As is typically the case any criticism is labelled "dislike". In this instance it is the hypocrisy of RC's that I don't appreciate.
If you wish to look at it as a narrowly-focused Catholics-only item, you may only do so until the government finds your denomination inconvenient, at which time, you’ll be the next up.
I'm well aware of this and I am also well aware that when the govt attacks my church the RCC will not come to our aid if it doesn't benefit the RCC.
“As is typically the case any criticism is labelled “dislike”. In this instance it is the hypocrisy of RC’s that I don’t appreciate”
I did not vote for Obama. My Catholic family did not vote for Obama. Most Catholics who attend daily or weekly Mass did not vote for Obama. The largest bulk of Catholic Obama voters are those who don’t regularly attend Mass & who are what we call lapsed. So where’s the hypocrisy??
I am a healthcare worker. As I said, I didn’t vote for this Marxist, but according to you, I should be compelled into assiting with abortions & having my conscience violated??
If that’s your case, then you have some strange logic.
Wow someone needs to get over the hatred of the Church for just long enough to realize that this is a fight that we all need to be concerned about, and, for once, something that we can all agree on, doctrinal differences aside.
Pretty sure freedom of religion benefits all of us, therefore, opposing any illegal government attack on your church automatically and implicitly benefits the "RCC".
And I think they know that. I know, for example, that the Catholic bishops and Catholic civil-rights organizations were very interested in the Hosanna-Tabor decision, even though the church involved was LCMS, not Catholic, and the case referenced LCMS theological principles that we don't share (the idea that a part-time catechist is a "minister," for example).
Sorry you don't see it that way when the denominational roles are reversed. I'm glad most of your Protestant brethren disagree with you, and understand the truth of Ben Franklin's barb: "We must all hang together, or we will most assuredly all hang separately."
Oh, and as far as bringing up the history of religious wars centuries ago, you might stop and think that some time has passed since then, and everyone might have had some second thoughts. As for our "second thoughts," Dignitatus Humanae (Vatican II) says:
This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.
The council further declares that the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the very dignity of the human person as this dignity is known through the revealed word of God and by reason itself.(2) This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right.
It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility-that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth However, men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom. Therefore the right to religious freedom has its foundation not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it and the exercise of this right is not to be impeded, provided that just public order be observed.
Disagree. Strongly.
Off the top of my head, I can't think of an issue which would put an evangelical/mainline Protestant denomination in the government's gun sights and not Catholicism but there might be one, I guess. However, I'd bet my next pay check that the USCCB would have something to say about it and it would not be out of self-interest.
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak out because I was Protestant.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.
First they came…" is a famous statement attributed to pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the inactivity of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group. The text of the quotation is usually presented roughly as follows: