and selling of souls. You can pray for Pelosi even after she is excommunicated; did you realize this?
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 7:19 PM By Bruce
The speaker continues to openly and publicly defy Almighty God. I wonder how much longer He will allow for her evil charade and those of her criminal congressional gangsters to continue before He calls on them and sentences their mortal souls? Can't they see that hells fire is for eternity? What is wrong with them? They seem to have sold their souls to Satan all for the power, awards, and riches of their short earthly lives. Pray for them before it is to late to save even one more innocent baby's life and for them to confess their sins and amend their lives.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 7:28 PM By WOODY GUIDRY
SAL, mentioning Grunner and SSPPX shoots down the logic of the rest of your comment. Thanks for adding "lose their balls" to the accepted vocabulary of this publication. You have scored a "first" amongst the commentators.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 7:49 PM By MarkF
What's going without comment is that the bishops actually HAVE been talking to these politicians. Rep. Kennedy and Pelosi have confirmed it, where a lot of us have wondered what has been going on. It seems that the bishops have been talking to them over a series of time, not just one conversation. We have good reason to assume that it's not just Rep. Kennedy and Pelosi who have been counseled. It's probable the VP Biden has been counseled too. Maybe it's too little. Maybe it's too late. But isn't the real story is that this is going on? As Fulton Sheen said, it will be the laity who force the changes onto the hierarchy. Always, always, always write a BRIEF letter to you bishop when you hear about some serious attempts to high jack the faith, and ALWAYS send a copy to the Papal Nuncio in DC. He is the man who collects all the information that gets sent to Rome. If the Papal Nuncio knows something, then the Pope has a chance of knowing it too. Think about that.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 8:16 PM By garvan
The bishops failed to act when Roe v Wade became "law" in 1973. Had they acted swiftly, vocally and decisively at the time, the Congress would have overturned Blackmun's Abomination in a trice. But they did not. Nor will the bunch of them act decisively today against those who call themselves "Catholic", but do Satan's work. I suspect that money is just as big a factor as cowardice.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 8:21 PM By MATTHEW
We have a duty to remind our fellow Catholics of the teachings of our Faith. Pelosi is contributing to misguiding Souls, and possibly contributing to the loss of those Souls. If she continues to publicly profess her opinion that a woman has the right to abort an infant, she must be excommunicated.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 9:26 PM By nick
From page 25 of the Winter 2009 issue of "Loyola" University of Chicago magazine:
"...the chair is named after the Reverend John Courtney Murray, S.J. , a Jesuit priest and theologian who was known for his efforts to reconcile Catholicism and religious pluralism."
(N.b. "Religious pluralism" is a euphemism for idolatry and state atheism.)
Father Murray was the main author of "Dignitatis Humanae" from Vatican Council II. As an "anonymous atheist," along with Fr. Karl Rahner and company, he attempted to spread atheism by secularizing the Church. In the 1940s Fr. Murray was silenced by Pope Pius XII for promoting crazy ideas such as this but was "rehabilitated" by Pope John XXIII and invited to Vatican II to participate as a peritus. Michael Davies expounds on the history of these dissidents in his excellent book "Religious Liberty and the Second Vatican Council." Fr. Brian Harrison, O.S. wrote a chapter for this book, too.
I read a letter Fr. Murray wrote to Cardinal Cushing in the 1960s in which he encouraged the Cardinal to dissuade Catholics to not stop the changing of laws which prevented the spread of artificial contraception. This crazy idea has led to abortion on demand and the murder of many millions of little infants (the Latin word for "little infant" is "fetus") in the western world. Fr. Murray is often cited by sophistic politicians who claim they are personally against abortion but believe the state should fund it for others with tax dollars of those who are anti-abortion. These phony politicians also belong to the "anonymous atheist" sect.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 10:21 PM By The Truth Hurts
Mark from PA, Do YOU believe in the power of prayer when it comes to changing hearts? In response to your January 04, 2010 3:26 PM post. It's a real darn good thing that it's not up to the laity to decide who gets excommunicated! Don't worry Mark, you and Nancy Pelosi are in our prayers. You both supported and helped with votes to elect a well known pro-death President who kills our precious unborn. The day that you apologize without any "nuanced lame excuses" on this website for helping to elect a person who you knew was pro-abortion is the day that I'll really,really, really. really believe in the power of prayer.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 10:27 PM By Leonard
Pray for the bishops and all politicians...
All of them have a free will and will be judged on the return of Jesus. AMEN
|
Posted Tuesday, January 05, 2010 2:53 AM By 1abqdad
Mark - Pelosi has been given too much prayer. It is wasted on her. (BOTH the Pope and her archbishop have preceded us!) And, Mark, it IS most certainly our "business" to point out when a bishop fails to do his job! Did Jesus NOT point out when the pharisees were falling into heresy? He was an example of how WE should behave! Mark, you missed the point the Jesus gave us! We have an OBLIGATION to protect the credibility of the church! You give her the chance to repent and then if she fails to change, you excommunicate her...Period!
|
Posted Tuesday, January 05, 2010 5:09 AM By Gary
Since Vatican II the Bishops have allowed their own theology to be washed out and minimalized. There is no Dogma any longer. Once they moved away from the task of "saving souls" it has left them seeking legitimacy by lobbying for secular issues like healthcare and immigration etc. Abortion activism is something the Catholic faithful do, not the Bishops. When the healthcare finally gets enacted with minor constraints for funding for Abortion, the Bishops will view it as a victory. We will not hear anything more from them. The Bishops are destroying the Church.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 05, 2010 10:32 AM By Mark from PA
1abqdad, you say that Pelosi has been given too much prayer. It is wasted on her. Do you believe that prayer is wasted on most people? Do you think if a person is in prison that prayer is wasted on them. Is prayer wasted on drug addicts or alcoholics? How does one judge if I person is not worth being prayed for?
|
Posted Tuesday, January 05, 2010 12:59 PM By Abeca Christian
The problem is that there are a lot of so called Catholics that think like Pelosi. Sad but true, I met many Catholics like her.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 05, 2010 1:06 PM By David
" and that is that we are all endowed with a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions. And that women should have that opportunity to exercise their free will.”
Our prisons are filled with people who have "free will". She should have finished her statement with "and a responsible for their actions." Free will gives us choice, it does not mean that the choice is correct, moral or ethical. Abortion is murder, nothing else.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 05, 2010 2:17 PM By Canisius
PA no this witch is not worth being prayed for she is clearly in the enemies camp. She has chosen "planned abortionhood" over Christ. There has to come a point when you "peace & social justice" Catholics will have to choose a side, Christ and His Cross or the Prince of this world.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 05, 2010 2:56 PM By JonJ
Uhhh, Garvan, Congress cannot "overtturn" the Supreme Court. Congress is empowered to legislate, not adjudicate court cases. And, in fact, its the Supreme Court which has the power of judicial review over congressional legislation; but congress hold no similar power over the Court's decisions. The only way Congress could reliably change the Roe decision would be to amend the constitution, which requires a 2/3 majority vote.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 05, 2010 3:47 PM By MarkF
Does anyone else travel a fair amount? I go to Mass all over the North East and I've noticed a difference in how Masses are said in the last year or so. I know a parish up in NYC that has daily confession and has lines of people waiting every single day. I went to Mass on Christmas up in a small town. Since last year when I was there last, they've added kneeling during the Credo at the appropriate time. At the end of Mass, the people didn't burst out into talk. They had a moment of prayer, knelt and said five hail Mary's. I see another parish where the Benedictus and Sanctus are sung in Latin. I see the bishops speaking out more. I hear more and more priests are learning the Latin Mass. Does anyone else see these signs of spring around them?
|
Posted Tuesday, January 05, 2010 4:28 PM By Rebecca
It's wrong to choose hell, but God gives man (and woman) a choice anyway. Be perfect, like your heavenly Father is perfect.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 8:39 AM By Canisius
Mark F yes, our side is clearly winning. I live in NY north of the city, and I can count at least 10 parishes in a 20 miles radius of my home that offer the Latin Mass, where 3 years there was only 2. Thing have turning around for at least the past 2 years maybe more. Since the Holy Father's Motu Propio on the Extraordinary form. Every single young priest I have met lately is orthodox, including a Capuchin friar, the traditonal/orthodox orders are the ones that are now having to turn away candidates due to overcrowding. In time these young traditional/orthodox priests will take the reigns of power and guide the Church away from the diaster of the past 45 years. I imagine there will be bitter resistance from the parallel Church of the PA's and Grisha's put they even know their time has past.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 2:35 PM By james
why practice a religion if you don't believe in its most basic tenets? it ceases to be your faith when you invent your own rules and interpretations of it to fit your lifestyle. you might as well be a scientologist.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 3:34 PM By Mark from PA
Canisius, you may think that Mrs. Pelosi is a witch but this is your own theology. I know of nothing in Church teaching that witches are not worth being prayed for.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 4:07 PM By Abeca Christian
james you made a good point there.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 5:42 PM By JLS
PA, I just posted Church teaching that some people are not worth praying for. To wit: Jezebel, whom God punished by allowing her victims to throw her over the wall to provide a meal for the jackels and wolves. So, PA, are you suggesting we follow your teaching, your ignorance of teaching or Church teaching which I have provided an example of?
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 5:53 PM By Mark from PA
Canisius, we had 1400 people at the 4 PM Christmas Mass in my "parallel Church." Our Church was also filled for Midnight Mass. I sang in the choir at both Masses. I don't think that the time is past for my parish yet. I find the haughtiness here astounding at times. When did disdain become a virtue?
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 8:32 PM By simone_dubois
Uhhh, JonJ, through the soft language of Judge Marshall, after having been removed from the Supreme Court by Jefferson and wrangled back on by Adams, he instituted what became a defacto veto and the abuse of legislating from the bench with a defacto veto through the use of review and opinion. This was not a federal supreme court power granted by the consitution, it was one developed by the supreme court and which has been increasingly used in these last 40 years to create law, a power originally intended to be vested in the legislators elected to represent the will of the people. We need to restore the courts to the Constitution though I agree it might require an ammendment and given that they don't care what we the people think or want FIRST WE HAVE TO VOTE ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS OUT!
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:17 PM By JLS
PA, the televangelists had many times your 1400 souls at Mass ... Are you finally revealing to us how you define the true Church, it being defined by how many people attend it?
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:20 PM By JLS
JonJ, we went through this last year. The president and/or the Congress can limit the jurisdiction of the supreme court. Such things are sometimes called legislative set asides, and happen not infrequently. The president can stack the court with additional justices, and can reduce the number as well. Read your copy of the Constitution.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:32 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
JonJ,
You are wrong, Congress can declare a decision by the Courts to be out of their venue. That was actually in the works when a then Regent of "Catholic" Santa Clara Univ., Cong. Don Ewards, refused to let it out of Committee. A removal from Committee motion lost by only a few votes. Learn your facts.
By the way, Edwards was never excommunicated either.
I know Dr. Garvan Kuskey personally, and I doubt very much you have the background he has in these matters.
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:55 PM By Abeca Christian
simone_dubois you sound like you know all your stuff, very impressive.JonJ what do you have to say to that? If you have some good sense and a little bit of humility perhaps you will let it be.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 12:09 AM By 1abqdad
Mark -
I'll bet that the baptist church down the road had even MORE people at their "service"! If the TRUE Church used ONLY numbers as the sole method to establish success, they would have put TV's, video games, and ice cream parlors in the chapel! (Oh, wait...That is exactly what many protestant churches have done!) The ultimate success of GOD's Church is NOT about numbers but adherence to doctrine and consistent, orthodox teaching combined with offering QUALITY programs that meet the needs of the people. To simply claim that numbers equals legitimacy is foolish at best! (Jim Jones had great numbers as I recall!) I hope that you enjoy the choir...
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 3:40 AM By Jamison
In regard to prayer and worth of persons, the Church teaches that "Every human person... is a being of inestimable worth created in the image and likeness of God" and teaches: "When we say 'hallowed be thy name,' we ask that it should be hallowed in us, who are in him; but also in others whom God's grace still awaits, that we may OBEY THE PRECEPT THAT OBLIGES US TO PRAY FOR EVERYONE, EVEN OUR ENEMIES. That is why we do not say expressly 'hallowed be thy name 'in us,"' for we ask that it be so in ALL men." (CCC#2814) In the words of His Holiness Pope John Paul II, "The liturgy, in fact, teaches us to pray for EVERYONE, in the name of that bond of solidarity that joins the Church's members to one another: it is a bond stronger than death itself. May NO ONE lack the support of our prayer." And, "Unceasingly the Church implores from God mercy for EVERYONE." In the words of His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, "In the Church EVERYONE has a place, EVERYONE!"
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 4:32 AM By Mark from PA
JLS, Jezebel was in the Old Testament, she was not Catholic. If Nancy Pelosi was thrown over a wall and eaten by animals would it satify some of you people? I think Christ would deal with her differently.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 6:39 AM By Canisius
PA, let me ask you something, of those 1400 how many do you think were worthly to receive the Blessed Sacrament, does your Parish Priest remind its members that only those in a state of grace are worthy to receive. Your attitude reminds me of weak cleric I met one time who said they dont really speak about sin in his Parish, I said then you have no business mentioning Christ either. He was in shock, this is your attitude PA. Your Happy Talk Catholicism, your emphasis on tolerance and diversity, instead of the last 4 things (do you even know what they are?).I am positive that the majority of those 1400 souls were the typical C & E catholics, probably dont even know the mysteries of the Rosary or what the word transubstantion means, this your parallel church
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 8:27 AM By Ski Ven
What a new revelation! Everyone has a place in the Church, including Satan? Wow! Who'd of thunk it!!
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 8:38 AM By Cnaisius
PA, why are you so sure Christ would not release his just wrath on a woman (Pelosi) reponsible for the death of millions of unborn children, again your parallel Church and its twisted mind set
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 3:24 PM By Jamison
Ski Ven, if that's what you "thunk" of it, perhaps the (dis)credit may be yours! :) Pope Paul VI (or his interpreters) expressed it slightly differently, saying: "Do you know the meaning of 'Catholic Church'? It means that the Church is for the entire world... Each MAN... has a place in the Church. How can I say such an astonishing thing? Because that is what Jesus Christ, the first-born of all men, has wanted."
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 3:57 PM By Mark from PA
Canisius, you may hate Nancy Pelosi and disagree with her politics but to say that she is responsible for the death of millions of children is out of line. What would happen if a mentally unstable teen heard this and decided to assassinate Nancy Pelosi because he thought she was a mass murder? Using language such as was used here doesn't do anything to help a noble cause. It only drives people away and makes them less likely to listen. People may criticize the bishops but they know better than to use inflamatory language like that.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 4:02 PM By Mark from PA
Yes, a lot of the 1400 souls were probably Christmas and Easter Catholics. Our pastor welcomed them and said that he hoped that they would continue to come on Sundays. Hopefully some will take him up on the offer. Our priests usually talks about the gospel and the other readings during their homilies.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 4:42 PM By John F. Maguire
The Catholic Church opposes CYBERBULLYING. Opposition to this form of bullying derives from the natural law -- "the law written on the heart," in St. Paul's terms.
Such opposition, moreover, is implicit in Pope Benedict XVI's call for CIVILITY on the Internet. ~ As Phil McKenna has noted: "The Internet doesn't just amplify the effect of bullying .... The many options to remain anonymous on-line...means people can write things they would not dare to if their identity was known...." P. McKenna, "The Rise of Cyberbullying," New Scientist Tech, July 19, 2007.
"Cyberbullies [we know] often hide behind screen names and email addresses that don't identify who they are. Not knowing who is responsible for the bullying messages can add to the victim's insecurity" (the Nat'l Crime Prev. Council's report _Cyberbullying_, published on the Net).
Happily, the trend in the law is to move in the direction of greater protection from such bullying. In this connection, I share in the optimism of one of the leading scholars in this field -- Shira Auerbach. "Shielded only temporarily by the anonymity afforded by their computer screens, bullies will eventually have to confront the impact of their words." S.
Auerbach, "Screening Out Cyberbullies: Remedies for Victims on the Internet Playground," _Cardoza Law Review_, Vol. 30:4 (2009), pp. 1641-75 at 1674; also see
Bradley A. Areheart, "Regulating Cyberbullies Through Notice-based Liability," _Yale Law Journal Pocket Part_, Vol. 17 (2007). Not unexpectably, the problem of cyberbullying also sounds in canon law, notably in the context of Canon 220's provision of privacy protections.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 5:27 PM By Edward
I am a Catholic and I believe, if the Church is in favor of excommunicating her, then it should do so. She can think for herself, she has true morals concerning basic human rights, and she and many other Catholics would probably be better off if ties to the immoral and corupt church were cut by the Pope himself. The Church speaks for so few but can't transform away from its bully tradition.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 8:33 PM By JLS
Edward, what is going on between your ears? On the one hand you say you are Catholic, and then you say the Church is evil. Is this your way of saying that you are evil? And if this is so, then why should anyone believe you?
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 8:35 PM By JLS
Maguire, finally you are notifying the world that you are preparing yourself for confession of cyberbullying. Excellent move. Hopefully your penance will include A. reducing your wordiness and B. making a decision based on fact.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 8:37 PM By JLS
Pelosi, speaker of the house of representatives, second in line to the presidency, has used her power to further abortion. Had she been a Nazi on trial at Nuremberg, she would have been found guilty and hanged.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 8:39 PM By JLS
Jamison, now you're saying that the Church and Jesus put every man as being a member of the Church. Have you taken leave of your senses? Neither the Church nor Jesus ever said that. It is something that comes from the pit of gay perversion pseudo-churches.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 9:00 PM By The Truth Hurts
Ski Ven, I wonder if John Maguire feels that there is plenty of room in the Catholic Church for the smoke of Satan that has entered the Sanctuary? For many years, liberal dissenters have tried to annihilate any and every semblance of authentic Catholicism. This has taken place in our seminaries, chanceries, schools and parishes. I wonder how many good men were bullied out of the seminary for being loyal to the Magisterium? I wonder how many faithful priests were bullied by liberal dissenting superiors who rejected their vows to uphold the Teachings? I wonder how many faithful men and women were bullied out of teaching in Catholic schools because they just taught the Catechism? Yes, the liberal bullies resent a Catholic website that not only promotes the Teachings of the Catholic Church but also exposes Nancy Pelosi and the wolves in sheep's clothing. Now, all of a sudden, John Maguire is becoming an advocate against, ......Let me guess? Is John an advocate against error being taught in our Churches, or schools?.... No, Ski Ven, John Maguire has suspiciously embraced the topic of "Cyberbullying". One of the most faithful priests that I have had the privilege of knowing once asked, "What do you find hiding under the thinly veiled surface of a liberal when you scratch a layer of skin off? "A *DICTATOR*" Three cheers for California Catholic Daily.....They must be doing something incredibly powerful. Keep up the good work!
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 10:27 PM By MarkF
How should we deal with politicians like Pelosi? I would not be in favor of excommunication at all. I am also increasing against the denial of communion too. The problem with this approach is when does it stop? What behaviors will cause one to be denied communion? Support for abortion and same-sex marriage? For sure. Support for the death penalty? Attending a same-sex wedding? Giving someone a present for a same-sex wedding? (Isn't that the material support for sin?) Communion is about grace, and grace is what heals us. The denial of communion sounds like a good solution but gets tricky very fast. Where I'd be much more firm is with getting rid of people who are intent on spreading dissent within the Church. There are no moral problems in removing people from their jobs in seminaries, parishes, and the USCCB. There are no moral problems in expecting fidelity of those who are in religious orders and teach in our schools.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 6:07 AM By Canisius
PA your right I do hate Nancy Pelosi, good honest hatred for a evil woman. I do not care who is driven away, I am tired of liberals screaming for "dialogue" and "listening". Liberals would try to dialogue with Jack the Ripper if it made them "feel" better about themselves. You people are so morally bankrupt and would not recognize or fight evil it had its hand around your throat.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 7:40 AM By M A D
There is no doubt that Nancy Pelosi needs a serious
discussion with the Archbishop of S.F. about abortion but
instead of wringing our hands, beating our breasts and discussing this on and on, let us put our energies into praying that she will realise the error of her ways and publically proclaim that she was wrong! The Rosary said for the conversion of heart for Nancy Pelosi will work miracles.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 7:42 AM By Ski Ven
Jamison, you clearly used the word everyone in your post, and now you're acting like you did not say it and blame me for thinking that you meant everyone. Perhaps you are being a wee bit dishonest.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 8:09 AM By Ski Ven
PA, "disagree with her politics", now that is an understatement. She only uses the legislative process to kill babies. That is not that big a deal, right? You are more worried about Canisius' pointing out what she is doing than you are worried about what she is doing. You are more worried that someone might be inspired to kill her because of Canisius' accurate language than you are worried that Nancy Pelosi's language might inspire some women to kill their own babies. You have a serious lack of priorities there. "inflamatory (sic) language", huh. Saying what supporting abortion really entails is inflammatory, right? Have you ever considered that supporting abortion in and of itself is inflammatory. Do you really take murder seriously? Have you ever in your life read any materials that are designed to prepare you for confession? They have plenty of things to say about the fifth commandment.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 9:26 AM By Ski Ven
It looks like I am not allowed to respond to either Maguire or SA. I guess Calcatholic wants to prevent another war from erupting. I wonder if that means that the elitist intellectuals can take pot shots at me with impunity.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 9:39 AM By Grisha
Regarding PA's comment about the "slippery slope" I think this may be why even the most conservative American bishops havn't formally excommunicated any public figures for their support of abortion.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 9:40 AM By Grisha
CORRECTION: Regarding MARK F's comment about the "slippery slope" I think this may be why even the most conservative American bishops havn't formally excommunicated any public figures for their support of abortion.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 9:52 AM By John F. Maguire
In reply to TTH: (1) I am a liberal in the Thomist sense that I agree that the organon of the virtues is incomplete if it fails to include the virtue of liberality, i.e., the virtue of generosity, especially as it pertains to the distribution of one's resources. (2) Denver's Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, I submit, engages the primary issue before us directly and well: "Do I think there are people in the last election who voted for pro-choice candidates and did so sincerely after reflection and prayer? Yes, I do. Did they do wrong? No, they followed their conscience. But that serious reflection and prayer, that's really important, and not just being swayed by party sympathies or that's the way you always vote. It has to be about issues." (3) In prior posts, I've added another consideration, which I think is compatible with the position of Archbishop Chaput, namely that those Catholics who did, in point of fact, vote for Senator Obama (that's 53% percent of the Catholic vote) do -- really do --have, in consequence, a SPECIAL superintending obligation to oppose President Obama's abortocratic policies. Withal, however, there remains of course the GENERAL obligation of all Catholics, however they voted, to oppose the abortocratic policies of President Obama. (4) There is (I hope) nothing suspicious about my interest in the topic of cyberbullying. Surely there is nothing suspicious about the Church's own opposition to cyberbullying, not to mention other misuses of the Internet. At the same time, if Archbishop Chaput's intervention is NOT taken into account by bloggers and blogmeisters; if, in consequence, pro-life Democrats or pro-life Independents or pro-life Republicans (whether on the mere supposition that these persons voted for Senator Obama or, in the alternative, on actual knowledge that they voted for Senator Obama) find themselves hounded on the Internet due to this vote-attribution, then of course the question of cyberbullying becomes an issue.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 10:13 AM By JLS
MAD, Pelosi is not going to convert. She needs dungeon time.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 11:05 AM By Jamison
Ski Ven, you said, "you clearly used the word everyone in your post". Yes indeed, the word "everyone" in my post is the very word copied/quoted directly from the Church documents from the Vatican's website. You go on to say, "now you're acting like you did not say it and blame me for thinking that you meant everyone." That is your interpretation, and as it is your interpretation, the "blame" you speak of is yours. Thus, it is not someone else blaming you, but you blaming yourself. As to the notion that I "meant" 'everyone', again, I *quoted* the word "everyone" directly from the Church documents from the Vatican website. Whatever meaning you chose to give to the word "everyone" in those quotes was your choice. If you chose that "everyone" means every man AND every angel or whatever rather than every man, or you chose not to ask what it might mean, that's your choice. Perhaps you did not realize you had a choice. The Church teaches, "Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another's statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it." (CCC#2478)
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 1:58 PM By Ski Ven
That's your interpretation Jamision. There you go blaming me again. You say: "Whatever meaning you chose to give to the word 'everyone' in those quotes was your choice." It is your choice to use the word everyone in a context that emphases the fullness of its meaning and then blame the reader for reading it that way. A reasonable person would have responded differently than you have. What is wrong with just saying "I understand that the way I used the word everyone has the potential to be problematic and misleading, so in the interests of clarity I will clarify what I said..." That's is not how you responded. You want to nit pick and argue back and forth and waste other people's time. Frankly, you are not worth it. BTW, your tacit admission that Satan does not belong in the Catholic Church undermines your own position. I'll leave you to others. See ya.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 3:18 PM By Mark from PA
Grisha, I am also in agree with you in regard to Mark F's "slippery slope" comment about excommunication. Thanks also for your instruction, Jamison.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 5:30 PM By Abeca Christian
MarkF you are 100% right and the others speaking against you are 100% wrong!
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 6:12 PM By MarkF
Canisius, why do you feel that hating Nancy Pelosi will accomplish anything? Do you want the satisfaction of hating her, or for our Church to be restored and the world to be evangelized? Believe me I know that this is a VERY infuriating woman. I believe that she shares many traits of Stalinist thinking, and this is coming from someone with some academic credentials on the study of the Soviet Union. I understand your anger at those who have infiltrated our beloved Church. But will hatred heal anything? Can I ask you to separate out your hatred from the righteous desire for change in our Church? Try to find something constructive to do instead. I am not one who limits our options to prayer alone. Press our bishops to step up the counseling of politicians. Press them to speak out more about the immorality of Catholic politicians who support abortion. Hate less, do more.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 6:25 PM By Jamison
Ski Ven, whatever meaning you gave to the pope's word "everyone", whatever light you made of the pope's statement, was your doing. I did not choose the meaning of the word "everyone" for you nor did I even "choose to use the word everyone" over any other word. I chose to use whatever words I found in the Catechism and on the Vatican website on the subject of who to pray for, who the Church has mercy for, etc. Had it said "the Church implores from God mercy for GYOLKRETS" or "In the Church GYOLKRETS has a place, GYOLKRETS!" I would have shared that as well. The pope said it. The Vatican publishes it. Why should I censor it or you mock it? Whether you might have used a different word, he apparently didn't and that doesn't make his word "wrong". When I saw that your response, I promptly looked to see what else he or another pope might have said to explain the meaning, and I again shared what I found. If you choose to condemn another's statement rather than give it a favorable interpretation or ask how else it might be better understood, that's your choice. That's my "position", and nothing uncharitable you might choose to make of it will undermine it.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 6:30 PM By MarkF
Grisha, there's a lot of confusion out there over the difference between the denial of communion and excommunication. Any priest may deny to communion to whoever they think is not in a state of grace, although their actions are always under the supervision of their pastor and bishop. Excommunication is something that we, for the most part, do to ourselves. In the vast majority of cases, a bishop merely recognizes that a person has in fact already excommunicated themselves. Here's where it gets interesting. If Pelosi knows that to provide material support for abortion results in a penalty of excommunication then she already may have excommunicated herself. The question then is, has this been explained to her? Or has the counseling only been along the lines that to materially support abortion is gravely wrong? She has to know about the penalty for it to take effect. I'd suggest that her bishop has been talking about excommunication to her. Why do I say that? In her interview with Eleanor Clift she seems scared.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 10:40 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
The Truth Hurts 9:00 PM, the answer to your questions is simple "they are legion"!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 11:04 PM By The other Mike
Realistically, we can't throw Jezabell Pelosi over the wall (sounds like fun, but no), we aren't going to excommunicate her, and we can't vote her out of office (San Franciso Congressional district? Are you kidding me?) So what are we to do? How about participating in the Walk for Life on January 23, 2010? It's much more productive than whining and moaning about Pelosi and the Bishops on the interwebz.
|
Posted Saturday, January 09, 2010 12:05 AM By 1abqdad
Grisha - you and Mark could NOT be more wrong! There are two simple reasons that the USCCB CHANGED their directive to excommunicate: MONEY and fear of the IRS's attacks! (There is a third: cowardice! But, that's another story!) The simple truth is that there is actually NO allowance for the bishops to NOT excommunicate! Any time that a person (Esp. if they are public servants) uses their association with the church for ANY financial, political, or other gain, the bishop is REQUIRED to initiate excommunication IF they refuse to change their behavior after formal notification by the bishop! (Which is exactly what has happened!) So, the bishops are actually failing in their formal obligations! Of course, Mark, in his eternal humanistic beliefs, KNOWS that he is smarter than God and the Church and would object to any actual "rules" that must be followed! He believes that variation of ANY position or rule can be justified! Pelosi is causing untold damage to the church's credibility with her constant heresy! Where is the "slippery slope" in telling the world that the church is opposed to abortion? I propose that there is a far greater "slippery slope" that IS occurring with the refusal of some bishops to follow the law of the church! Yes, Mark and Grisha, God is "smarter" than you and your liberal friends. He has given us deliberate rules to avoid exactly what is happening...further justification of violations of church doctrine and the deterioration of his will! THAT is the ONLY slippery slope that GOD is concerned about! Jesus did NOT hesitate to destroy the temple when it was being defaced, and he certainly would NOT hesitate to excommunicate Pelosi! But, the USCCB has grown weak, and unwilling to take any risks for Christ... as you are!
|
Posted Sunday, January 10, 2010 4:21 AM By 1abqdad
Mark - Of course you are in agreement with the "slippery slope" because your version of faith is to NOT hold anyone accountable for anything! Just allow things to go into the toilet and allow them all to face eternal damnation because you are too weak to admit to the truth...that some actions are WRONG! It IS so much easier to simply act as if everyone and everything was just dandy! But, as any RESPONSIBLE parent finds out, you MUST DEAL with bad behavior! You can NOT be your child's "friend"! That is NOT your obligation! Well, the bishops are responsible to "lead" their flock and that has SPECIFIC obligations, which are NOT presently being followed because the bishops are playing the proverbial "friend" when they are required to be "parents"!!! Pelosi has been given FAR more latitude than ANY other heretic in Catholic history! BOTH the POPE AND her Archbishop have formally notified her of her heresy! What else do you propose? ALSO, to "claim" that the OT is NOT valid because she was NOT "Catholic" is ridiculous! COME ON! What other absurd concept are you going to claim to avoid admitting that there IS "right and wrong" in Catholic teaching? Just because of your extreme guilt is NO reason to excuse others! The Catholic faith is the COMPLETION of the Jewish faith, NOT a totally different one! Jesus came to COMPLETE God's covenant to the Jews! The first so'-called "Christians" did NOT call themselves "Catholic". Does this mean that NONE of their teachings apply to us? That's as absurd as your claim that Jezebel's actions do NOT apply here! You are reaching far too far to vindicate a heretic! If you are incapable of being responsible and dealing with the realities of adulthood, that's your choice. But, a"grown up" Catholic has certain duties and obligations! It is NOT easy! MOST people would rather just sit back and have fun all of the time, but and adult is called to make HARD choices and decisions! You are incapable of this.
|
Posted Monday, January 11, 2010 9:27 AM By Sister Act
In reply to Ski Ven: Those religious traditions that derive from the Abraham's act of faith in the desert (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) favor higher learning -- they do not dismiss it as "intellectual elitism." For a critique of the hostile, dismissive prejudice against higher learning, see Richard Hofstadter's 1964 Pulitzer Prize winning book _Anti-intectualism in American Life_ (New York: Alfred A. Knopf/Random House: Vintage Books, 1966 [1963, 1964].
|
Posted Monday, January 11, 2010 5:50 PM By Mark from PA
Good grief, 1abqdad, I just agree with someone and you go off on this big rant against me. Why the screaming here? In regard to Jezebel, I don't think that Nancy Pelosi really compares to Jezebel and I think that throwing Nancy Pelosi out of a window and having her eaten by dogs would not go over well with most in our society.
|
Posted Monday, January 11, 2010 9:56 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Actually, MarkF, Nancy has already "Latae Sententiae" Canons 1398 & 1329 excommunicated herself. The only real and legitimate purpose for her Bishop to publicly recognize this is for the sake of the faithful who are scandalized by her actions.
God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher
|
Posted Wednesday, January 13, 2010 4:16 AM By 1abqdad
(Charley Brown) Mark - Who's screaming? I only wanted to point out that your reference to Jezebel's faith status was inaccurate. That was the ONLY point. I made NO comments about the actions that were taken against her, for those most certainly change with the times. (We used to hang horse thieves!) So, if you want to respond, please respond to my historical analysis of the origins of our faith and how the teachings of the OT most certainly DO apply to us as Catholics since our faith is simply the completion of the Jewish faith. But, you totally neglected that aspect to "rant and rave" about something totally unrelated. (Could that be because your assertion was wrong?) If you want to use my name, please stick to MY point!
|
Posted Wednesday, January 13, 2010 10:01 AM By JLS
SA, he wasn't talking about higher learning, but about intellectual elitism.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 13, 2010 10:02 AM By JLS
PA, it would be abhorrent, but no doubt her constituents would chow down.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 13, 2010 3:38 PM By Mark from PA
Well, of course Jezebel was not Catholic. She worshipped the Phoenician god Baal and influenced her husband King Ahab to allow temples to Baal. I don't know what exactly you refer to when you say my reference was inaccurate. Some of the teachings of the Old Testament apply to us as Catholics and others do not. How many Catholics follow (or even know) all the commandments of Leviticus? One of the reasons that the Scribes and Pharisees hated Jesus was that he did not strictly follow man-made laws. Jesus said that the two most important commandments were to love God and to love one's neighbor as oneself.
|
Posted Thursday, January 14, 2010 1:50 PM By Ski Ven
SA seems to be talking about a fictitious statement. And why she responds with an academic reference to someone who doesn't get academic language is beyond me. I guess that after you have been in an ivory tower for a long time, you loose touch with the real world.
|
Posted Thursday, January 14, 2010 8:17 PM By 1abqdad
Mark - Once again, you could not be more wrong. ALL of the OT somehow applies unless it was specifically modified as Christ did with certain Jewish Laws, which God had given ONLY to the Jews for hardening their hearts, such as the dietary laws. My "point" was your claim that the OT did NOT apply, as she was NOT Catholic. My point was that the lessons are NOT exclusive or limited unless specifically so. The challenge in interpreting such a diverse and timely set of writings is to study it as a novel with associated variations in tone and textual intent. It is rather easy to attempt to follow a "liberal" view or "Conservative" view as opposed to seeking truth...Wherever it takes you. I choose TRUTH. (As a former child migrant worker, a professional musician, and finally seasoned researcher and world class research engineer and religious history student, it's easier than you might think.) I choose absolute truth to the extend that it is possible. When that is not an option, I seek Christ's values and behaviors to determine right from wrong. The records remain to understand His thought. He gave us sufficient information to know right from wrong in more than simply a basic manner. When attacked by Satan, God never gave into negative responses, which is why we MUST avoid anger and bitterness at ALL costs! ALL that you seem to see is though eyes of anger, bitterness, and guilt. That is NOT healthy. Intent is as important as action. When the intention is protection of the Church, AND it is totally proper. It is right. Yes, we can debate the actual level of action, but NOT whether a grave sin has been committed. Pelosi has committed the MOST grievous sin possible because she is leading souls AWAY from God! At the SAME time, she is destroying the credibility of the Church, which iscausing some leadership to fail. Her actions DEMAND excommunication.
|
Posted Monday, January 18, 2010 12:55 PM By Abeca Christian
For those that want to pray for Pelosi, that is fine too but I just want you to think and know this, Pelosi very well knows the teachings of mother church but still chooses to go against it. It is out of her own free will not because of ignorance. She is a very worldly and intelligent women. Ignorance plays no role when it comes to her disobedience. I'm sure she's been told over and over but still she chooses to do what she chooses to do, on her own understanding.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 19, 2010 6:29 PM By Sister Act
For whatever reason, Ski Ven, you seem to have chosen not to acknowledge the lessons to be learned from Richard Hostadter's book _Anti-Intellectualism in American Life_. This book is a scholarly documentation of the history of an ornery and mean-spirited syndrome in our naation's history, but Ski Ven, if you do not respect scholarship in the first place, if you do not respect the Pulitzer prize winning work of the distinguished historian Richard Hostadter in the first place, then I would recommend that you take to heart Kate Horsley's blunt observation that Americans have taken to anti-intellectualism "like a hog to mud." *** There will always be a few students who think that reading a book or knowing history is a waste of time, but as Kate Horsley observes: "Worse than students not wanting to think is fellow teachers and educational administrators who are hostile, and arrogantly so, against intellectualism. The very word sounds like something elite and nasty. I have been in meetings -- which are a condensed version of the dumb ass parade -- in which the term 'ivory tower' is used smugly. It's a sad little cliche to indicate the privilege and idiocy of college professors who study useless stuff and impose findings on the rest of the world that is just trying to figure out how to record their favorite reality show.... I tell my students this: Ignorance is not good. Knowing stuff is good. Read. Think." Kate Horsley blog, March 19, 2008.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 19, 2010 10:42 PM By JLS
PA, your knowledge and especially your understanding of Judeo-Christian history is extremely faulty. You have told us how your religion teacher was a homosexual pedophilie pervert abuse specialist ... and yet you cling to the fantasy that what he taught you was true religion. Don't you get it that Catholicism is not a fraction of a person? A bad fruit does not produce good trees. I think you've got a thirst for truth, but you refuse to admit to yourself that your doctrinal foundation is shifting sand. Once you find the real foundation of Catholicism, you will fall over with joy; learning from that point is amazing, PA. Seek the true foundation; seek a holy teacher and sit at his feet and learn.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 19, 2010 10:59 PM By JLS
S.A., I'm stunned (a condition far beyond aghast) at your continuing confusion over intellectual prowess and quality. One of the greatest intellectual Catholics of all time, who proved it in deed while others have proved themselves only in literary awards, is St Paul. He was a brilliant Jew who learned how to share in the rule of Israel by studying at the foot of one of the most highly respected Jewish intellectuals of antiquity, the pharisee Gamaliel. Yet you see how St Paul's letters are written. Instead of being given awards, he was shipwrecked, beaten, scourged, imprisoned and eventually executed for what he said. Yet he converted Europe to Catholicism. That, Sister Act, is intellectual quality, and is radically different from what you put forward as such. Another thing that irks me, S. A., is the implication that you and you alone are the only reader who has ever attended college and read books of status in intellectual circles. Many have read them; just check their circulation figures, their tattered covers and pages. And many have rejected their exalted positions in academia. I can give you a clear example from the world of academic economics: In the sixties the Univ of CA and undoubtedly of many other universities pushed the author Samuelson and his basic economics text which promoted the policies of the government, and promised that never again would the world see a "great depression". As we all know now that academic intellectual bunk is junk science, junk politics, junk banking, and junk government, not to mention junk university. You socialists simply cannot disguise yourselves well enough to fool all the people all the time.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 19, 2010 11:55 PM By Abeca Christian
In case anyone didn't know but a witch commits an unforgivable sin, a witch commits blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. I heard that blasphemy against the holy Ghost was considered unforgivable. That is if that witch committed it willingly and knowingly. From what I understood from that teaching. I think that calling Pelosi a witch is also out of line but I can understand why one would feel so strongly against someone who has brought so much scandal to Christ and His church, would have that sentiment against her, perhaps we can rightly call her some that actually would fit her but a witch, I don't think so.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 12:02 AM By Abeca Christian
Also Rebecca you are right, God does give man free will. It is a pity that sin blinds many to choose the wrong path. May God's sweet graces help us all. Also on my last post
(I hope it went through) regarding calling Pelosi a witch, don't feel bad, I have caught myself calling her that too but deep down I know that in reality she is not a witch but a lost soul. I guess anger makes us do or call people things that we ought not call out sometimes, we must continue to practice true humility even though at times it may be hard. So I am not judging the comment but I just wanted to convey reflection on the words we choose at times. I for one, am guilty of choosing the wrong descriptions at times. God bless you.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 8:01 AM By Canisius
To Sister, most the stuff that comes from so called intellectuals is propoganda, not fact or knowledge. It is superimposed liberal world view, I violently, repeat violently reject it and its messengers
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 1:15 PM By Ski Ven
I find SA's choice of quotation to be very revealing. The display of arrogance and misanthropy towards the common man is so typical of the intellectual elitist crowd. Obviously, I don't respect Kate Horsley's observation. I respect the people who do the manual labor that makes this country work in spite of government getting in the way. I do not respect the elitists in both parties, the elitists in Washington D.C., and the elitists that are running various state and local governments who think that they are smarter than we are. They have been running the government, academia, the courts, and the media for a long time and all they have to show for it is a country being run into the ground. If you guys are so much smarter than the rest of us, then how come y'all screwed everything up royally? I thought y'all are supposed to be better than the rest of us. You can cling to your books, Sister. I'm clinging to my guns, my religion, and my tools.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 1:48 PM By Abeca Christian
Canisius I agree with your post and I admire your convictions. I reject all evil propaganda as well.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 6:44 PM By MarkF
JLS, I'm curious as to what you expect to get by continuing to engage with the serial distorters on this site? You're talking to a brick wall. You're dealing with a psychological situation, not a theological one. You say, "your knowledge and especially your understanding of Judeo-Christian history is extremely faulty." No. That's not the problem. What you cite there is the outcome of a conclusion that's already been made. I've talked with many so-called "gay Catholics." Their sole interest is to defend and promote their own homosexuality. As I've said many times, it becomes their religion, their pagan god. The Church is seen only through the lens of how it affects their homosexuality. I'll post this quote again. It's about all the "gay Catholics apologists." "Most Holy Redeemer is not a Catholic church with gay members. It is a gay spiritual institution that is willing to use Catholicism, including the sacraments, just as far as they can be made 'inclusive' of the formative experience of the parish, which is homosexuality, and no farther." So history here is not about facts. It is about arranging the facts of the Bible to serve the preordained conclusion, which is to defend and promote homosexual behavior. Jesus himself tells us to dust off our sandals at this point. It is LONG past the sandal dusting moment. You've been sucked into mass of confusion that only wishes to feed on your anger. Don't feed it anymore. Starve it.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 7:08 PM By JLS
MarkF, false arguments need to be corrected in a public forum. That is what I seek to do. As for the sandal dusting thing, I'm not knocking on their doors but on their heads. The bite at the heels of the Church, and the Church stomps their heads.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 7:13 PM By JLS
Whoa, I just re-read Sister Act's post and found that she hates hogs. Now also I find that Ski Ven loves guns. What a deal! Drop that hog and put it on the barbee.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 7:17 PM By JLS
Abecca Christian, Pelosi may be both lost soul and witch. Have you ever read or listened to the late Malachi Martin, a Jesuit of the old school and a confidant of popes. He can explain a great deal about such stuff. I heard him on a talk show talking with a witch who called in. Catholics who exercise their faith exert a great deal of the power of God's authority. Remember we share the mind of Christ, not something written down but through the mystery of faith. We take a step or two now and then on the water, and then we sink and come up gasping for air, and have to swim back to the boat. The witches have no grasp of this at all.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 7:22 PM By Mark from PA
JLS, I don't actually know the orientation of my religion teacher. I don't actually know if he was an actual pedophile either but do know that he did abuse several teens. However, I was very innocent at the time and was not aware of what the man was up to. You say that I cling to the fantasy that what he taught me was true religion. Sadly, for 2 of the 3 years that he taught me, it seems that he didn't teach much at all. I actually remember discussing Simon and Garfunkel songs in religion class. However, I feel that I had a strong background in grade school. From 1st through 7th grades, I was taught by sisters. We studied the Baltimore Catechism and Bible history. In 8th Grade we were taught by a priest and a sister. They are both still active and I consider both to be holy persons. My 11th grade Religion teacher is a magnificent priest and was a good role model for me. I was taught by excellent sisters in high school and many fine lay teachers also. I can't complain much, I had one lousy teacher but I had many wonderful ones. The priest was haughty and sarcastic towards me but did not harm me. I feel that I am strong in my faith and have always been active in my faith because of the many good sisters and a couple of the priests that taught me.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 7:41 PM By Mark from PA
JLS, you say that my knowledge and understanding of Judeo-Christian history is extremely faulty. I have a degree in History and have taken several Bible study classes at my parish. So I would say that I have a better knowledge of this history than most Catholics. Also, I continue to study and learn.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 9:54 PM By JLS
That's not much, PA. You blow a lot of Scripture out the window, not to mention Church doctrine. I've taken college courses where the content was not up to par ... at major universities. I remember once getting an A for a big unit class without turning in any work ... University of California. I've had professors who were not too good at the task. You should be aware of all the criticism of many Catholic universities and colleges. Have you ever tried to match the course material you experienced with similar stuff from other universities? Most important of all, PA, is that these topics require not the replication of one's college or TV experience but of the truth. For this one either has to provide it through experience or through Magisterial documents. The second of these is foreign to your blogs, and the first is narrow and based on your feelings. My dogs have feelings not much different from those of human beings; truth is not based on feelings, PA. Feelings are simply an aspect of our natures.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 20, 2010 10:07 PM By JLS
PA, I can believe you when you say you were "innocent" in your teen years, and I won't press you for any depth to that. The summer after high school I was with friends at the school gym pumping iron. One of the teachers came in and did some benchpresses. I had taken a course from him. After the workout I was standing outside bsing with friends when this teacher came by and started a conversation. He caught my interest and next I knew we were standing across the street and talking. He invited me to a trip to his goldmine in the desert, which I was not interested in. Besides I felt strange and that this guy was strange ... as I glanced back to my pals and a bunch of other guys I went through high school with I caught their looks, which said "Get the hell out of Dodge". I walked back to them and they made references such as didn't I know the guy was a homo or something to that effect. It was really shocking and I felt relieved to have not been sucked into his bizarre scheme. Some people have skeletons in their closets; that teacher had them in his mine shaft. Later that summer or the next, my Mom asked me if I knew that teacher, as the newspaper reported his suicide and apparently put up some reference to an illicit life style. I told her of that event, and she was relieved. I still didn't understand that gay stuff; I was still trying to figure out how to get the chicks. A couple years after that one of my sister's boyfriend's buddies tried to put the make on me, and that was bizarre also. By the time I hit college I was beginning to find more and more of these homos. I ran into the political side of the perverts then, and got a real good look at what happens when they gain a little authority, such as handing out grades. By experience, PA, I have no sympathy for the gay agenda and no tolerance for homosexuals who mess with me.
|
Posted Thursday, January 21, 2010 3:55 PM By Mark from PA
JLS, I got all my A's in college the hard way. I never skipped assignments and this includes reading assignments. I went to a state school but I had excellent professors for the most part. I remember when I was a freshman and took a geography class and since I was always answering questions the professor asked me if I had gone to Catholic school. That is sad about your teacher. Too bad that he couldn't have gotten some help. I am sure that nobody "messes" with you.
|
Posted Thursday, January 21, 2010 5:31 PM By Melissa
JLS, hitting on others and "scheming" is something that plenty of people, heterosexual or homosexual, do. It's almost a national sport. Apparently you were part of that scene when you were "still trying to figure out how to get the chicks"? That can be an "illicit lifestyle" itself. Good thing you, John Edwards and others haven't committed suicide over your "illicit lifestyles".
|
Posted Thursday, January 21, 2010 6:54 PM By JLS
Melissa, there was at that time in my life almost no licitness at all. Compared to my lifestyle back in the day, that of John Edwards is virtuous. You bring up an excellent point in associating suicide with illicit sexual activity. If you want to read the profound nature of sin and what it leads into, read ... slowly and carefully ... the story of Cain. It is not simply that he murdered his brother and got kicked out on his ear by God ... Read it and discover, if you haven't already, the complex situation involving souls going haywire. As for me and suicide, at a point I realized my lifestyle would kill me and I turned to God. To leave a bad lifestyle is easy. You turn your life over to Jesus and you're home free ... well, of course you have a lot of work to do, a lot to sacrifice, and a lot of pain to overcome ... and more, as so many know. Melissa, perhaps my writing style makes it seem that my wayward youth was yesterday ... This may be because I can remember almost everything as if it were yesterday. Why? Because with the Lord a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day.
|
Posted Thursday, January 21, 2010 7:13 PM By JLS
PA, the only grade I never got was an "F". The professors I took courses from ranged from excellent to worthless. Many of them simply spouted the official liberal doctrines and others were radical leftists; I recall no Catholic professors at least who were devout enough for their Catholicism to show through. There were some who put charity into action. The ones I liked most were the ones who helped me learn how to throw a devastating intellectual punch. The one that most comes to mind was an English/American literature prof. He commanded an infantry company for four years in the Pacific theater of WWII, and he started off the course telling us he desparately wanted to see us reason out the issues and not simply regurgitate the information presented, even though that would be where the "A" grades would land. If your motivation is the grade, then you can be manipulated, PA. The other one was a campus doctor. He flew a P-38 Lightening and was shot down, spending the last year of WWII in the notorious castle prison camp made famous in the movie The Great Escape. He became a military doctor and delivered 500 babies in '53. My rhetoric prof dropped behind the lines with the Screamin' Eagles the night before D-Day; his hobby was making wood furniture. He got upset with me for not following his rules for my speech ... but it was the up and coming stuff of the day, and we got on well anyway. Later at UCLA there were some interesting professors and in both UC campus experiences I ran into what Catholicism would call mystical encounters of the ordinary kind. Testimonials are filled with such things ... people popping up out of the blue to provide a directional note, so to speak. I also took two course at Catholic University to see what that was all about. If you want to learn truth, you have to keep from being manipulated. Your Catholic formation should never end until the day you die. Beyond university professors there are religious to seek out.
|
Posted Thursday, January 21, 2010 11:25 PM By Abeca Christian
JLS interesting. I will look into Malachi Martin. Thanks for commenting. I still disagree with calling her a witch, who am I to discern that from someone who has never come out to say they are a witch. As a follower of Christ, I can only judge her for what she is doing now, doing evil work but I don't know her personally enough to truly say that she is a practicing witch. Perhaps the English language has lost it's true sense of definitions, because gay use to mean happy, witch now means something else to some people.
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 10:41 AM By Mark from PA
Oh, Abeca Christian, gay still means happy too.
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 11:10 AM By RR
Mark from PA: No, gay does not mean happy anymore. I'm sure nobody, not even you and you are gay, is going to go out to a store or public place and tell people, "I feel gay today." You know exactly what people are going to think and say. Nobody uses that word anymore as meaning happy. So, yes, gay people did take away the true meaning of the word gay. Tell me, mark. Have you used the word gay, meaning happy, in the last year? I know I haven't nor ever will use that word again when referring to being happy. So sad!
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 11:49 AM By The Truth Hurts
RR, Besides praying for those who reject God's design for men and women. I think we should take back the meaning of our beautiful words such as rainbow and gay. The homosexual agenda has distorted the hopeful meaning of the symbol after Noah's Ark survived the flood. This is how the devil works by cleverly turning a beautiful word into an opposite meaning. It is a way to mock God and society has fallen for it. I propose a huge campaign of reverse-ology by using backward the word "YAG" for gay and "WOBNIAR" for rainbow to remind everyone that people are like sheep. They forget to follow the Divine Shepherd and they wander off and graze on unrefined cud with the herd. The Divine Shepherd would surely love the real meaning of the symbol of the hope in the rainbow to be returned to the Rightful Author's intended meaning. So the next time you get the opportunity to take back the intended meaning of these words, be sure to educate someone and proclaim..."What a gorgeous Wobniar it surely puts me in a Yag mood!!!"...Start the reversal of sheep! ....With God's Grace we can do it!
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 1:00 PM By Anne T.
RR, a case in point: I used to say before the word was hijacked, "They had a gay old time", meaning a happy, joyful, carefree experience. I no longer use it and catch myself when I start to say it, knowing I will have to explain what I mean -- that I mean the original sense of the word -- so I just avoid the word altogether, and so does everyone else I know.
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 2:25 PM By RR
The Truth Hurts: You know, I never thought about what you said about the rainbow. The gays did take the meaning of the rainbow and blasphemed the meaning into something sick and twisted. About three years ago my sisters and I went to a homeschool convention in Iowa and it was being held in like a reception area in a Catholic Church. This reception area was connected to but off to the side of this Catholic Church. We glanced into the Catholic Church and we saw these rainbow banners that went from the ceiling all the way to the floor. There were about five of them. We all looked at each other and our first thoughts were that it was something about gay pride. We said, "No, it's a Catholic Church. They wouldn't have anything like that." Well, come to find out it was a gay pride thing. It was a movement in that area where gays picked a weekend and said that they were going to go to Mass and not be ashamed to be gay. There were Churches in that area that actually welcomed them and that Church was one of them. It is very sad that our first thought of a rainbow was of gays and not our promise of God. Yes, let's take back our rainbow and the word, gay. Let's call a sodomite a sodomite.
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 2:30 PM By RR
Anne T.: Remember at the end of the Flintstones cartoon they used to play the theme song and it ended with the words, "We'll have a gay old time." Were Fred and Barney gay and were Betty and Wilma gay?
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 2:53 PM By Ski Ven
I guess it all depends on what the meaning of the word is is.
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 3:43 PM By JLS
Abecca Christian, I am aware that we do not have the power or authority to judge hearts and souls and minds and bodies ... but if some Saints can read them, then it is possible for others to do so. Besides eternal judgment is not the same as temporal judgment. Some people can read motives, and the mind can see what might be driving them. Pelosi may not be a witch, because witches are particular practicioners of evil things. But Pelosi is an evil woman. If the bishops want to stop legal abortion, they can do it through their unity in the Eucharist. Of course there is no such unity for those who take the Eucharist in a state of mortal sin. I do not believe that the bishops cannot see who is who in this regard. What is keeping them from wielding the authority of God? Can it be that all of the bishops have failed mortally? When Henry VIII took over the Church in England he succeeded in persuading all bishops except one, St John Fisher, to reject God. How do we know if our bishops are following the will of God? Well, they have not stopped legalized abortion, the number one sin of our era ... so what is it that God is telling us about the bishops? Now, I'm not claiming that they are not authentic bishops, but those in England who turned from God were authentic perhaps up until that moment. A priest is a priest forever, but a bishop is not a bishop forever.
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 5:04 PM By Mark from PA
Anne T and RR, thanks for making me smile here. The Flintstones was my favorite show when I was a kid. And I still remember that line, "We'll have a gay old time." Regarding Fred and Barney, they were always sneaking off together behind their wives backs. Poor Barney, Fred was always picking on him. In regards to the rainbow, I think it is a beautiful symbol. A lot of civil rights organizations use this as a symbol also to refer to the beauty of people of all different colors. It makes me sad to think of people feeling angry when they see rainbow flags, etc.
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 6:49 PM By Anne T.
RR, those were more innocent times. Today if one said the same thing, it would conjure up a picture of homosexuals having an orgy in a San Francisco bathhouse.
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 6:57 PM By Anne T.
At least for most Californians who know what went on there, it would.
|
Posted Friday, January 22, 2010 9:57 PM By JLS
According to billclintune, the meaning of is is is. Sounds like a serpent hsssing.
|
Posted Saturday, January 23, 2010 8:20 AM By Mark from PA
Oh please, Anne T, I hope that you aren't picturing that.
|
Posted Saturday, January 23, 2010 12:35 PM By Sister Act
Ski Ven: Whether the books you have in mind are the Sacred Books or not, your disdain for books in general cannot be squared with tradition. You write: "Sister,
you can cling to your books. I'm clinging to my guns, my religion, and my tools." *** To begin with, to read and then interpret what one has read (taken as a single practice) has always been a part of the Jewish tradition. In ancient Israel, also today, the custom of the people of Moses has always been to read the Sacred Books in the synagogue on the Sabbath. It is in this context that Jesus of Nazareth
"rose up to read" from the Book of Isaiah in the synagogue of Nazareth upon his return from Galilee. St. Luke writes: Once Jesus had finished reading from this Sacred Book, "he returned it to the rabbi, and sat down. And the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed upon him" in anticipation of Jesus' interpretation of the text he had just read (Luke: 4:16-20). This Jewish paradigm, according to which, first, we read a text, and second, we interpret that text, can never be eliminated from religious life so long as ancient custom remains alive and so long as Jesus of Nazareth remains our Model. Nor should this traditional paradigm of be disdained in favor of "clinging to guns, religion, and tools" -- as if the bibliophobia of the proverbial backwoodsman could ever be squared with the love of books that Judaism and Christianity have always cultivated.
|
Posted Saturday, January 23, 2010 3:43 PM By The Truth Hurts
Sister Lazarus Rose, Your in-action to defend the Authentic Teachings of the Catholic Church speaks so loudly that no one can hear what you are reading. Stop telling everyone what you know and show them what you truly believe with actions. Otherwise, you frankly appear to have not been raised up like Lazarus and caught in the mud of dissent.
|
Posted Saturday, January 23, 2010 3:44 PM By JLS
PA, it is not what goes into a man that defiles him, but what comes out.
|
Posted Saturday, January 23, 2010 3:48 PM By JLS
What Ski Ven is informing you of, Sister Act, is that the result of reading Scripture etc is what counts, not merely the reading of them. Ski Ven's "guns, religion and tools" denote what God has tasked man to do: Defend himself, his family, his neighbors; worship God and love his neighbor as himself; work to provide a good living for himself, his family and the community so that the poor may also benefit. What else is there, Sister Act? He says it all.
|
Posted Saturday, January 23, 2010 4:04 PM By JLS
Whoa ... Sister Act, "proverbial backwoodsman"?!@#*! What planet did you say you were from? Oh yeah, you reside in an ivory tower overlooking the peasants; I almost forgot. Well, the Bible tells us of God, man and nature: OK, so doesn't that exist without books? And if one reads all the books, then how much time wasted in redundancy do you expect there would be? Jesus is Verbum Dei, the Word of God: what better book to read than Verbum Dei? My dog sits and looks intently at me studying me reading me awaiting a movement, a command; he will do this until he sees what makes sense to him and then he will act according to his nature; we are meant to wait upon the Lord. A donkey with a false prophet once stopped and talked to the man and thus warned him of an angel about to strike him ... but don't we see this sort of thing for ourselves without having to read about it in a book? St Paul reminds us that when we see the stars at night we see the evidence of God. If we are blessed enough to go to Mass where faithful sermons are preached and we faithfully merge ourselves with the prayers said on our behalf by the priest, then what more do we need in the way of book reading? If we work with our tools to keep the parish from falling down, then why would we want to read books about someone else doing it? And if we rest in the Lord, then why would we need to set our books down for a break? The book of reality, Sister Act, is not the same as the book of paper and ink, but is greater. The Jews that you mention were greater than their books. Lastly are you subtly attempting to persuade readers that guns, religion and tools are specific to the backwoods only? Maybe, Sister Act, you should get out more often ... contract a tour guide and ride a camel for a while; they're having a sale on them in Australia right now. Get one with a seat belt in case it's spirited.
|
Posted Saturday, January 23, 2010 8:45 PM By Mark from PA
What is it with some people and their guns? I never understood this love of guns. Most of the men in my wife's family had guns and loved hunting but they only showed up at church every once in a blue moon. A lot of them thought religion was for women and guns were for men. They thought that it was somewhat odd that I never missed Mass on Sunday. (Most of them were not Catholic.)
|
Posted Sunday, January 24, 2010 1:51 PM By Sister Act
To hate books, Ski Ven, is to hate those who write them.
|
Posted Sunday, January 24, 2010 2:33 PM By Abeca Christian
RR you are right, they hijacked the true meaning of some words and we can not say "oh I feel gay today". Come on if I said that with meaning happy, in actuality people here in California or anywhere for that matter, will think I was gay. Sorry people but once you damage the meaning of a good word, there is no turning back, the English language has become so cheap now a days. We can't take back what was never ours, the secular can twist and turn, humans change but God never changes but people do. Sorry PA I will have to disagree with you that gay still means happy, I will disagree with you 100%. I don't allow my kids to use that word because they know better, they know that people will misunderstand them and hey it will lead to perversion thinking.
|
Posted Sunday, January 24, 2010 2:41 PM By Abeca Christian
JLS yes you are right but witch means someone who practices witchcraft, from what I was told, does that mean people here think that she practices witchcraft knowingly? I don't think so but if you want we can call her a witch and take away its true meaning. I guess it is acceptable to call a women a witch when we dislike them but I don't see that appropriate. I don't care for Pelosi because of her evil work she does for our country, because she has betrayed her faith, she is in bad will but a witch I don't think she makes.
|
Posted Sunday, January 24, 2010 2:49 PM By Abeca Christian
RR I love all your comments, they made me smile because you speak truth but come on lets get real here, once a society loses its innocence (Modern technology doesn't help either, computers, internet, etc etc, the farther we get away from God and church, the worst we become.) we can't get it back, we can try but the trauma is there. So I doubt that anytime soon, we will see the word "gay" as happy, I can see the rainbow coming back as it's original definition, because that is in the bible and there is hope there but the only way would be to outlaw the gay agenda from using the rainbow as a symbol, and that will be impossible because we are a free country, to a point.
|
Posted Sunday, January 24, 2010 5:29 PM By Preston
Abeca, if the true meaning of "gay" has been hijacked, you can take it back, like this: "Be gay always, pray continually, give thanks in all circumstances, for this is God's will for you in Christ Jesus." (1 Thes 5:16) Just as Mark from PA has been saying, it's not a sin to be gay. It's God's will for you! And at the end of the world, "The gaiety of the tambourines is stilled, the noise of the revelers has stopped, the joyful harp is silent." (Isa 24:8)
|
Posted Sunday, January 24, 2010 5:37 PM By Mark from PA
Abeca Christian, it depends on who uses the word gay I suppose. You could probably use the word and people would not think you were gay. I surely could not as people would think I was gay. But please, look up the word gay in the dictionary and see what it means. Many words have multiple meanings. I feel sad that you don't allow your children to use this word as it not a bad word. It describes a beautiful feeling and also beautiful people. You worry about your kids but what about all the innocent gay kids? They are God's children too.
|
Posted Sunday, January 24, 2010 6:24 PM By Anne T.
Sorry, Mark from PA, as I have heard you live in a far more conservative state than I do. Such things as Gay and Lesbian parades were and are probably not allowed there, but after hearing about the obscene sights some people I know experienced just going through San Francisco during the Gay and Lesbian parade and the degrading experiences of the firemen in San Diego who were sexually harrassed and forced to be in such a parade, yes that is exactly what it brings to some Californian's minds. We don't dwell on it in our minds, of course, but my circle of friends, relatives and church people don't use the word "gay" either. If they did, I would ask them, "Now just what do you mean by that word?"
|
Posted Sunday, January 24, 2010 7:32 PM By Jim
Anne T, so-called gay/lesbian parades are legal in every state in the U.S., and states like Pennsylvania have parades in multiple cities.
|
Posted Sunday, January 24, 2010 10:30 PM By Anne T.
Yes, Jim, I just found that out online, but some of them might not be as decadent as some of the ones here.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 5:22 AM By RR
Mark from PA: "I surely could not as people would think I was gay." You are gay and apparently very proud of it.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 5:25 AM By RR
Mark from PA: I better add this post also to my post above to you because people and yourself might think I was talking about you being happy when I was actually referring to your homosexuality. See how the homosexuals have hijacked the word gay.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 10:28 AM By Sister Act
JLS, why do you balk at my posts, the purpose of which is to demonstrate that reading books is an ineliminable aspect of Catholic life. *** Though he knew better about friendship, it is worth recalling here Groucho Marx's comment, "Outside of a dog, a book's a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too hard to read."
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 11:39 AM By Ski Ven
Oh boy, I started out by talking about pompous intellectual elitists and Sister Act ended up accusing me of having a hatred for books in general. I don't know where to begin to address all of the issues that I found with her post. I'll just set aside the socially inept aspects of her post for the sake of brevity and highlight just a few things. Sister Act seems to have not understood the signification placing a possessive pronoun in front of the noun books and consequently ended up conflating disdain for intellectual elitism with hatred for books. There seems to be an element of rash judgment in place here that favors having such a misunderstanding. She goes on to cite the oral public reading of scripture that has been a part of Jewish tradition and uses implied language to suggest that I am disdaining that tradition by clinging to guns, religion and tools. The thing is, I frequently participate in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass where the Holy Scriptures are orally read and then interpreted according to the Magisterium, the authority of which has been given to the Catholic Church by Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Himself. The Mass does not end with this Liturgy of the Word. The Liturgy of the Word is followed by the Liturgy of the Eucharist where the Holy Sacrifice that Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ made once and for all is made present through the power of the Holy Spirit and where I receive the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. It is in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that the activities that take place in the Jewish synagogue and the Jewish temple are joined together in an act of perfect worship to God made possible by the Infinite Merits of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and the shedding of His Most Precious Blood. Therefore, the Holy Sacrifice of Mass is the fulfillment of Old Testament worship and tradition. (continued in follow up post)
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 12:15 PM By Ski Ven
(continued from previous post) Thus my clinging to my religion is a fulfillment of the Jewish tradition that has been mentioned by Sister Act. The use of the phrase "bibliophobia of the proverbial backwoodsman" not only comes across as an attempt to caricature an opponent but also it entails a misuse of the word bibliophobia in a context that indicates an intention to use the word as a bully word. In her next post, Sister Act borrows from Mark from PA's blogging style and conflates hatred for books with hatred for their authors. Common sense dictates that a person can read a book and not like it without hating the author. Sister Act needs to observe a vow of silence. The more she writes, the more she looks like an educated fool.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 3:35 PM By Abeca Christian
Jim yes homosexual parades are legal and so is abortion but that does not mean it is right! So what's your point?
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 4:52 PM By Sister Act
You'd rather I take a vow of silence than reply? Mr. Ski Ven,
there are times of silence in the daily rounds of the religious life, but a full vow of silence (which is very rare in any event) is incongruent in misssionary/teaching orders. *** It should by now have dawned on you that it is precisely because you participate in liturgical readings from the Sacred Books that your anti-book complex is inconsistent and therefore puzzling.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 5:05 PM By JLS
It is a mortal and grave sin to "be gay". Why? The word, "gay" means a political and social movement to exert perversion into the public domain and to legalize it. The word, "gay", means a practicing homosexual or a person who advocates homosexual activity. It is not a sin to be homosexual, as long as this attraction is not acted upon either exteriorly or interiorly. Lust in the heart is still lust, and if it is indulgence by either the mind, the heart, the soul or the body in this homosexual lust then it is a mortal and grave sin. It is also a sin to keep from trying to correct one's homosexual attraction. Why? Because we are instructed to "be perfect even as your Heavenly Father is perfect", which is to say that unless we strive to move towards the image and likeness of God, then we are breaking the Commandment to honor our Father and Mother, the violation of which is a mortal sin.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 5:18 PM By JLS
Not having ever had a nun for a teacher, I find it can be hilarious to dig some of the tales and interactions. I myself have no sense of loyalty to school teacher nuns. But our elderly maiden of an elementary school music teacher with her autoharp was sort of like that. She really was good but we wouldn't give in to her ... One day on a one on one session she about had me singing a good sounding scale, but my buddies opened the classroom door just in the nick of time and instantly without changing a beat my voice sounded like Alfalfa in the Little Rascals. And we were the good guys. The bad guys sliced all four of the tires on her brand new '56 T-Bird. So these nuns who think they've got it tough in their Catholic schools have been saved from a few things already in their experiences.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 5:58 PM By Mark from PA
Well, JLS, you are a practicing heterosexual and that isn't a sin. The Catholic Church does not teach it is a sin, mortal or otherwise to be gay. It is an orientation. Who told you it was a sin to keep from trying to correct one's homosexual attraction? Is this more of the gospel according to Rev. Phelps?
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 6:29 PM By Mark from PA
JLS, a person's orientation is only a part of who they are. I have criticized several gay people here. One is Bishop Daniel Ryan, who I feel is a disgrace to the priesthood and also a disgrace to honest gay people. Another homosexual bishop, who I will not name, I have criticized on another blog. This man is a strong conservative but is also pompous, arrogant and overbearing. He could use a little humility. There are other gay bishops who are faithful and compassionate. But again, having this orientation is not sinful.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 6:39 PM By Anne T.
Mark from PA, if you are married to a woman as you say, why do you keep referring to yourself as "gay"?
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 7:21 PM By Jim
Anne, my point was that you were incorrect in your claim that the parades are illegal. And yes, just because a particular act is legal does not mean it's morally right, but a parade is not a sex act and parading isn't necessarily immoral, not even if it's called a "pride" parade. Not all pride is sinful. For some it may mean "I'm not ashamed of my unchosen condition" and for others something else. I've seen a wide variety of pride parades, from people with bikes, cars, pet animals, little people, Chinese, Irish, sports teams, towns, military, disabled people, bigots, Christians, straights, gays, etc. But at any parade there can be displays of questionable or immoral behavior or pride in immoral behavior. One might even see immoral behavior and pride thereof in church in what one might call the communion parade. Some people might even view this website as a type of pride parade, even a gay pride parade, and you are in attendance.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 8:14 PM By Abeca Christian
Jim how can anyone have pride in parading around passing out condoms, men dressed in nun outfits and woman's clothing, children are there in the midst of these evil scenes, men acting like they are having sex and grabbing themselves in public, etc etc... how is that something to be proud about because that is what happens in gay pride parades here in California, they are offensive to family values and children! I especially get mad when they have well known sex offenders(Pedophiles) also be part of those parades with children present there. While they may not be illegal, the parents should be accused of child abuse for allowing their youngsters be there at such events!!
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 8:20 PM By Mark from PA
Anne T, I said that I couldn't say that I felt gay (as in happy) because people would make assumptions. Anne T - I didn't refer to myself as "gay", RR did in her post of 5:22 AM. I don't usually label myself. I never call myself a homosexual and don't really call myself gay either. I am neither 100% straight nor 100% gay. I am married and whether or not I am gay would depend on what one's definition of this is. Just call me a Catholic, that is easier.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 8:33 PM By Jim
JLS, whether "be gay" means engaging in homosexual sex acts or being happy, it is already legal to "be gay" and there is no movement to make it legal. There is, however, an effort by some to make it more acceptable in society, just like there's an effort to make fornication, adultery and other sins more acceptable than they already are. On your words of "unless we strive to move towards the image and likeness of God", that raises another issue of semantics / perspective. The priest at our parish advocates "be still" to "be perfect", to let Jesus lift the burden and be healed, that the yoke of Jesus is easy and light. He says to the extent people struggle to be perfect, they have not accepted Jesus and that the so-called "striving to be perfect" is not really striving to be perfect but is actually the effort people expend trying every way they can to avoid it. After all, it is effortless to be still and likewise he says it's effortless to be perfect. God does not break a sweat. But people refuse to believe and so they strive/struggle. With that in mind, yes, it is wrong to strive to not be perfect, but to the extent the striving in striving to be perfect is actually resistance to perfection, it can also be wrong to strive to be perfect. He reminds of Philippians, "Have among yourselves the same attitude that is also yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself". In short, to the extent striving / trying to be perfect means grasping at perfection, that is not the right attitude. Rather, that was the attitude of Adam. And for those who are inclined to misinterpret (rather than hear what is truly being said) because they're busy resisting perfection in the name of striving to be perfect, our priest reminds that "be still" and "my yoke is easy and my burden is light" do not mean the proverbial "anything goes".
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 8:50 PM By Jim
Anne, not everyone at a parade behaves in the manner you describe. As I've said, this website is itself a type of pride parade, and you yourself are not only in attendence but also marching in it. Some of the posters and comments parading on this forum are offensive to children and even to adults, and others are not. Probably many are even "proud" of their posts. As to "pedophiles", there are pedophiles probably at every parade, mall, amusement park and living in most every neighborhood. Some people get worked up over it and some don't. Welcome to the parade.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 8:53 PM By Jim
Abeca/Anne, my last post addressed to Anne was actually meant for Abeca, but you're of course welcome to it too, Anne.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 11:38 PM By JLS
Jim, your pitch in allegory boils down to the old fable of an exuse for sin. It's ok since everybody is doing it. Jesus provides the power and authority for you to stop sinning.
|
Posted Monday, January 25, 2010 11:50 PM By JLS
Jim, many immoral things are legal. Many immoral things have been illegal and for good reason. Jim, this priest you claim says this "He says to the extent people struggle to be perfect, they have not accepted Jesus and that the so-called "striving to be perfect" is not really striving to be perfect but is actually the effort people expend trying every way they can to avoid it", is striving against Christ and the Church. This is how the problem of effeminacy and homosexuality in the clergy manifests ... this masquerade of passiveness in receiving the grace of God. I wonder if you are interpreting the priest correctly, probably you are. St Paul however, which does not contradict Jesus Christ, tell us that gaining salvation is like a fight, a struggle, a race to win the crown of salvation. You might point out to your priest this fact. St Paul was not passive, nor did he receive his graces passively, but rather St Paul at the time of his initiation into Heavenly hope was executing Christians and riding a find horse. These are not passive things, yet that great Saint was bestowed graces that would pale the likes of the priest you refer to. Yes, there are stillnesses that are good for us, but like all other things in our spiritual warfare we have to use wisdom to judge which to use and how. Jesus was able to tame raving maniacs by transferring His graces to them ... He did not have to make them still first. St John of the Cross explains much about this being still, but you have to read what he is saying, and then you have also to realize that there is a time and place for it and that it is not something to occupy your every moment. Many can testify that God grants graces even to those who struggle violently to receive them. So for you to generalize onto everyone is error. You are an individual person; ask Jesus for your personal graces.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 12:03 AM By JLS
PA, you fail to understand what I keep telling you, and you fail because you refuse to try. I do not know who Rev Phelps is. You seem fixated on him; maybe you should contact him and see how he might help you in your dilemma. You used to caricature me and ascribe my name to ideas that you made up. Here you are simply ignoring what I said. You are doing what is known as a kneejerk reaction, based on cues rather than thinking thing out based on the actual statements. You would earn an F on such a thing if it were a paper for a course, because you do not engage with the facts, but create a pseudo-persona for the other conversationist. You are deathly afraid of giving up your same sex attraction. Why are you afraid? Don't you know that you will have to give it up eventually? You will eventually have to give up natural things such as your toes, elbows, hair and the rest of your body. You should already be giving it all up, giving yourself totally to Christ; yet you refuse to give Him even the disorders that beset you, regardless of their genesis. Jesus gives you His sinless self; yet you refuse to give Him your sinful self. Do unto others as you would they do unto you: PA, Jesus is merely letting you keep the disorder that you refuse to give Him; do you understand this application of the Golden Rule? In effect you tell Jesus that you would have Him let you keep your disorder, and you tell Him this by your simple refusal. It is called body language if you want to make a pun out of it. By not giving Him something, you are telling Him that you do not want Him to give you something in exchange, namely order for disorder. Why do you prefer disorder?
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 5:25 AM By RR
Mark from PA: You are gay. You have stated on here before that you are bi-sexual. Therefore, a part of you is gay. You have said many, many times you were born gay. You have chosen to live a heterosexual lifestyle, but according to you, you are attracted to men also. I asked you about a year or so ago why you live a heterosexual life when you are gay and you told me because that is how you were taught to live and that was what was how you were raised to believe. I wish I knew where that post was because that post said a lot to me. So, yes, you are gay. How come you tell others here to be proud of their ACTIVE homosexuality and gayness that it is normal, but you don't want to be labeled as gay or live a gay lifestyle? Sounds to me your being a little hypocritical to yourself and your gay friends. Sounds to me that your proud to be gay, but not on here because faithful Catholics can tell you that you are not accepting or believing Church teaching by supporting and condoning ACTIVE homosexuality. An ACTIVE homosexual CANNOT be a faithful Catholic. It is mortally sinful and worthy of hell. That's a fact.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 9:06 AM By Jim
JLS, the priest has heard all of what you wrote. He's been around the block and has worked with people like you. He's pointing out a semantic of the words strive, struggle, resist which is commonly overlooked in our inclination to make things difficult. He's not advocating you sit and twiddle your thumbs. You say, "Jesus was able to tame raving maniacs by transferring His graces to them. He did not have to make them still first", but to "tame raving maniacs" is to "still" them. Perhaps you want to quarrel about that. The priest reminds of Proverbs: "He who loves sin loves strife" (note "stife" is directly related to "strive") or "He who loves a quarrel loves sin." Etymologically, the word "strive" comes from a word meaning to quarrel and pertains to impatience, another form of effeminacy (you seem big on that). Jesus said, “'Quiet! Be still!” and the wind ceased and there was great calm. God's grace is sufficient. Even if you're inclined to make it a struggle.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 9:19 AM By Paul
"It is mortally sinful and worthy of hell. That's a fact." Here's a fact: For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: (1) object is grave matter, and (2) committed with full knowledge and (3) deliberate consent. While a homosexual act that is committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent may meet all three conditions, a homosexual act in itself does not necessarily meet all three. The promptings of feelings and passions can diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense (meeting the first of the three conditions), conditions 2 & 3 are subjective components, and therefore we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 11:11 AM By Mark from PA
RR, yes, I suppose you are right, a part of me is gay. And this is the way that I was born but I live a heterosexual life style. JLS, might not consider me to be gay because he considers it to mean that a person is sexually active with a person of the same sex, which I am not. In truth, there is no such thing as a "gay lifestyle." Different people have different lifestyles. I am sure that there are some active homosexuals who are faithful Catholics. I don't think it is up to you to decide who is or isn't worthy of hell.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 2:16 PM By The Truth Hurts
Jim, When you see Walt this afternoon in the mirror please tell him that he needs to change his writing style. Are you an angry bitter and disgruntled priest? It's very sad but I know some priests who talk just like your posts. The underlying cause is a deep disorder due to homosexuality One certain priest has gotten more agitated since Pope Benedict was elected. When Pope Benedict was elected he even arrogantly stated in a newspaper that Pope Benedict would not have been his first choice. False arrogance, a trademark that you often display, that places oneself above the Holy Spirit. Since this is a Catholic website I'm sure that you would not be quite as imprudent to announce the same thing. You seem to be just a hair more clever, but even that single hair does not hide your true disdain for the teachings of the Catholic Church. You are angry about them and that is why you don't defend them. If you are a priest this is highly offensive to God. You cannot fool God. This priest who sounds just like you pretends to support Pope Benedict with loyalty to unsuspecting and trusting Catholics but behind the scenes he sounds just like you. One unsuspecting Catholic was warned about him and he did not believe it so he was instructed to ask this priest one question the next time they had lunch together. This priest comes across as loving all of the exterior traditional trappings of the Catholic Church. Well the man asked him that question at the next lunch, "What are your feelings about homosexual marriage and the teachings of the Catholic Church ?" The priest responded "Well, I'm in the middle leaning greatly toward the left side." The faithful Catholic was interiorly stunned but now he had the same clear picture that you give on this website. Some of your monikers say they love the Traditional Mass and accept the Teachings but the dissident part of you where the disloyalty rules cannot bring himself to defend Christ's Church to the homosexual activists on this site. cont.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 4:11 PM By JLS
In the eternal dimension of trusting people to the judgment and mercy of God we can go ahead and do so. In the temporal affairs of life, it is we who have to discern, judge and meet out the weapons of spiritual warfare. The Marines have a nice little formula for this: Your soul belongs to God, but your *** belongs to the Corps. So, Paul, you have to make decisions in this life about such things as how to stop abortion. St Benedict gave us his great motto: Ora et Labora, which is to say, you have to work as if it all depends on you, and pray as if it all depends on God. Catholicism is not a pie in the sky religion, Paul.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 4:17 PM By JLS
Jim, what the priest you are talking about is doing is straining at gnats and swallowing camels. Unborn babies being whacked needs to stop ... you and your priest need to get real and stop wasting your time with trivial nonsense. Maybe he has worked with "people such as me" ... what a queer statement from somebody who has virtually no knowledge of me! ... but I have talked with dozens of priests and found a huge portion of them to reflect deep disorders. The evidence is the ongoing child abuse scandals and the continuation of legal abortion, and the rise of homosexual political power: If bishops and priests and parishioners like you had been awake at the switch, then these evils would not be infesting the Church and society today.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 6:19 PM By JLS
PA, you have gone and falsified my definition of "gay", once again. There are no active homosexuals who are faithful Catholics, PA. Active homosexualism excommunicates such people ... it is called obstinate sin, and flirts with the sin against the Holy Ghost, from which there is no return to grace.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 6:34 PM By The Truth Hurts
Mark from PA, Your response to RR is more flip flop quicksand. Did you already forget that you said you would tell Aaron it would be best for him to be chaste? Just a few examples: Active heterosexual adulterers, active heterosexual fornicators and active homosexuals are not being faithful to the Catholic Church if they are active sinners. They all have to go to confession with a firm purpose of ammendment to change their sinful habits. Mark you don't want to make all homosexuals especially the ones who are being chaste and faithful to Christ's Church's teachings on sexual morality, seem as flip floppy unstable as your fleeting with the wind answers reveal? Mark, I know there are homosexuals who think that you are doing a greater diservice to them by your posts. If you truly care about your fellow homosexuals who share a similar trial, you will apologize to RR for that blatant lie. Active sexual acts between two people of the same sex is an abomination against God. "Sodomy" is an unnatural offense against God's Order of Nature. It is a sin the cries to heaven for Divine Justice. Mark if your mission on this site is to lobby for homosexuals, you are really doing much more harm than good. Your message is that all homosexual men are nothing more than mere animals incapable of receiving God's healing grace. By healing I mean the spiritually infused desire to try to never offend God. You are responsible for each lie that you use to keep others mired in confusion and sin. #1"Presumption" and #2 "Resisting a known truth" are two sins against the Holy Spirit. The chief Capital sin is "Pride". You are advocating everything that is not only very damaging to your soul but the souls of others. This is very serious Mark Maybe your time would be better spent taking your wife out or spending time with your children as long as you don't lie to them either. Since this website seems to be an occasion for you to fabricate Church Teaching maybe you should avoid the near occasion.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 6:50 PM By Jim
To the poster who asks if I'm "angry bitter and disgruntled", and for his own personal reasons, seems to think I have "disdain for the teachings of the Catholic Church", the answer is very simple: no. I REJOICE with the Church's teachings. You talk about "homosexual activists on this site", but who are you talking about (and why are you so particularly obsessed with them)? I looked a bit through this discussion and see a post today, "Tuesday, January 26, 2010 11:11 AM By Mark from PA", who seems to say he has some same-sex attraction to some degree but is otherwise living a "heterosexual life style", whatever that means. Ok, so what? Is he your alleged "homosexual activist"? I found an earlier post in this discussion where he wrote, "The Catholic Church does not teach it is a sin, mortal or otherwise to be gay," and in the common meaning of the word "gay" (apart from some peculiar persons on this forum who seem to think themselves dictators to others on what the word means), he appears to be saying what Cardinal Ratzinger said, namely that "the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin". Of course, any inclination to sin is disordered, but the inclination to sin is not unique to any group of persons. All mankind, heterosexual or homosexual, suffers from an inclination to sin. It's called concupiscence. For some people, that inclination may lean towards sexual sins with persons of the same sex, and for other people, towards sexual sins with persons of the opposite sex. Perhaps your own particular inclination to sin is weighted in another direction, such as calumny or something else. Everyone is in need of salvation, even if your personal focus is elsewhere on "homosexual activists".
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 6:56 PM By Mark from PA
RR, you say that I sound like I am proud to be gay. Well, it is not an accomplishment, just part of the way that God made me. The thing that I am proud of is that I can discuss this with you here. Five years ago I couldn't even discuss this with myself. This is very personal to me and not something that I really discuss with people. I don't know if I would be able to discuss this with you in person. I suppose I am afraid of people that hate gay people and this makes me cautious. I understand that some people think that gay people are going to hell and some of these people even approve of violence and discrimination directed towards gay people.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 7:13 PM By Jim
JLS, what's "queer" is that while you think you have enough knowledge of this priest and what he says and does to sit and judge based on what you describe as your experience with a handful of priests, and yet you think that a priest who has worked with tens of thousands of people has not worked with people like you. Now that's queer. Also queer is that you seem to think he's "wasting time with trivial nonsense" all the while you sit on this forum discussing it.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 7:44 PM By RR
Paul: Yes, I know the 3 conditions needed to be present for a sin to be mortal and agree with your post, but I was talking about ACTIVE homosexuals who know darn well what they are doing is wrong and serious and they know what Church teaching is and they thumb their noses at the Church. I'm not talking about people who have mental problems or issues or are not mentally sane or all there.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 7:50 PM By RR
Mark from PA: You CANNOT be an ACTIVE homosexual and be a faithful Catholic. If you don't live by Church teaching then you are NOT a faithful Catholic and Church teaching says ACTIVE homosexuality is a mortal sin. No, it's not my place to say who is worthy of hell or not, it's God's place and God said homosexual acts are an abomination. All I am doing is repeating what God has already said about homosexuals. I'm judging nobody. The homosexuals have already judged themselves.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 8:48 PM By The Truth Hurts
Jim, I noticed that you did not deny being a priest. You don't REJOICE with the Church's Teachings! You REJOICE at playing Dodge Ball. Is it too late for you to petition and request that Dodge Ball become an Olympic sport. You might win the first gold medal if there is no age limit. Please St. Rita of Cascia, Saint of the Impossible, Please convert the heart of this priest and give him courage and make him unashamed to defend all of the Teachings of the Catholic Church. Amen.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 10:47 PM By JLS
You took the bait, Jim.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 10:53 PM By JLS
Jim, I discuss ending abortion. No doubt that is trivial to socialist proabortion people such as yourself. Don't you realize that your ilk has only one route in discussing morality, and that is to go off about endless details particular to other topics. That is what Jesus means when He uses the metaphor of "straining at gnats while swallowing camels". Why have you exaggerated both what I said and what you claim. You claim to have dealt with thousands of people ... so what? How you deal with them is the critical issue, and so far you have not impressed me, other than your sense of dealing with people is to manipulate them. Perhaps you do not see this, but you do indeed know that you have no interest in seeking truth. That is your downfall, Jim. You don't care about truth. Why don't you care about truth, Jim? Do you have other priorities that are more important to you? What could they be, Jim?
|
Posted Tuesday, January 26, 2010 11:02 PM By JLS
Jim, your rant hopefully is only due to your shallow lackluster effort to read the posts. PA, for example, includes homosexual activists in his definition of Catholic, not in agreement with the Pope, contrary to what you said. And your very own posts give away the fact that you have no idea what any of the terms mean. Obviously your psychological skills are not going to be very effective battling against Magisterial Doctrine. This thread began with the problem that the evil proabortion wretch who is speaker of the house of reps presents. She champions homosexual activists, abortion, child sex abuse, and other immoral things ... how to stop her is the discussion point. You will not stop her by the use of psychology. Even the Archbishop has not been able to stop her. As she enables women to spill their guts by abortion, how I wonder will God enable her to spill her guts ... like the ancient King Herod whose guts burst and worms spilled out? Get down to the nitty gritty, Jim; help stop abortion.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 27, 2010 6:27 AM By RR
Mark from PA: In your post to me at 6:56 it appears to me that you accused me of hating gay people and believing that "gay people are going to hell," and saying, "some of these people even approve of violence and discrimination directed towards gay people," First of all, I do NOT hate gay people. I do, however, HATE what ACTIVE homosexuals do sexually and publically. I do hate the sin of sodomy, wether it's done by gays or straight people. It's mortally sinful and worthy of hell either way. God said so, not me. Secondly, what I do hate also is when homosexuals flash their homosexuality in front of me. I can't tell you how disgusted I am to see it every day on t.v. It's all over the t.v. The gays they choose for their t.v. shows are the most effeminate, flambouyant, prissy, sissy, "men.' They portray them as soooo funny when it is actually soooooo disgusting. It is NOT funny to be actively homosexual and be out in the public for all to see, just as it is wrong to show heterosexual people in bed having sex. It is immoral. That's how the media tries to brainwash people, mainly the youth, into thinking that it is normal and so great to be an ACTIVE homosexual. You can't watch HGTV and not see a manly, lesbian couple or gay, effeminant couple trying to find a house together. And as far as violence and discrimination against gays, believe me when I say I have no violent tendencies or discrimination towards gays or anybody else for that matter. Everybody should be treated with respect, BUT you do not have to accept or condone their sinful lifestyle; and yes, ACTIVE homosexuality is a lifestyle and it is sinful. I wish I could talk to you in person. You would see I am not a hateful person, but a person who cares about not only people, but their souls also. I think I speak for a lot of people on here who don't hate, but rather care about others and their souls as well as their own souls. Please, pray for my soul as I will be judged someday too and I'm not assured of Heaven.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 27, 2010 8:00 AM By Ski Ven
I was talking about intellectual elitists and Sister Act keeps saying that I was talking about books. Some people are just stuck on stupid. Also, she seems to be intending to imply that those who are inclined to engage in pensive pursuits are better Catholics than those who don't and by corollary those who are intellectually gifted are better than those who are not. This approach seemingly conflates intellectual stature with personal holiness and can be called Ivy League Catholicism. It is certainly a different faith than the faith that I know. I was taught that the same Spirit gives different gifts to each person and each member of the Church is a member of one body with each person playing an important role. What we don't need here is the brain telling the hand "you need to be another brain". If the whole body was the brain, where would the hearing be? How would you walk or handle objects? How would you take care of yourself if you can't pick up anything? Each member of the body should be allowed to fulfill the role that was intended by God. Trying to force a member of the body to play an alien role is counter productive and ignorant. 'Nuff said.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 27, 2010 10:35 AM By Abeca Christian
Jim you are redefining parade? These here are comments/posts to news articles not a parade. Jim I just read that you are a priest! WHAT! Lord have mercy. Please leave the church because you are not welcome! We don't need more scandals that the homosexual community brings! I just can't believe that you ignored the fact about the parades here in California and what they represent, how they promote orgies, and such! You have broken my heart because you are the huge problem we have to deal with in our Church, you give us Christians a bad name. I am greatly saddened at what you are condoning and defending. I admonish you our of charity and I rebuke all your evil deeds!
|
Posted Wednesday, January 27, 2010 10:43 AM By Abeca Christian
Not everyone that calls out "Lord Lord" will be saved and not everyone that calls themselves Catholic is Catholic! This is a spiritual war people, we have traitors in Christ's church. We will see division and we must be very careful as well because the devil will disguise him self as one of ours and make us believe he is a believer when in reality he/she is doing the work of the evil one. He will appear kind and good but inside he is full of pride and doing worldly evil deeds that appear good! Be watchful and stay faithful, only the faithful will be saved! Praise Be Jesus Christ!
|
Posted Wednesday, January 27, 2010 11:39 AM By John
RR, there's no one having sex on HGTV. I've seen shows on HGTV where two people of the same sex look for a place to live, but that's not having sex. Two people of the same sex can morally live together, even if those two people are homosexual. They can even sleep in the same bed. There's no rule that says they have to sin or even be sexually attracted to one another (even if they're homosexual) to live together.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 27, 2010 12:52 PM By The Truth Hurts
John, I think that your mind, heart and soul is in desperate need of an Intense Interior Make-Over and Re-Design by God.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 27, 2010 7:34 PM By Mark from PA
Abeca Christian, I think you are very out of line in your post of 10:35 AM. Who are you to tell a priest to leave the Church because he is not welcome, just because you don't agree with some of his opinions? You don't even know this man and you rebuke his evil deeds? What kind of charity is that? You can disagree with someone but don't tell them to leave the Church.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 27, 2010 7:43 PM By Abeca Christian
John try EWTN
|
Posted Wednesday, January 27, 2010 8:00 PM By RR
John: Can I borrow your rose colored glasses?
|
Posted Thursday, January 28, 2010 7:58 PM By RR
Mark from PA: What? No response for me for my post to you @ 6:27 A.M. on Wed. the 27th?
|
Posted Thursday, January 28, 2010 8:34 PM By Abeca Christian
Mark from PA you ask who am I to tell this priest to leave the church. PA the priest already left the Catholic Church long time ago, ever since he chose to disobey God, he has already left and I wanted to save him the embarrassment of more scandals being brought to our church! Why stay when you are not with the Church, (hey I know we are all sinners and we need the church for salvation but some people are here to destroy the faith) why stay when you choose to do evil over good, why because when people stay it is because they are sometimes here to do the work of the devil to tear down this church, the ROCK! Hell will not win! I suggest you look deeper before you keep coming on here like you are self righteous when in reality, you keep promoting your gay agenda encouragement! That's who! You asked and you got your answer! I can give you more buddy but hey why waste more time! It's not the first time you posted these comments on here, I'm not the only faithful that has heard these very words coming from you on to them!
|
Posted Thursday, January 28, 2010 10:03 PM By JLS
PA, Jesus informs us clearly that the grain fields have weeds among them ... If these characters are not weeds, then who would you see as weeds?
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 1:34 AM By 1abqdad
Mark/PA - I find it interesting that the liberals such as your self are the FIRST to stereotype everyone who follows orthodox teachings! If I follow church teachings regarding homosexuality, I am homophobic. If I enjoy the shooting sports, I rarely attend mass and look like Elmer Fud. If I am "conservative" and pro-life, I hate women! It is classic liberal hypocrisy in action! It is the true followers of Christ, the orthodox, who are truly "open-minded" as God calls us to be! (I enjoy target shooting, but I attend daily Mass. I follow church teaching in regards to homosexuality, but I am NOT homophobic. I am orthodox and pro-life, yet I adore and respect women... I in NO way conform to your ridiculous stereotypes!) Liberals only allow people to be "open-minded" IF they totally agree with the evil, humanistic agenda! You are the prejudiced, closed-minded person! At least admit it!
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 4:45 AM By Mark from PA
RR, yes, I know that you don't like watching gay characters on TV or watching gay actors on TV. What do you think it is like for a gay teen reading this? What do you think it feels like when a kid knows that their parents feel like this and that they think gay people are disgusting. I read of a young man whose mother told him that she would rather have had an abortion than had a gay son. He was forced to go to NARTH where he was told that he was dirty and evil. The poor kid was called homophobic names before he even knew he was gay and when his parents found out that he was gay he was called names by them too. What kind of Christianity is this? It certainly is not the way of Christ who treated all people with love and compassion.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 7:53 AM By Ski Ven
As of yet, Mark from PA has not apologized to Canisius or JLS for laughing at and approving of Peter's hateful insult of them. Neither has Mark from PA urged Peter to apologize for making such a hateful remark. Mark from PA is clearly not the nice person that he claims to be. What is he full of is probably related to sodomy induced constipation.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 9:49 AM By RR
Mark from PA: Of course that is not the proper way to treat anybody, that is, if it is true. Were you there to witness what was said to him? NO! If you weren't, it is hearsay. There are two sides to every story. I'm not saying it was not said or done to him, but sometimes when someone doesn't agree with or accept your beliefs they will exaggerate the situation or even lie to make someone or something look bad, or worse yet, twist words, like you do all the time to my posts to make me look like an awful or bad person. I, as a mother, love my kids from the depths of my heart. I would never treat my son or daughter this way, but if they were ever gay, I certainly would never condone or approve of them being an ACTIVE gay. I would be very compassionate towards him or her, but as a parent would tell my child that God and Church teaching says it is mortally sinful to be an ACTIVE homosexual, and yes, that it is evil, sinful, deviant, and disgusting acts that homosexuals do and unrepented ACTIVE homosexual acts are worthy of hell. That is my OBLIGATION as a Catholic mother and parent to tell my child this. If I don't and approve of this it will go to my judgement someday. I would tell my child that I will always love them, but if they choose to live an ACTIVE homosexual lifestyle that I don't want to condone it or be around it. If they choose to live a chaste life, which God would approve of, then I would certainly accept a gay child. It may sound harsh to you and other homosexuals, but in reality it is true love for your child to tell them ACTIVE homosexuality is a grave sin. You tell them because you care about their eternal soul and love them from the depths of your heart. If you continue to tell ACTIVE homosexuals on here that it's o.k. for them to continue in their sinful lifestle and condone their behavior, you are NOT being Christian towards them or care about their soul as you claim. You're helping them to choose sin and that my friend is not Christian or loving.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 10:25 AM By RR
Mark from PA: Cont.... I might add that this goes for other sins and not just about being gay. If I had a son or daughter and they started shacking up with someone before they were married, I would tell them that what they are doing is mortally sinful and worthy of hell. I would tell them it's fornication to say the least and against God and Church teaching. I would take no part in it and I certainly would not go to their house or have them in my house. They would definitely be told that I'm doing this because I love them and their souls with all my being, but I cannot watch them sin their way to hell. Again, that is my Catholic Motherly duty to do towards my child. It would not be Christain or loving of me to accept and condone this behavior and sin any more than it would be to accept an ACTIVE homosexual relationship. Mortal sin is mortal sin no matter what the sin or who is committing it and it CANNOT be accepted, promoted, or condoned in any circumstance. PERIOD.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 10:59 AM By Mark from PA
1abqdad, I am actually somewhat conservative myself. I voted for Reagan twice and both Bushes twice. I even saw George W. Bush when he came to our area. When I took a "What kind of Catholic are you?" on a religious site I ranked as a "traditional" or "Rosary" Catholic. I am also very pro-life, I have taken part in pro-life activities, donated to pro-life causes and I am also an adoptive parent. I wouldn't consider myself Orthodox but a Latin Rite Catholic. SkiVen I do not suffer from consitpation and if I did it would not be sodomy related as I don't partake in such activities. But I hope that you had a good laugh at my expense from your rather tasteless comment.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 11:15 AM By Mark from PA
I must tell you SkiVen that your ridiculous comment does not upset me. What upsets me is how young people, like the young man referred to in my post of 4:45 AM, are abused by their classmates, abused by their parents and abused by people like those at NARTH. If young people are taught to love themselves, respect themselves and respect their sexuality they will be OK. Kids that are taught that they are dirty and bad and disordered are the ones that are most at risk for things such as drug abuse, exploitation and casual sex.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 11:20 AM By Ski Ven
Well PA, you have had a rather good laugh at Canisius's and JLS's expense when you were laughing at Peter's tasteless comment. What does that make you PA? You so full of it. You keep acting like you are all pious and nice but you don't walk the walk. Who do you think you are kidding?
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 11:24 AM By Ski Ven
If Mark from PA finds a reference to sodomy to be tasteless, maybe there is some hope for him. Perhaps he realizes that sodomy is disgusting.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 11:50 AM By Ski Ven
Hey PA, what about people being told that they are creepy. Aren't they being told that they are dirty and bad and disordered and unwanted? Isn't that putting them at risk for self hatred and suicide? Isn't that abusing them? Shouldn't they be taught to love themselves and that they are good? It cuts both ways, PA.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 2:42 PM By Mark from PA
Ski Ven, you may think that young people committing suicide is a laughing matter but many people don't. I'm talking about kids here. I think some of the older men here can take care of themselves.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 3:54 PM By Mark from PA
RR, I got that from a transcript from the Proposition 8 Trial. It is sworn testimony. The testimony is from a man who now works for a police department. This man stated that as a teen he turned to drugs, the reparative therapy helped lead to this. Can you imagine what it must feel like to be hated by your parents? To be told by your mom that she would have rather had an abortion than have you? I don't know if you have a daughter but I hope that if you do and she was ever in a situation where she was expecting a child out of wedlock, I hope that you would give her your love and support. I would hope that you would tell her the importance of her child's life. I would hope that you would go to her house and accept her and her child in your house. It is sad that so many women have children out of wedlock but I am strongly pro-life and believe that every life is precious.
|
Posted Friday, January 29, 2010 5:00 PM By Mark from PA
In regard to Nancy Pelosi. I went to my Bible study last night. We are reading the Gospel of John, which I have read many times. After our Bible study we offer prayers. I offered prayers for Nancy Pelosi that God may touch her heart and give her compassion for our precious unborn. I prayed that she fight against abuse of all children, born and unborn. We always say many prayers for our precious unborn after our Bible study.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 7:28 AM By Abeca Christian
PA quit trying to come on here like you are some sort of saint. Offer prayers for Pelosi? You object to her views on pro-choice but you are no different than her. You are very pro-homosexual lifestyles, I suggest that before you pull the splinter off of Ms. Pelosi with prayers, that you take the rod out of your own eye first because you keep defying the church, you voted for Obama, your are promoting homosexual lifestyles acceptable, etc etc, I know this because you made it very public, therefore ye will be judged according to God's laws.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 12:14 PM By Mark from PA
Abeca Christian, I have often explained my pro-life beliefs to pro-choice people and they have respectfully listened to me, sometimes not offering a reply and other times telling me that they did not agree. This is the first place where I have ever been disparaged by pro-life people. People like you and Ski Ven and your hateful, nasty remarks are very telling. Perhaps some of you wish that I had been aborted even though you probably wouldn't say so. You will be judged also.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 12:32 PM By Mark from PA
It is true Abeca Christian, I am not a saint, I am a sinner. Hopefully God hears the prayers of lowly sinnners also. You tell me that I am no different from Nancy Pelosi but I am sure that most people could tell us apart. Being a homosexual is not a lifestyle. It is an orientation. Many priests are homosexual and live a chaste, celibate lifestyle.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 1:24 PM By Melissa
Mark from PA, God bless you. You have such a sweet heart.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 3:29 PM By RR
Mark from PA: Yes, I have two daughters and two sons. If my Daughters or my sons ever had a child out of wedlock, I would accept my daughter or sons and my grandchild, but I would tell her or him that what they did was mortally sinful and that they need to go to Confesssion and to never again engage in sexual activity until they were married. Now, see how you try to make me look bad just as I have said you do. You want people to think that I would allow or condone my daughter to have an abortion and that I am this heartless mother who doesn't think that all life is precious or important. I guess only you are perfect and pro-life and the rest of us are just cruel and heartless people.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 6:56 PM By Abeca Christian
Melissa he may have a sweet heart but his bite and sting of deceptions are not so sweet.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 7:09 PM By Abeca Christian
PA we are all sinners but we can't always flaunt it so proudly because some people say they are sinners because that is their ticket to not change. Who are you talking about when you said "Perhaps some of you wish that I had been aborted even though you probably wouldn't say so." Any faithful soul here who strives to obey and love God with all their being, would never wish that. I think that sometimes you just like drama and have distorted views. PA now about what you perceive to be nasty remarks from some of us, you post your anti-church views here on this Catholic website and it is the duty of the faithful to admonish any error or heresies being spread about the faith. It's a pity that you don't understand that. God bless.
|
Posted Saturday, January 30, 2010 7:54 PM By Mark from PA
RR, I know that you are pro-life and would support your daughter if she had a child out of wedlock. That is why I brought it up. You said that you would not go to their house or let them in your house but I know that if you had a grandchild you surely would, even though I know that it would be somewhat upsetting to you. I also think that if one of your sons turned out to be gay that you would change your tune somewhat. I can imagine that if he adopted a child, that you would be right there to help if needed. So no, you are not a heartless mother. Abeca Christian, I am not proudly flaunting being a sinner here. I am just admitting to human weakness because you told me to quit coming on here like I am some sort of a saint. I share that I go to Bible study, sing in the choir, teach Religion class and attend Mass several times a week because I am sharing my life here. My faith is not just an hour on Sunday but an everyday part of my life. Since this is a Catholic site I don't think that people would take offense at this. Just because I attend Mass often does not mean that I am perfect. I would hope that the graces I receive from this would make me a better person. We need God's graces to help us get through this life which is not always easy.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 9:09 AM By RR
Mark from PA: NO, if my son or daughter turned out to be gay I would NOT change my tune. I do NOT compromise with sin. It would NOT be accepted in any circumstance. You might be lax, but I'm sure not.Also, bringing a grandchild into my home, no matter what the circumstance of how they got here, would NOT upset me. What would upset me is if they were to live together or fornicate further. Then I would be upset and they would NOT be allowed in my home. It would hurt terribly because they probably wouldn't bring over my grandchild, but I have to put God and my faith before even my own children and grand children. Thankfully, I don't believe I will ever have to deal with this. I pray anyway that it won't happen and I have taught my children to put God first in their life and they were taught to have morals, about mortal sin, about the reality of hell, and all the consequences they will have to face if they offend God. They were given the gift of free will by God and they are and were taught that you don't compromise in you faith, beliefs, or values for anyone or anything. They have not let God or their parents down. They are good Catholic children.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 9:12 AM By Mark from PA
Abeca Christian. I just returned from Mass. Today's readings were beautiful and insightful. We read from Jeremiah, 1st Corinthians and the Gospel of Luke. Let me share a beautiful line from Jeremiah, "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you." I stated before my pro-life views. I think it is a terrible thing to deny someone's humanity, to view them as something lesser. Some refer to an unborn child as a "fetus" as if they are less than fully human. But an unborn child is fully human. I feel the same way when people believe that gay people are "disordered." I realize that some view them as something lesser. Some people think it is OK to treat gay people with disrespect and make fun of them. I still think of the young man whose good Christian mother told him that she would have rather had an abortion than a gay son. I wonder how many other Christians feel like that. It is not that I like the drama but to me abortion is a dramatic thing. It is a violent thing. And if I ever met President Obama I would tell him the same things as I have told the people here.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 9:20 AM By Mark from PA
Thank you for your kindness, Melissa. I want to let you and Abeca Christian and RR know that actually I am somewhat traditional in my faith. I teach a Religion class and I take a somewhat traditional approach. We just started a chapter on Church history. We were reading about St. Peter and St. Paul and I passed out Bibles to the students. I wanted to familiarize them with the New Testament. I explained to them the books of the New Testament. We read some from the Acts of the Apostles. I had them read about the first Pentecost and the martyrdom of St. Stephen. We also read about the conversion of St. Paul. I hope that my students remember some of this.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 11:58 AM By Canisius
PA the very fact that you "teach" religion to anyone is a prime of example of how far the Church has fallen in the past 45 years. You claim you are traditional tell me do you know what the last 4 things are? I know I do. You are a tiresome man, you think you better and holier than anyone on this site. Let me ask you would fight to defend your Faith religion like I did. Or do you leave that to real men like me
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 1:24 PM By Mark from PA
Canisius, I never said that I was better or holier than anyone on this site. I am sure many are better and holier than I am. Just because I teach a religion class and go to Mass frequently does not mean that I am better than someone else. It just means that I make my faith an everyday part of my life. I am sorry if you think that is tiresome.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 1:45 PM By Abeca Christian
I feel the same way as RR posted on January 31, 2010 9:09 AM By RR. I don't bend or condone any sin. I do my best to make the peace but bend or condone, no way! True love and salvation does that, never condones and bends, it actually guides and directs with prayer, patience and love. True love understands this. But we humans don't love perfectly because only God does but His graces shows us how, the truth and way. Canisus you are right, the church/people running it (society but the faith remains the same, God is still the same) has changed so much. I read from traditional books that even long ago, before your time and mine, it was considered a sin to marry a non-believer. The faith had it's problems like always because of traitors and heretics but the faith was still Christian, our Catholic faith in the earlier times wouldn't allow such things that are happening now.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 2:40 PM By Mark from PA
Canisius, the last 4 things are Death, Judgement, Hell and Heaven.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 3:18 PM By Mark from PA
RR, it is not a sin to be gay. It is not something a person chooses either. When you said it would not be accepted are you referring to a child adopted by your son? Being gay doesn't have anything to do with free will or being a good Catholic. I would hope that if one if your children were gay that you wouldn't tell them that they let you down by being who they were, because of their biology.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 3:37 PM By RR
Mark from PA: Now where in my post or other posts have I ever said it was a sin to be gay? NEVER said that. What I have said and will continue to say is it is mortally sinful to be an ACTIVE homosexual. ACTIVE!! Where are you reading in my post anything about an adopted child? HUH? Why would I not accept an adopted child?? I also never said being gay had anything to do with free will, but you can use your free will to choose to be chaste in your life or you can use your free will to live a sinful, ACTIVE homosexual life. Where would you get the idea that I would ever tell my gay child that they let me down? I would, however, tell my child that living an ACTIVE homosexual life is a mortal sin and worthy of hell and that I love them with my whole being and that it cannot be accepted or condoned. That, Mark, would be true love. Again, Mark, all you are doing is trying to make me look like this truly, awful mother and person. You can't answer any of my questions hosestly without taking shot at my character.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 3:38 PM By Mark from PA
I don't think it is a sin to marry a non-baptized person but I do not think such a marriage is considered a Sacramental marriage, but I am not sure. Perhaps Mr Maguire can enlighten us here.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 3:46 PM By Mark from PA
It appears that male homosexuality may in some cases be caused by hormonal factors. This may go back to conditions present in the womb combined with genetics. It comes from the mother, not from the father. The more sons that a woman has, the more likely it is that each succeeding son will be gay. Gay men are also more likely to be left-handed than heterosexual men.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 3:57 PM By RR
Mark from PA: "Perhaps Mr Maguire can enlighten us here." PU-LEEZE! Why would you go by a man's oppinion instead of Church teaching.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 4:05 PM By Mark from PA
RR, in yesterday's post of 7:54 PM, I stated that I thought that if your son adopted a child that you would be right there to help if needed. I then said, "So no, you are not a heartless mother." I still think that you would do anything to help your grandchildren. However, if you did have a gay son, it would be good if he would become a priest and live a celibate life. It might also be for the best that he did not share his orientation with you (if he was a priest) if this would be upsetting to you.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 4:13 PM By Martina
RR, it is not a sin to be an active homosexual person. Being a person is not a sin nor is it a sin to be active. For example, there are some homosexual persons who are quite active on the tennis courts as I type. Some are professional tennis players. These active tennis playing homosexual persons have a professional tennis player lifestyle. Meanwhile, there are some heterosexual persons down the road who are engaging in homosexual acts for a porn movie. For some heterosexual persons, such acts are a regular part of their heterosexual lifestyle.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 4:20 PM By Canisius
PA, you don't actually verbally say your are holier, but like most progressives you have to "show off" how great you are. "Look I go to Mass everyday" "I talk to my pastor on this and that" " I teach religion class". I have done many things to defend the Faith in far away places, but I don't spout about every two minutes. The only time your kind gets it is when they are completely defeated
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 5:37 PM By Mark from PA
Sorry, RR, if you know the Church teaching on this, please let me know. I wasn't asking his personal opinion I was asking what Church teaching was so if you know you can share it. Canisius, I am just telling what I did today. I suppose I can be annoying. My supervisor at work once told me that I was a religious fanatic and that I needed to stop going to Church and find another hobby. This was shortly before I found this site.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 5:43 PM By Abeca Christian
RR and others,
We have gone over these same topics over and over with PA, he thrives on them. It is a trap, I suggest we ignore him now because these conversations through these posts have pretty much been the same. He continues to be in bad will and frankly I am disgusted by his posts. He will never convert me to his evil views and I'm sure you are the same too because PA just goes in circles and people get caught up in that web of things with him. He is very clear, he will not submit to church teachings and therefore I think that if anyone knows him personally and that cares, should warn their church and remove him from teaching any religious education. God bless, Peace!
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 5:59 PM By RR
Martina: You're kidding, right? Obviously you are new to this blogsite.
|
Posted Sunday, January 31, 2010 8:02 PM By Mark from PA
Abeca Christian, I have gone to Mass almost every Sunday since I received my First Holy Communion and I don't care if you would like me removed. I am welcome in my parish. I got the same haughty attitude as yours from the priest that taught me religion for 3 years. He didn't drive me from the church, and you won't drive me away either. Christ had a message of love not a message of hating people who were different. I think gay people are equal in their humanity and their dignity to other people and if you consider this an evil view so be it.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 4:52 AM By Mark from PA
RR, perhaps Martina is making reference to your using of caps to show contempt for a group of people.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 5:38 AM By Canisius
PA you are like the Pharisee Our Divine Saviour mentioned in the parables, thanking God you are not like these other sinners. You talk too much and listen too little, you ignore direct challenges because you are a coward like most progressives.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 8:56 AM By The Truth Hurts
RR, Martina is definitely not new to this Catholic website. This is age-old rebellion against God. Instead of serving God, Martina serves distracting tennis balls that are TRANSPARENT and out of bounds.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 9:32 AM By Ski Ven
Canisius, you are so right about PA. He writes like someone who prays like this. "God, I am glad that I am not like the rest of those creepy people who ridicule my piety and despise gay people. I got gold stars when I was in kindergarten, I made straight A's in high school and college, I sing in the choir, I teach catechism, I receive communion frequently, everyone tells me how pious I am, and the holiness that radiates from me overpowers the speech faculties of anyone who tries to utter a profane word in my presence..."
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 10:30 AM By Canisius
To Ski, awesome LOL, evil comes in many forms, non as so cunning as when it wears the mask of piety...as Our Divine Saviour said "there is nothing new under the sun"..Rex Christi
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 10:40 AM By RR
Mark from PA: There you go AGAIN! Trying to make me look like this awful hater and person. My use of all upper case letters for the word ACTIVE is not hate towards anyone. My use of all upper case letters for the word ACTIVE is for YOUR benefit because you always use the excuse that homosexuality is not a sin. With you I have to stress the ACTIVE part, meaning homosexuals that are sexually ACTIVE with others of the same sex. Homosexuality is not a sin unless you are ACTIVE sexually in a homosexual way. You know darn well what I' saying. Just for the record, Mark from PA, I hold NO contempt towards any person or group of persons, But I DO HAVE contempt and hate for ACTIVE homosexual ACTS and SINS. So quit trying to ruin my reputation. It's mortally sinful. I use to think that you were a man with a good heart, but I'm beginnig to see, through your recent posts to me, that the only people you have a heart for are homosexuals, ACTIVE homosexuals, and yourself.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 10:55 AM By RR
TTH: Agreed!
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 11:17 AM By Mark from PA
Oh, Ski Ven, would that I were that good. I am not better than anyone else. We are all equal in the eyes of God. My life wasn't all so easy. I struggled with French in high school and was happy when I got picked next to last in gym. But I am glad that I was taught by wonderful IHM nuns who shared their faith with me. And yes the one priest that taught me Religion probably ridiculed my piety. But still I don't quite understand why my love of Mass and the Eucharist is annoying to some here. I don't go to Mass because I am oh so holy but because I am a sinner in need of God's grace. When we receive Our Lord in the Eucharist we become one with Him.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 11:23 AM By Abeca Christian
PA I am not asking you to leave to the church, because you need the faith for salvation but I am asking that you stop teaching religious education. You are part of the problem of that education system within the church!
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 12:06 PM By Ski Ven
Some people are just trying to get Mark from PA to come back into the Church by accepting what the Church teaches but he does not want to. It is dishonest for him to profess love for a religion whose teachings he despises.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 12:56 PM By Ron
RR, you said, "quit trying to ruin my reputation. It's mortally sinful." What are you saying is mortally sinful? Your reputation?
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 2:36 PM By RR
Ron: "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor." When you tell lies about someone and say things about them that aren't true, you are ruining their reputation and disobeying the eighth Commandment of God. When you break a Commandment, you commit a mortal sin.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 3:48 PM By JLS
PA, you advocate one more false idea to justify yourself, by saying that we are equal in the eyes of God ... Then explain to me why St Paul teaches us that we are in a contest and that there are winners who receive crowns ... and that there are losers who do not?
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 3:49 PM By Abeca Christian
RR I think that PA already has bear false witness against all of us here who defend the wholeness and beauty of the faith. How many times has he said things like, "I know you hate me, or want me to have been aborted because I am a homosexual/gay etc etc, things of that nature. Sad that he views us that way, no matter what we reply, he does not see our charity. I find that very sad indeed!
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 3:53 PM By JLS
Martina, the end result of sin is homosexual behavior ... it is the bottom of the barrel of evil behavior, the result of other sins. Those who are condemned to Hell are forever in eternal torment, bitterness and gnashing of teeth, or perhaps into outer darkness with bitterness and gnashing of teeth. This gnashing is not the same as the grinding of teeth, but is worse, eternally worse; it is like a snarling dog or werewolf snapping in anger at what it cannot have.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 4:00 PM By Mark from PA
Abeca Christian, I am more than qualified to teach in my Church. I have a degree in education. Also all volunteers in my parish must have a criminal background check and child abuse clearance. We must also be registered members of the parish, of which I am a lifelong member. I love my faith but I do not believe that gay people are disordered and inferior beings. I believe that we are all equal in the eyes of God and all our lives are precious.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 4:05 PM By Mark from PA
I was always under the impression that almost all Catholics believed that Christ was present in the Holy Eucharist. I read here that some think that a lot of Cathoics don't believe this. I think the Church needs to encourage more devotion to the Eucharist. Our pastor said that every time we go to Mass we witness a miracle.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 4:31 PM By Ron
RR, sometimes when it appears that someone has told a lie about me or someone else, they didn't actually mean what one might think they said, or there's some truth, perhaps significant truth, in what they said that is overlooked. Do you also have that experience? For example, I see that Mark from PA said, "perhaps Martina is making reference to your using of caps to show contempt for a group of people." And looking back, I see where you wrote "it is mortally sinful to be an ACTIVE homosexual." To be fair, I can see where someone may read those words of yours as speaking negatively if not disrespectfully and falsely about a group of people rather than simply towards some sinful acts. Are you unable to see that? Even the term "a homosexual" is problematic. Cardinal Ratzinger explains, "The human person, made in the image and likeness of God, can hardly be adequately described by a reductionist reference to his or her sexual orientation. Every one living on the face of the earth has personal problems and difficulties, but challenges to growth, strengths, talents and gifts as well. Today, the Church provides a badly needed context for the care of the human person when she refuses to consider the person as a 'heterosexual' or a 'homosexual' and insists that every person has a fundamental Identity: the creature of God, and by grace, his child and heir to eternal life."
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 4:32 PM By The Truth Hurts
Ski Ven, I know what you are saying about Mark from PA. I do not have any illusions about Mark's real reason for daily communicating error on this website. I don't think that anyone does unless they are like-minded in sharing confusion or like-minded in selective silence or hiding the true Gospel. Mark's strategically aimed nonsense that Mark F. called psychological *quicksand.*
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 5:12 PM By Mark from PA
Abeca Christian, oh yes, I see your "charity." Go back and read Ski Ven's comment on Friday 1/29, 7:53 AM. Then have a good laugh. Then go back and read Ron's comment of 2/1, 4:31 PM. Think about what they both said. I see charity in what Ron wrote.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 6:34 PM By Mark from PA
Abeca Christian, I never have said, "I know you hate me." People here don't even know me. In regard to my statement about abortion, I started it with "perhaps some" but it would have been better not to have said that sentence. I was thinking of the mother who told her son that she would rather have had an abortion than have a gay son. I know that there was a discussion of whether it would be OK to abort a child if it could be discerned that he would be gay or else tamper with the unborn child to possibly prevent him from being gay. I think that would be horrible but I know that many, many babies are aborted because they are female. This is very common in China and India and probably even occurs here. I have always been somewhat outspoken in my opposition to abortion and it has sometimes annoyed people.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 8:01 PM By Mark from PA
The Truth Hurts, one of my reasons for communicating on this website is to fight negative stereotypes of gay and bi-sexual people. I tell about things in my daily life and how religion is a part of my daily life even though this is annoying to some. There are many gay Catholics and they are your brothers and sisters in Christ. There are a lot of gay teens that need support and love from their Church. They don't need to be called homos, queers, heretic or sodomites; which are words that some here use. They don't need to be told that they "suffer" from "same sex attraction." They don't need to be made fun and put down and driven out of the Church. We need to nurture the goodness inside these kids so that they can be the best that they can be. We need to be a welcoming Church and not be like some of these fundamentalist sects that threaten kids with hell and judgement and even drive some to suicide. Our Church is better than that.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 11:20 PM By Abeca Christian
PA we all know you have a cause, but I'm afraid that your cause is not exactly helping the "gay" agenda because what you are doing here is only making us see that the gay agenda is truly disordered, you are not really helping your cause PA. It only re-affirms and continues to confirm what our precious Lord has taught to His people about homosexuality and all types of sins. It is you who has negative views about the faith regarding your views on homosexuality, you don't understand salvation and it's teachings at all. You are part of the reason it is negative. I see double standard here.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 11:31 PM By Abeca Christian
PA I did what you said and read the comments of others, they are just tired of your heresies, sin causes scandal and people of faith will react unfortunately those who provoke those responses only see them as bad because they only see what they want to see through their own eyes and don't want to own up or face the reality that they may be in error, it is called pride. I'm sure that you would be greatly qualified for a secular school education system but speaking for myself, as a faithful and knowing what you have posted here in the past, I would say that I wouldn't allow you to teach at any of our churches perhaps I would prefer you be taught true Church doctrine and true bible studies on your own free will instead. Free will because I don't believe in forcing anyone, I prefer that people choose Jesus on their own. And yes PA you are qualified to teach at YOUR CHURCH of MARK from PA (Because you may have build in your own mind your own man made Church) but not at a Catholic Church where true Christian doctrine should be taught by those who are loyal and faithful to Dogma and holy scriptures.
|
Posted Monday, February 01, 2010 11:43 PM By Abeca Christian
I do want to clarify, I understand that some people have had bad feelings towards homosexuals and I do not condone any hate towards any individual, I have much compassion and love for these confused souls, I really do, that I feel that the better education and just thing we ought to do for these brothers and sisters, is teach them about abstinence and chastity. Homosexual individuals are called to celibacy. They are called to a greater joy of temperance and rejecting that fallen temptations of same sex attractions. We want to let them know that they are way better than living a lie, they are better off embracing God's plan for them and what the church teaches. These brothers and sisters need our love and help not by condoning their disordered state but by giving them guidance, spiritual love, prayers and much support to choose Christ and His ways. Their cross may be a heavy one but not an unbearable one. We need to empower them with truths and tools that help them reach healthy choices for their state of mind and dignity of human life.
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 5:55 AM By RR
Mark from PA: Get over yourself. First of all, nobody here is stereotyping any gays or bi-sexual people. We are all here to tell gays that if they are sexually ACTIVE homosexuals then according to Church teaching they are committing grave mortal sin. When you talk about your devotion to the Church, we are not annoyed by this. What we are annoyed by is how you come on here and blatently condone and promote ACTIVE homosexuality and say that you are such a great and faithful Catholic. If you condone mortal sin as you do with ACTIVE homosexuals, then you, Mark, are not a faithful Catholic. If you didn't condone sexually ACTIVE homosexual sex and said the things you say about your great faith, then we would all agree that you are a great Catholic with deep faith, but you don't. You are correct. Gays are our brothers and sisters, but we are not brothers and sisters in Christ if they are sexually ACTIVE homosexuals. ACTIVE homosexuality is if the devil, not Christ. Yes, gay teens need support and love from the Church, BUT accepting and condoning sexually ACTIVE homosexuality is NOT being compassionate or loving. It is only helping them go to hell. The Church needs to tell them to live a chaste life. Also, the Church does not drive gays from the Church. Gays have free will and if they leave it is because they choose it themselves. They choose their lust over God's laws and the Church. Yes, the Church needs to nurture the goodness inside these kids, but you do NOT nuture them by accepting sexually ACTIVE homosexuality. That only hurts them more deeply and spiritually. cont....
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 6:13 AM By RR
Cont.. Mark from PA: Yes, the Catholic Church is a welcoming Church. The Church welcomes sinners who are repentent and not defiant of Church teaching. Kids need to be told about the reality of hell. If you don't teach them about hell and mortal sin, they will always choose to sin. It is much easier to sin than to obey God's commandments. If a commandment or a Church teaching is broken, God, as loving as he is, is still a just God too. We will ALL pay some day for our sins. Yes, that includes teenagers. Also, it's people such as yourself who help gay teens and adults to kill themselves. You keep telling them it's o.k. to be sexually ACTIVE in their homosexuality when in fact it is NOT. When you promote ACTIVE homosexuality you are furthering disease which AIDS kills many, many, many ACTIVE homosexuals as well as heterosexuals. Your type are the ones who lead them to suicide, not the Church. Our Church does not drive gays to suicide. They choose to sin and they choose to kill themselves. They choose to sin and kill themselves from people like you who condone and promote them in their sins. Yes, there is a hell. The Fatima children had a vision of it. More people go to hell for sins of the flesh and impurity than any other sin. Think about it, Mark from PA.
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 10:34 AM By Mark from PA
RR, how dare you say that people such as myself help gay teens and adults to kill themselves. That is an evil thing to say to someone. Please show me anywhere that I have said that gay teens or any teens for that matter should be sexually active.
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 3:33 PM By Abeca Christian
PA you are condoning their lifestyles, that is another way to encourage their same sex activities!
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 5:16 PM By Carlson
RR, if your concern is the spread of AIDS, an uninfected person will never become infected during sex, no matter how sexually active he or she is, no matter whether the person engages in active homosexuality or active heterosexuality, as long as either the person's sexual partner is not infected or the person does not come in contact with infected fluids. Many people engage in active heterosexuality or active homosexuality with ZERO risk of becoming infected by their sexual acts. So-called "phone sex" and "cyber sex" are some simple but obvious examples. Meanwhile, even married persons (heterosexual or homosexual) can become infected if their spouse is already infected or becomes infected during the marriage through an affair, or IV drug use, or blood transfusion, etc. There are millions of married people in Africa and around the world who have found that out. Nothing I've said should be interpreted as saying that safe means moral. I'm only pointing out that the spread of HIV infection is not intrinsic to active homosexuality or active heterosexuality. Rather, the virus is extrinsic and does not care whether the person with whom you may be sexually active is the same sex or the opposite sex, or whether the person is your lifelong spouse, your live-in sex partner or someone you never met before.
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 6:21 PM By Mark from PA
Being a gay teen is not a lifestyle it is an orientation. I have stated that I do not believe that gay teens or any teens should be sexually active. I have stated that I do not believe that gays are disordered and inferior beings. I have stated that I believe that gay people are equal in their dignity and their humanity to other people. I believe that God loves gay teens just as much as any other child. I am angered by bullying and hatred directed towards gay kids. Please tell me how any of these views would lead any young person to suicide.
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 6:43 PM By Mark from PA
I got back from Mass a short time ago. I was thinking about "people such as yourself" and "your type are the one." Yes, I know what that means. After Mass I spent a while in Eucharistic adoration. I prayed to Jesus that he protect our young people from prejudice and violence and hate. ACTIVE Catholic.
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 6:50 PM By Mark from PA
From what I know, the Catholic Church does not drive gay people to suicide but some of the fundamentalist Protestant sects do. Some of these sects force innocent kids into harmful reparative therapy. Some of the people in these sects really hate gay people. Many of them think that gay people are going to hell. Most Catholics are tolerant and accepting of gay people. Many Catholic priests are celibate gay men. In all my life I have never heard one word said against homosexuality or gay people in Church.
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 6:53 PM By Canisius
Its people like PA and Carlson that I hope that Our Lord turns San Francisco into a pillar of salt. Perhaps then and only then will tolerant progressives get it that sex IS NOT a recreational sport.
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 6:54 PM By Anne T.
Carlson, you are not telling RR anything she does not already know. There are other diseases connected to the misuse of the sexual function besides HIV, and she knows that too. Some are tearing of the rectum, anal cancer which is rare among most heterosexuals, HIV and other cancers of the mouth, fungus diseases, etc.
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 8:04 PM By RR
Mark from PA: I dare to because it is true. If you would be truly Catholic you would be compassionate to homosexuals by telling them to remain celebate and that it is against the Catholic faith to be an ACTIVE homosexual. The Church is trying to tell them that it is mortally sinful and here comes Mark from PA telling them that it is o.k. When you tell them that it is o.k. to be an ACTIVE homosexual you are confusing them further. I'm not just talking about teens either. I'm talking about all gays. You have the nerve to tell me "how dare you" when you come on this Catholic website and condone and promote ACTIVE homosexuality when you know it is against Church teaching. Well, I say to you how dare you thumb your nose at God, Church teaching, and the Church by coming on here and promoting ACTIVE homosexaul relationships. And you say where have you ever said for teens to be sexually active? Well, Mark from PA, every time you write a post on this site a teen can read what you write and you are promoting ACTIVE gay relationships here ALL THE TIME. What the heck do you think they are going to think? " That is an evil thing to say to someone." Well, what you have to say in your support of ACTIVE gay relationships is more evil than what I had said to you. Yes, I stand by my words that you and other ACTIVE homosexual supporters help gay to kill themselves because instead of letting the Church compassionately help them through it there are the Mark from PA's who take matters in their own hands and confuse them even farther and condone and push them into evil ACTIVE homosexual lifestyles, thus killing them spiritually and possibly having a part in them killing themselves. I am not saying other people don't contibute to gays killing themselves. We all know people can be so cruel and I surely know suicide happens because of mean and cruel people, but it does not help them by you saying it's o.k. because it isn't. cont....
|
Posted Tuesday, February 02, 2010 8:20 PM By RR
Mark from PA: I know that you would never intentionally mean to make a gay person kill themself, but it is not helping them by accepting and condoning ACTIVE homosexuality. It is confusing them further by accepting and promoting ACTIVE homosexaulity for gays of any age. I really feel sorry for gay people. I don't feel they are inferior and neither does the Church. I understand there are a lot of people who feel that way, that gays are inferior, but the Church says their ACTIVE behavior is disordered, NOT the person. Mark, I understand your compassion for gay people, but you can't condone their ACTIVE homosexual sins and tell them it's o.k. You are confusing them further and not helping them. I just wish you were close to where I live because I would love to talk to you. There is always misinterpretation on blogsites and I think communication is best in person. Pray for my soul and I'll do the same for you, for all gay people, and for gay and straight people whose lives are so horrible that they commit suicide.
|
Posted Wednesday, February 03, 2010 3:31 PM By Abeca Christian
Canisius and RR good posts.
|
Posted Wednesday, February 03, 2010 7:16 PM By Mark from PA
RR, I posted a response earlier but it never posted. When it comes to gay people, the Catholic Church (in our diocese at least) pretty much has a position of benign neglect. They really don't talk about it. Gay teens are on their own when it comes to the Church. It is good because our local school has a Gay/Straight Alliance where the kids can get support. I have never heard a negative word said against gay people in Church. But I haven't really heard anything about them at all. Let me quote again, "I have stated that I do not believe that gay teens or any teens for that matter should be sexually active." So how is that thumbing my nose at God? I never recall advocating any practices here. Sadly, a lot of people have a strong dislike for gay people. Most Catholics are tolerant and accepting of gay people and don't see them as inferior but some Church documents view them as inferior.
|
Posted Wednesday, February 03, 2010 7:23 PM By Mark from PA
In truth, RR, you probably would enjoy talking with me. We would probably talk about how I am pro-life, about the sisters that taught me, about my love for Mass and the Eucharist and how I love our faith. But I doubt that I would ever discuss my orientation with you in person. This is very personal to me and something that I really don't discuss with people. The only reason I ever got in discussions about it here was because of the stereotypes and hatred directed towards gay people which I found very upsetting. So my opinions have been influenced by what I have read here.
|
Posted Wednesday, February 03, 2010 8:38 PM By RR
Mark from PA: I was not talking about gay teens when I said you are thumbing your nose at God. I am referring to adult, sexually ACTIVE gays that come on this website and you condone their behavior and say it is not mortally sinful. You make up any excuse to support their behavior and sins. If you are on this website telling adult ACTIVELY gay men that what they are doing is beautiful and loving and not sinful you are influencing any teen on here reading it to go ahead and pursue this kind of behavior, that it is o.k. It's not. You say that you would never discuss your orientation with me. I can appreciate that. How you feel about that is probably the reason you said that you never hear about gay teens. It's not something gays want to talk about. If a gay Catholic teen seeks the guidance of the Catholic Church I think the Church needs to be there for them, but that does not include condoning the ACTIVE behavior. The Church will never accept ACTIVE homosexual behavior. That's the problem though with these gay/straight alliances. They are obviously secular and Church teaching is not even considered. They will always lead them into the ACTIVE gay lifestyle and that is wrong according to Catholic Church teachings. The most spiritual and best thing the Church does for the soul of adult gays and teens is to tell them it is mortally sinful to sexually act upon their homosexual physical feelings. You may not agree with that, but it's the truth. The worse thing you could do as a faithful Catholic is to condone or promote that behavior. That is not helping them spiritually. It's making the situation worse. The Church needs to tell them that God loves them dearly, but God's laws say that they cannot act on these physical feelings, ever. Do you agree with that? Gay Catholic teens are not on their own if they truly want to seek out God's teachings. Many won't go to the Church because they don't want to hear that the Church won't condone the sexual behavior.
|
Posted Wednesday, February 03, 2010 10:19 PM By JLS
PA, how about you starting in your parish a program of manly activity for gay boys? How would you set it up and what would it consist of?
|
Posted Thursday, February 04, 2010 4:54 AM By Mark from PA
Yes, RR, the Gay/Straight Alliances in the public schools are secular and do not teach the students the teachings of the Catholic Church but public schools aren't allowed to do this as most of their students are not Catholic. It is good that they want to protect the kids from bullying and discrimination and also teach them to respect themselves and not make bad choices.
|
Posted Thursday, February 04, 2010 7:49 AM By Ski Ven
It is not only sinful to act upon homosexual physical feelings, it is SICK. No amount of academic razzle dazzle will ever convince me that an orientation that leads someone to engage in such behavior is not disordered. That behavior is totally disgusting. Anyone who does such things needs professional help.
|
Posted Thursday, February 04, 2010 8:27 AM By Ski Ven
It looks like my comment was edited to remove a reference to the most disgusting and disease ridden aspect of homosexual acts.
|
Posted Friday, February 05, 2010 10:43 AM By Mark from PA
JLS, that is an interesting idea. I think our diocese could use programs to help these kids. I will have to discuss this with one of my priest friends and see what he thinks of this idea. I do think something should be done to reach out to these kids.
|
Posted Friday, February 05, 2010 2:35 PM By Abeca Christian
JLS I would consider it dangerous for someone like PA to run a program to help kids who are confused, because he will not steer them in the right direction, he is defiant of church teachings and such.
|
Posted Friday, February 05, 2010 4:18 PM By JLS
Abeca Christian, I agree; you'r probably right. The Church is tasked, whether the leaders like to think about it, with curing, healing, and making straight the ways of the Lord. There used to be Catholic military academies where the boys were made into men. Now we find the USAir Force Academy entertaining wicca programs and persecuting Christians and promoting gays. Hopefully this nation does not get into a competitive war in this pathetic condition.
|
Posted Friday, February 05, 2010 4:22 PM By Mark from PA
Abeca Christian, I would like to help but I would prefer that a priest run the program. There are a lot of priests that could really help these kids and be good role models for them. Sadly, I think a lot of priests would be fearful to do this due to the fact that many people are prejudiced against gay people and have a strong dislike for them. So the priests might be afraid of being labeled.
|
Posted Saturday, February 06, 2010 9:40 AM By Mark from PA
Where were there Catholic military academies? I never heard of such a thing. I doubt that the US Air Force Acedemy persecutes Christians.
|
Posted Saturday, February 06, 2010 11:26 AM By JLS
The USAF persecutes Christians. It favors feminists and homsexuals and wiccans.
|
Posted Saturday, February 06, 2010 11:34 AM By JLS
PA, why don't you google it up ... I found several.
|
Posted Saturday, February 06, 2010 12:16 PM By Abeca Christian
Actually PA there is a support group run by a priest here in San Diego, from what my understanding is, I think that it supports men choose Christ and not the homosexual lifestyle, I'm sure if teens went that route they may get some help, probably not a lot as we would like to see because the topic is so touchy here. I truth of the matter, someone or most people are afraid of being sued. I'm not so sure how the priest runs that support group but I hope it is somewhat helpful. I know that the evangelicals have a great one and I have heard of a few teens choose Christ and turn away from homosexual temptations.
|
Posted Saturday, February 06, 2010 1:03 PM By Mark from PA
Why would the USAF favor Wiccans? There aren't even that many Wiccans. I don't know as if I've ever actually met a Wiccan.
|
Posted Saturday, February 06, 2010 2:29 PM By Charles
As part of its effort to make the school more tolerant of different beliefs, the U.S. Air Force Academy has agreed to recognize an outdoor worship area for Pagans, Wiccans, Druids and other Earth-centered believers. In addition to creating a space for Pagans (which consists of a double circle of stones atop a hill), the school has worship facilities for Protestant and Catholic Christians, Jews, Muslims and Buddhists. Of the 4,000 cadets at the academy, a small number have demonstrated an interest in Earth-centered beliefs. Lt. Col. William Ziegler, one of the academy's chaplains, said designating the space is part of the school's effort to foster religious tolerance and to defend the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom. "It's about our commitment as airmen to protect freedom and defend freedom. To me this is a freedom thing," he said. The academy superintendent, Lt. Gen. Michael Gould, has made religious tolerance a priority. It became a concern in 2004 when a survey found many cadets had heard slurs or jokes about other religions and that some felt ostracized because they weren't religious. Anyone is welcome to visit the new worship site but it should be treated as a religious structure, Tech. Sgt. Brandon Longcrier, who sponsors the group and describes himself as a Pagan said. A formal dedication is planned in March.
|
Posted Saturday, February 06, 2010 4:02 PM By JLS
There are lots of wiccans, which also use various other names for themselves. PA, California is a gathering ground for extremist religions, cults, airheads, homosexual movement organizations and so forth ... 40 million people here, PA. I think this is more than the population of England fifty years ago. The USAF Academy has established a worship space for wiccans, which includes a stone circle reminiscent of Stone Henge. I wonder how long before they begin their animal sacrifices there, such as black cats etc.
|
© California Catholic Daily 2010. All Rights Reserved.
|