Catholic-abortions...?!

[Roger Perry]

What it means is that Catholic institutions have no right to invite those with opposing views on articles of faith and morals to speak there.

Then you do agree that Bush should never been invited to speak there because of his views on the death sentence since the catholic church is against capital punishment?

Every good Catholic knows that the church is strictly opposed to capital punishment. Since Bush set records for carrying out death sentences when he was governor of Texas, you would think that the same guardians of virtue that are protesting Obama, who has never personally signed an abortion certificate, would have been out in force for a man who presided over 152 executions.

[Julie R.]

Here ya go:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/5/16/732331/-CATHOLIC-PROTESTERSemand-Notre-Dame-Revoke-Bushs-Honorary-Degree.

Daily Kos. Hmmmmm......

[Keith Farmer]

The point is not necessarily that Obama spoke at Notre Dame. The point is that he was asked to speak, given an honorary doctorate (even amidst staunch opposition), and now the same church body seems to be embracing abortion for its own purposes (whatever they may be).

Here is a very interesting quote directly from the Roman Catholic catechism:

841 The Church's relationship with the Muslims. "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day." (bold emphasis added)

Now, my intent is to not debate the outrageous heresy with that quotation but to clearly point out a motive for what we are seeing.

The push for ecumenism by the Pope and his church representatives is astonishing. The effort to blend the world's religions is heavily underway. Now enter Obama who is politicizing religion by trying to work from common ground principles (same thing the church is doing) with all of the big religious players (Muslims, Jews, certain "Christian" groups, Hindus, Buddhists, etc.) and one can easily see that the church must go along to accomplish its goals of a one world religion...hand in hand with a one world government.

Here is a quote from 1985 by Pope John Paul II (speaking to an audience of thousands of Muslim youths) "Christians and Muslims, we have many things in common as believers and as human beings....We believe in the same God, the one and only God, the living God...."



.

[Roger Perry]

Daily Kos. Hmmmmm......

Mr. Obama will be the sixth sitting president to speak at a Notre Dame commencement and the ninth to be awarded an honorary degree. Even when those presidents have opposed abortion rights, as former President George W. Bush did, Notre Dame students protested — in his case, over his support for the death penalty.

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/200...ovokes-debate/



The New York Times

[dnf777]

What it means is that Catholic institutions have no right to invite those with opposing views on articles of faith and morals to speak there.

Wow,
Do you realize that means we will have 300,000,000 different churches? I'll bet that you can find one point of faith or morals in each one of us that disagrees with the Pope, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson....take your pick!

Maybe I'm not a "devout" catholic because I have many friends with which I could find a point of contention, but instead choose to be a little tolerant and have thriving friendships surrounding things we can agree on!! ie dog training.

I'm a card carrying member of the NRA, life-member of the VFW, and hate paying enough taxes a year to buy a F350 with a chassis mount dog box...but have had gay people dine at our place, a gal that had an abortion, and even an anti-gun nut...all of whom I consider friends who I could call on in a time of need for help. Rather than shun my anti-gun friend, I invited him to dinner, and had him shooting cans with a Henry .22 by the nights' end! I doubt he's going to support the NRA, but it certainly spread a little common sense by using tolerance, rather than exclusion.

I'll get off my soap box now. And I'll throw birds with any of you guys anyday!

[Keith Farmer]

Mr. Obama will be the sixth sitting president to speak at a Notre Dame commencement and the ninth to be awarded an honorary degree. Even when those presidents have opposed abortion rights, as former President George W. Bush did, Notre Dame students protested — in his case, over his support for the death penalty.

This type of argument is the same old tired approach witnessed on any playground in America...well they did it so we can too. However, the stakes are different now and the outcome is becoming altogether clear when even a cursory glance at the big picture is taken. My position is not from a stance in support of George Bush nor is it from an oppositional stance to President Obama; my position is from the viewpoint of a biblical world view and therefore objective in essence (in terms of political party or candidate/representative).

First, when Bush spoke amidst opposition there was not an alterier motive by the President in terms of pushing a pro-death agenda...Obama is different in terms of his approach to pushing his pro-death agenda in the form of the Freedom of Choice Act. Further, the Roman church, or any of its affiliates, did not respond by instituting so-called death camps for use by the government...however, that may be what is going on in Boston with the abortion issue...fetus death camps to be used to further the radical Freedom of Choice Act agenda.

The ecumenical issue is huge. I suspect that my comments on it were glossed over but the reality is that both the political climate and the religious climate is abuzz in their efforts to globalize both governmental bodies...political secular government and the church. Therefore, the apparant cowtowing by the Catholic church, in my opinion, is not surprising. However, just a few weeks ago the mood was quite different. Below are a few quotes about the prior stance (and hopefully still so) of the Catholic church; however, the tide for now has most definitely shifted ...at least in Boston:

Auxiliary Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Chicago warned of “devastating consequences” to the health care system, insisting Obama could force the closure of all Catholic hospitals in the country. (http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...2M0NzQxNmZhMzQ=)

How could he (Obama) "force the closure of ALL Catholic hospitals in the country"? Because,

"bishops dread that FOCA would require all hospitals with obstetrics programs to do abortions, a natural expectation given that Obama has spoken of abortion as a “fundamental right,” a basic government service, and a vital component of America’s “safety net.” (http://www.crosswalk.com/blogs/EWThr...1596230/print/)


The response to that notion was a big huff and puff:

The bishops are not bluffing when they say they’d turn out the lights rather than comply. Nor is Auxiliary Bishop Robert Hermann of St. Louis exaggerating, I don’t think, in vowing that “any one of us would consider it a privilege to die tomorrow—to die tomorrow—to bring about the end of abortion.” (http://corner.nationalreview.com/pos...2M0NzQxNmZhMzQ=)

Any one of them would consider it a privilege to die tomorrow to bring about the end of abortion???

Well,

Boston Catholic health agency in partnership providing abortion coverage
June 08, 2009

Now I am not saying the bisops are teetering but there must be an outcry by them that we have not heard yet before I buy what they are saying in terms of their opposition to this issue.

Here are a couple of articles about the issue from a while back:

http://www.crosswalk.com/blogs/EWThr...1596230/print/

http://www.slate.com/id/2205326/


.

[Franco]

Well,

Boston Catholic health agency in partnership providing abortion coverage
June 08, 2009

Now I am not saying the bisops are teetering but there must be an outcry by them that we have not heard yet before I buy what they are saying in terms of their opposition to this issue.

Here are a couple of articles about the issue from a while back:

http://www.crosswalk.com/blogs/EWThr...1596230/print/

http://www.slate.com/id/2205326/


.

I don't think the Catholic Chruch is going to stoop to working the news media with some kind of outrage. They do a great job of handling disputes internally.

So, they have a renegade parish in Boston trying to take care of the needs of thier parishioners. To do so they must live by State and Federal requirements. Looks like the Boston Catholics are looking at the big picture. Good for them!

[Keith Farmer]

Looks like the Boston Catholics are looking at the big picture. Good for them!

The deeper issue for the "parishioners" is one of trust. If their foundational tenets are destroyed by their leaders for political/ecumenical gain then all is in vain is it not?

What foundational stone will be turned next Franco?

The adage goes everyone needs someone they can lean on...certainly looks like the Bostonians have lost a shoulder...a big one to many!

You relate in terms of the financial markets...investing in the stock market, according to you, is a fools errand...the same may be said of associating with the Roman church soon.

By saying that they, the bishops, would consider it a privilege to die to stop abortion as a practice only to see a PARTNERING by a Catholic group with an abortion group what message does that send to the "faithful"?

They certainly did not have an issue with playing the media before...why not now?

.

[Franco]

[quote=Keith Farmer;458232]The deeper issue for the "parishioners" is one of trust. If their foundational tenets are destroyed by their leaders for political/ecumenical gain then all is in vain is it not?

What foundational stone will be turned next Franco?



What foundation? I don't ever remember reading, "Tou Shall Not Have An Abortion". Last time I checked, Abortions are legal and NOT murder.

It wasn't until the 1970 that the Pope addresses Abortions and stated that the Roman Catholic Chruch is against it. That was his interpretation of what "he" thought it should be.

Abortions are the law of the land and that won't change. All relgions need to serve thier flock or they will become obsolete.

[Hew]

It wasn't until the 1970 that the Pope addresses Abortions and stated that the Roman Catholic Chruch is against it. That was his interpretation of what "he" thought it should be.

You're mistaken. Try this: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01046b.htm or this: http://www.catholic.com/library/Abortion.asp