Concerned about my Church

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Catholic : One Thread

Hello brothers and sisters. I am concerned about my priest. I'm sure it's nothing but I just want some Catholic family advice. Well, he can not stand Bush and thinks that whoever voted for him are not so smart, or dumb (remember, this is what I heard from my parent-in-laws who were talking with him counting the collection, I was not there). From what they said he claims a government should not control laws that would forbid a woman to have an abortion. That the Republicans control the money and that there should be more social servicies to provide women with financial support so they do not have an abortion. And that the "moral" laws everyone keeps talking about with Bush is nonesense. Yet when my mother-in-law commeted on Kerry being ex-communicated from the Church he seemed to change the subject.

He is an excellent priest though. He never candy-coats his sermons. They are almost always very strict. Usually he seems to preach to us in a strict sense to make sure we are "Catholics" and are following Christ. It saddens him how many children who have gotten confirmed never again return to Church. A very good preacher he is.

I am not a strict heavy duty politican, yet if anybody is going to be against the war, then they better be against the holocaust of aborted children. Please, your advice?

-- Jason (Enchantedfire5@yahoo.com), November 07, 2004

Answers

bump

-- (bump@bump.bump), November 07, 2004.

Why is it those who oppose Bush cannot have a friendly calm debate? Listen to yourself! Are you a liberal? I mean no offense when I say that yet Liberals just never seem to be able to have a mature debate without blowing their stacks. Taxes, working 7 days a week? Hey, we are put on this earth to serve Christ and that also involves living in poverty, not riches that keep us from Christ. I'm not so fond of Bush neither, and the war issue is very controversal, yet think about it, ABORTION! The MASS MURDER OF INNOCENT CHILDREN. Isn't Hitler defeated? I will live in poverty, I will not own riches, I will not eat out, for the cost of children to get a chance of life.

May the peace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you.

-- Jason (Enchantedfire5@yahoo.com), November 07, 2004.


jason,

i don't think you've red my comment thoroughlly

first of all i'm not a liberal i am for direct democracy and against any authority of the governement,the governement should only perform what the ppl have decided

all i want is freedom,justice and truth in my country

i never talked about being rich

i despise all the rich who swim in their money and don't give a shit about all the problems of this world,of all the ppl who live in hunger,in wars,in sorrow...

i was just wanting to say that we all are being exploited by our governement,they never did anything for us and they live as kings from our taxes

we have to work so much and then pay almost half of our salary to criminals who use it for military action where most victims are regular innocent ppl

about the abortion thing:

what do u think is the right thing to do? to forbid it by the law?

i don't know...

maybe like ur priest said that the republicans who control the money and should provide more social servicies to women with financial support so they do not have an abortion

this is a hard issue to discuss i myself could never do such a thing a child is a child,born or unborn it's not his fault u dind't use contraceptives , right?

but in the other hand,can u force a women to make birth of this child if she doens't want to?

hitler isn't defeated

he's alive and well and drinking his beer in the white house...

-- nathan de winter (de_nathan_winter@msn.com), November 08, 2004.


Jason,

1) the rules of this forum almost forbid a reply to your anguished cry. For example this reply in another thread:

"Either way (or even if there is another reason), you really have nothing valid to say at this forum if your mind is so warped (or your conscience is so malformed or dead) as to let you think that you could have voted for Kerry without sinning. We must pray very hard for you, lest you get hardboiled in Hades forever. "

2) out of consideration for your anguish and flames, we should not reply, unless explicitally given permission.

-- Sean Cleary (seanearlyaug@hotmail.com), November 08, 2004.


"what do u think is the right thing to do? to forbid it by the law?"

A: The law forbids the murder of human beings of all other ages. Why should it be any different for the youngest and most vulnerable human beings of all?

"but in the other hand, can u force a women to make birth of this child if she doens't want to?"

A: If a mother is holding her one week old infant in her arms, can you "force" her to respect the life of that infant if she doesn't want to? Well, that very SAME infant was inside her body a few weeks earlier. Since it was the SAME human being a few weeks earlier, simply in a different location, why would that SAME human being not have the SAME rights then that he/she has now?

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), November 08, 2004.



well i think u got a point paul...

-- nathan de winter (de_nathan_winter@hotmail.com), November 08, 2004.

SO THE CONCLUSION:

use contraceptives and know HOW to use them

-- nathan de winter (de_nathan_winter@hotmail.com), November 08, 2004.


No, contra (anti) ceptives (life! Have not sex until you are married. Own not rich possesions if you are hurting for money because I work in a social service building and man I cannot beging to tell how much the system is SCAMED. Not to mention many people who complain and cry about no money for rent or food, etc, own BRAN new SUV's, leather jackets, gold jewlery etc, and yet they complain about financial situations!

Pray for God's wisdom and respect marriage, then God will bless you. Hey, I do not have it easy neither, yet I pray for my government as well as my brother Kerry.

God be with you my friend:)

-- Jason (Enchantedfire5@yahoo.com), November 08, 2004.


My friend, if Hitler was in the white house we'd be a lamp shade or a pillow! We would not be able to speak out as we can. To compare Bush to Hitler is just, i'm sorry, out right ridiculous!

What if the magority of the ppl of the country are so anti-Christian and everything it stands for? Should the government then listen to the ppl? That's a complex issue.

Peace!

-- Mike (noemail@nomail.com), November 08, 2004.


What if the magority of the ppl of the country are so anti- Christian and everything it stands for?

what? you mean like outlawing student bible studies and prayer at public schools? or maybe you're talking about the fact that bush mentions his religiousity the leftists scramble to label him a fundamentalist? or maybe you're talking about how the country forbids any use of religious moral value in lawmaking, such that if youre religious then your moral opinion is brushed aside as moot.

I've got news for you... this country is already anti-religion. now what are you going to do to get it back?

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), November 08, 2004.



what are we going to do to get it back?

Well how about creating a Theocracy? Really cool. Rule by religion. And the constitution was an inconvient fraud. And the great experiment of democracy? Just trash it. It never worked the way we wanted it to anyway.

-- Sean Cleary (seanearlyaug@hotmail.com), November 08, 2004.


don't get me wrong, sean, i'm not advocating a theocracy here... but even a dictatorship is better than a democracy where people are not free to practice their religious rights in any venue... not where we are yet, but it could be one path if we Christians arent careful to watch out for our rights too.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), November 08, 2004.

THE GOUVERNEMENT SHOULD REPRESENT THE IDEAS OF THE PPL

that was the idea behind REAL democracy

today it's just an anti-democratic fascistic system with a govenement that only care about cash and do whatever they want

-- nathan de winter (de_nathan_winter@hotmail.com), November 09, 2004.


the fundament for a good functioning society is are freedom and equality

without equality there's no freedom and without freedom there's not equality

everyone's freedom reaches as far as it doesn't shred somebody elses freedom,so mike, the governement could decide some anti-christian things but not if those things threat one's freedom

but aren't so many things that are allowed today anti-christian in a maybe irrelevant way?

-- nathan de winter (de_nathan_winter@hotmail.com), November 09, 2004.


and bush is like hitler,but just in a different,masked,more subtile way

hitler was killing jews cos they had all the capital in germany

bush is killing arabs now for kind of the same thing

-- nathan de winter (de_nathan_winter@hotmail.com), November 09, 2004.



Dear Nathan,
I'm here from the right wing of Bush's OK Corral to invite you to the upcoming BBQ in Texas. Bring a friend, if you like, from the lunatic fringe.

We'll have fun laughing at our President, who mispronounces nuclear, and even sounds a little like you, sometimes. I'm sure he would like your input on all our nation's critical imperfections. He won't put you in jail if you want to speak your mind. --This time.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 09, 2004.


you are not even worthy of my reply....

-- nathan de winter (de_nathan_winter@hotmail.com), November 09, 2004.

We have you, here. A rare little guy who calls our President Hitler, and our country ''just an anti-democratic fascistic system with a govenement that only care about cash and do whatever they want--''

--and that makes you worthy of a reply? By what qualification? Yet I took time to reply to your worthless post. With your kinky spelling. Don't be a pest. Go back to your juvenile delinquent forum. A Catholic forum is too complicated for you.

Either that or stop making like a madman. Act like a sane person and folks will have some respect for you.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 09, 2004.


Paul and company,

Yes, I did go over the top a bit, but your reply did also imply that the direction that I went was not really so far as I thought I might be.

As an aside, you can not be consistent, complain that the Christians are the minority, and claim that the Christians won the recent election. That it was a Baptist/Catholic togetherness party is interesting. When the one religion only rules/dictates, which will it be?

Dictatorships over time tend to be oppressive. And the Catholic church does have several secular countries where it is not wanted as a political power because it got oppressive (Mexico, Poland).

Dictatorships tend to restrict peoples liberties to an uncomfortable degree. As an possible future example, the right of privacy is not explicity written into the constitution. One of the 'strict constitutionist' type judges could easily eliminate this right. And two of such judges on the supremes have consistantly voted in this direction. Can you imagine what laws would be allowed if this 'right' were to vanish? I can, and anticipate that this might be the way that things will go in a decade.

When I really think about such things I sometimes feel that Americans do not understand liberty enough to value it enough to keep it. So maybe we will lose it. The treasonous-to-my-eyes Patriot Act goes quite a bit farther in this direction than I feel useful or needed.

I am reminded by your comments about a exerpt of a novel that I read: a group of religionus people in ancient Rome was complaining about religious persecution: their religion demanded that they kill and torcher any other member of a false religion and the Romans would not allow them to practice their religion. Ok, true, the Catholic church is mostly a positive force and this example is mostly a negitive one. But a dictatorship would supress other religions, and if needed, would use force. And for that matter, the inquisition was a Catholic version of the above. And not all modern Catholics regret that it happened.

Sean

-- Sean Cleary (seanearlyaug@hotmail.com), November 10, 2004.


eugene you are a complete idiot if you don't realize that our country is going to hell...

-- anti-bushhhh (hahahaha@hahahaha.com), November 10, 2004.

Fine. Now you're also invited to the Bush Bar-B-Q. Do you know any history? The wise-guys of their day considered Abraham Lincoln nothing but an idiot. He was called a baboon and a monster in the press. YOU would certainly have gone along with the Lincoln- bashers. I know who's likely to be in hell. It's not this country; it's sinners who will not repent. Even an idiot can repent. Look in a mirror today; and ask yourself: am I an unrepentent sinner? Worry for your immortal soul first, then squawk.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 10, 2004.

Dear Sean Cleary:
You are an interesting contributor. One or two of your observations seem intelligent. But you still make blanket statements that make me wonder what's affecting you.

''Dictatorships over time tend to be oppressive. --Dictatorships tend to restrict peoples liberties to an uncomfortable degree.'' These are at bottom non sequiturs. We have NO dictatorship in our country. Why you chose to suggest this will be a dictatorship, for some unknown reason, I wonder. This much is certain; nobody in our forum is promoting dictatorships. Nor is the Patriot Act something dictatorial or ''treasonous''. It was made law by both our parties in Congress. They represent the people.

I also dispute a notion that the Church is ''not wanted'' because she is a political power. ''. . . it is not wanted as a political power because it got oppressive (Mexico, Poland).'' That's balderdash, Mr. Cleary. In Mexico that Church suffered persecution. In Poland, priests and nuns were exterminated by oppressive dictators. Not the other way around. In Ireland, Catholics have also paid dearly for our faith; overpowered by an advanced parliamentary government which calls Irishmen Pigs. Should I go on?

America cannot turn into a dictatorship as a result of religion. The only power our Church wields here is power over our consciences. Countries without conscience have always become rich. We have that kind of country here today compared to MORE Catholic ones, like Poland, Mexico etc., We practically exterminated the indian and took control of all his territories. Somehow, conscience made no difference back thn. (Now every Liberal believes in diversity.) But Mexico, for all its corruption and poverty, didn't wipe out the Indian. Spanish Catholics exploited the Indians, but also converted them to Christ. There was no genocidal drive in South America after the initial conquest. No racism as we know it in protestant countries. Because of religion & the Church, teaching them that Indians have souls created in the image of God.

Have some had dictators? We suppose so. I could argue that Ireland has lived under one. If you think the Patriot Act is unfair, you ought to look at Ireland. English law was far from democratic there; ''to an uncomfortable degree'' for the Irish. Mexico might be corrupt, but it's democratic. It's Catholic, too. More than we are.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 10, 2004.


Could someone please answer my original question? Thanks:)

-- Jason (Enchantedfire5@yahoo.com), November 10, 2004.

Don't hold the priest's private political views against him. They do not touch on the faith. You mention an unorthodox view on the government and abortion. But judging from what you tell us, it's pure hearsay. Unless you hear him express it, it means nothing. Sometimes people don't understand everything; you should reserve any opinion.

First observe and listen to his words yourself. He may be a great priest despite his political persuasion. Pray for him.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 10, 2004.


Jason,

I do feel for someone whose thread has been hijacked so. But as stated above, I can not answer you in this arena. May you get an answer that helps your pain.

eugene,

I was replying to Paul. See the subthread of his and my discussions. He did mention a dictatiorship. I was replying to that. Of course he was replying to my rant.

"in mexico the church suffered perscution" wow! at the hands of the Catholic majority?? when and where and why? we may be talking about the same events.

"America cannot turn into a dictatorship as a result of religion." Actually those familiar with Robert Heinlien's works know a 'prediction' that it will. Not that he got the crazy years right in every detail, he was more of a storyteller. But yes, it can happen here. Just eliminate the church/state distance. And that was put into the constitution by people oppressed by the church/state of England, amoung others.

The end result of a long enough time of voting could be that we slowly vote our liberties to their death. Yes, the people will give up liberties for something. And if that something just fades away, they will give up more to get it.

As to non-sequetor, it did follow the subthread.

Ireland under the English was an occupied country. They still resent it.

-- Sean Cleary (seanearlyaug@hotmail.com), November 10, 2004.


Daer Sean:

It's public, common knowledge the Catholic Church was persecuted in the 1920's all over Mexico. Priests were hunted, mutilated and killed. Not just a few- - EVERY priest in the country who didn't hide like an animal. It was a crime to harbor a Catholic priest. This was an atheistic government which did it; not the common people. Surely an entire era hasn't escaped your notice?

You may be interested in a fine movie made in the 40's starring Henry Fonda. Titled The Fugitive, it's a well-known classic dealing with that evil period during the Mexican revolution. I'm sure you can find it in a movie rental shop.

-- eugene c. chavez (loschavez@pacbell.net), November 10, 2004.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ