Posted on 05/06/2009 8:47:15 AM PDT by presidio9
The Senate voted 65-31 to confirm Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius as President Obama's Secretary of Health and Human Services. Just last week Sebelius again denied protection to the unborn when she vetoed a bill that would provide increased regulations on performing late term abortions.
Nineteen Catholic Senators supported the Sebelius nomination and six Catholic Senators opposed. Two Catholic senators who are ardently pro-life supported the governor; Senator Sam Brownback and Senator George Voinovich. Senator Brownback announced his support early on which was a surprise and a major disappointment to many in the pro-life movement.
Senator Murkowski, who has a mixed voting record on life issues, voted against Sebelius.
Senator Casey who campaigned in 2006 as pro-life has a voting record on life issues that fluctuates. In January he was publicly admonished by his local ordinary, Bishop Martino, for an anti-life vote opposing an amendment to reinstate the Mexico Policy. In a letter thanking the Senator for his support of a subsequent life issue vote, Bishop Martino called on Senator Casey to oppose Sebelius as HHS Secretary. Senator Casey did not heed the request of his local Ordinary. In a statement released by the Scranton Diocese regarding Sen. Casey's vote, Bishop Martino said he was "deeply disappointed." It went on to say that the Bishop would continue to monitor Senator Casey's positions and "if necessary future determinations will be made regarding whether Sen. Casey is worthy to receive Holy Communion. However, at this point Bishop Martino believes it is incumbent upon Sen. Casey to reflect on his actions and ask himself if he should receive the sacrament."
Sebelius' confirmation hearing had been stalled due to a report that she was not forthcoming on her relationship with late term abortionist Dr. George Tiller. The AP revealed that Governor Sebelius underreported the campaign money she had received from the abortionist and the pro-life organization Operation Rescue released a document showing Dr. Tiller contributed $200,000 to defeat Kathleen Sebelius’ challenger in the 2002 Kansas gubernatorial race.
A strong effort by the pro-life community and conservative family groups to defeat the nomination was met by an equally strong effort on behalf of abortion rights groups. NARAL claimed responsibility for 22,000 messages to senators.
Gov. Sebelius' local Ordinary, Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City, concerned about another high profile pro-abortion rights Catholic, made the following comments in an interview with Our Sunday Visitor when her nomination was first announced:
"...I think from the church’s point of view, it’s sad because it places another high-profile, pro-abortion Catholic into national leadership along with Vice President (Joe) Biden and Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi and a raft of others that are in the Congress. And so I think it makes our job as bishops more challenging, because we have to be even more clear that this is not acceptable for a person in public service to say that they are Catholic and then to support these policies that are anti-life, you know go against the most fundamental of all human rights, the preservation of innocent life."
Fr. Euteneuer, President of HLI made the following statment on the Sebelius nomination and Senator Brownback's decision to support her:
"The situation is atrocious. An extremist abortion hack (called the most pro-abortion governor in the nation by many), who falsely calls herself "Catholic," is given the opportunity to preside over the nation's healthcare system and normalize abortion even further; this radical is then endorsed by a US senator who also calls himself "Catholic" and who, many believe, wants her job back home when she becomes the abortion queen in DC."
As Secretary of Health and Human Services, Sebelius will no doubt advance abortion rights, and affect policy on conscience protection, embryonic stem cell research and end of life decisions.
To view the list of Senators and how they voted, including how the Catholic Senators voted go to OneNationUnderGod.org
Nope. The keys of the Kingdom were given to Simon Peter, Pope Peter I, at Christ's founding of the Catholic Church.
Very interesting protracted response for someone who made himself a rule to never gets into discussions about theology on this website. Your answer is itself a discussion. However, I understand your interest in cutting this off and respect your wishes. I don’t want to engage folks who have no interest in visiting over a matter.
That does leave me a little puzzled about the questions and comments you make, however. Not sure if you just wanted to smack me (...”I’d call it rude, and...”) and run or if you really wanted to discuss this matter.
Irrespective of your response to this dilemma, I will leave you with this...your numbered responses contain a series of misunderstandings about the remarks I made and a number of internal contradictions. Should you change your mind, or perhaps I should say, if God grants you an opportunity to revisit these matters, let me know. Until then, Grace be with you.
Sorry if that's the way your read it. You posted to a litany of incorrect statements concerning my Church, leaving my no choice but to correct the matter as briefly as possible. God has granted me a greater opportunity than most to visit these matters on a scale most are not lucky enough to achieve. I was schooled by the Jesuits through college. From your postings, its not clear to me how much you know about Church history, but if you know a bit, you'll know what that means. I have no interest in "smacking you" and running, as you say. The fact is that I have studied the matter as you have, and I have come to a different conclusion. But unlike you, I respect your conclusion, and don't doubt that it may be the right choice for you. because I'm a Catholic. That's the way we are taught to think. I think your interpretation is wrong, but I don't think your salvation is riding on my getting you to see the Light. You seem to be doing just fine with out me. So (forgive me if I am repeating myself, but I am dealing with 3-4 guys like you who posted similar things to me), I wish you the best but your sentiments and this discussion have no place on this thread. That's what I meant before. Sorry if you misinterpreted. A lot of protestant sects see proselytizing as part of their faith, and I respect that, but there's a time and a place for everything.
You have a very peculiar discussion style: I don’t wish to talk, but now that I am talking, you are totally wrong. But, don’t answer because I am well trained in you being wrong. However, I am much more understanding than you because I am Catholic and that makes me right, but you are welcome being wrong.
Sometime, re read your posts. There is little light, much smoke.
And, your salvation is riding on you being correct. But, that correctness will be guided by Christ, not you, not your group. Grace.
Actually, you are the one who needs to re-read my posts. My point was (and remains) that there is no place for a discussion of theological differnces between religious denominiations on a thead about so-called Catholic senators voting for a professed “Catholic” nominee who fights against a core belief of the Catholic faith. There is more than enough to discuss there.
Nevertheless, you posted directly to me a long attack on the Catholic faith. Again, you posted it directly to me. I answered that attack briefly, and indicated that this was neither the time nor the place for that discussion. And I am not having that discussion. You made your points (which you believe in). I gave you the Catholic responses. I never indicated that you have no idea what you are talking about. What I said was that your understanding of the Catholic position is very limited. I know more than you about Catholic theology. There is no reason why you should feel threatened by that statement. I’m sure you know more about the doctrine of your own denomination, and that doesn’t bother me in the slightest.
Again: There is nothing wrong with you wanting to profess and even debate the merits of your own faith against another. But trying to hijack a thread that doesn’t really pertain to that subject is just plain rude.
And since you brought it up, my salvation not only isn’t relying on your personal brand of faith (which is of course inferior to me), it isn’t even really relying on my own Catholicism to the extent that you seem to believe. Catholicism is only the easiest way to get into Heaven. And even then it is very difficult.
Wow.
I agree. It IS pretty cool.
You are under a great deception.
This verse keeps coming to mind as I read what you say:
And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
You have the best of intentions, but you make the worst choices.
The Old and New Testaments, is the verbally inspired Word of God, without error in the original writings. It is the complete revelation of His will, and the final authority for life and faith for all men. The Bible is the inerrant, infallible, and inspired Word of God. No written word of man is needed to add to it, clarify it, change it.
When you say,
"Catholicism is only the easiest way to get into Heaven. And even then it is very difficult"
you contradict the essence and clear purpose of the entire Book. You've abandoned the scarlet thread that starts with "bruise his heel" and goes to "Even so, come, Lord Jesus." An you've abandoned it in favor of your own carved image of a God who expects YOU make a covenant with HIM. You won't find peace with God on that path.
That church of yours has perverted God's Word and I pray that the scales will fall from your eyes and the Truth will be revealed to you before your house crumbles around you.
Thanks for taking an interest in me well-being. Your going to have to trust me on the fact that a Catholic’s relationship with God is his and his alone. All other aspects of the faith are secondary. The fact that obviously haven’t troubled yourself enough to learn even that much forces me to reject anything else you might have to offer. If you think that means I’m going to Hell, I promise you I won’t have trouble sleeping.
Reading your posts and reading your views of God’s plan of salvation, your faith, and your church – is just like watching a “Fail” video. I see what’s going to happen but no amount of calling out to the soon-to-suffer main character has any impact whatsoever. Just before the disaster strikes, the main character shouts, “Hey! Watch this! It’s ‘COOL!’”
Nothing on earth will stop the upcoming crash. I know it, and anyone with an ounce of discernment knows what is inevitable.
It’s sad to see such good intentions bring a person to such a disastrous end.
“O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified? This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? Have you suffered so many things in vain—if indeed it was in vain?”
“For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."
“However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.”
I remember well when the Priest prohibited the catechism teacher from using the Bible in class. His explanation: "The laity is not adept at God's Word and it is too dangerous for the students." I knew at that moment that in order to control the people the RCC had to keep God's Word out of their lives.
The RCC tactic is that three short readings a week is enough to give the appearance of adherence to "All scripture is given...and profitable..." but church doctrine (in your case Council of Trent, Cannons 11, 12 et al.) is what's needed to keep the congregation mesmerized and - indeed adamant defenders of the "faith."
I know: you’ve “made a rule…” but then you promptly broke it – so the door is open – right here, right now.
Carving your own image of who God is, His plan of salvation, and depending on your own imagination for your eternity: not cool.
Listen: I’ve already told you that I’m not interested in trading emails with you. Now let me be quite clear about the fact that you should be investing your time posting to religious forums, where you might find someone who cares to hear what you have to say.
You are frequently incoherent. You make things up to help your arguemts. You provide mysterious links that don’t work, and about which you offer no explaination. You are ignorant on many of the subjects of which you speak. I am convinced that you are suffering from a mental illnes, and I don’t say that as an insult to you.
I have read the NT front to back and back to front. I know what it says. You accuse Catholics of “carving our own image of who God is, His plan of salvation,” but you’re too blind to understand how hypocritical that thougt is: Someone, somewhere (whether you care to admit it or not) has created or helped create your own understanding. This is not open to debate.
Now, you keep posting lies to me, and I will keep posting the truth. You started it, so I get to finish it. That’s how polite discourse works. In any event, on this subject you are not about to convince me of anything ever. I would go to the lions for my belief. So, if you must post, take my name out of to box and post to yourself or God or whoever. Just not me. Capiche? Go nots. I’m sure you’re good at it.
OKAY!
WOW! I'm shocked! She,Kay Baily and their twin sisters from Maine have been voting for all things abortion.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.