Posted on 06/13/2008 6:38:38 AM PDT by camerakid400
George W Bush and Pope Benedict XVI have held an intimate meeting in Rome as rumours mounted in Italy that the president may follow in Tony Blair's footsteps and convert to Catholicism.
The two men spoke for half an hour in the 12th century Tower of St John, a private area in the Vatican gardens which is used by the pope for private reflection.
The usual protocol for heads-of-state is a meeting in the pope's library in the Apostolic Palace, but a spokesman for the Vatican said Benedict wanted to reward Mr Bush for the "warmth" of his reception at the White House earlier this year.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
Yes you are and you have not succeeded.
However, as I wrote in my last post - let us agree to disagree.
Bye!
What’s your point?
Hey - thanks for coming out and helping make the convention possible.
There are about 15 Catholic Church’s closer to the WH than the Shrine.
You’re welcome. It was a most exciting week!
“’I'm not trying to persuade you one way or the other of anything.’
“Yes you are and you have not succeeded.”
Gee, thanks for telling me what I'm thinking! I wouldn't have known without your help.
Seriously, your posts misrepresented Catholic teaching; I just wanted to set the record straight.
There are any number of misunderstandings presented in your post, including:
o that annulments take a lot of money (they cost far less than most civil divorces - in my own archdiocese, usually around four or five hundred dollars)
o that you can only get an annulment if you have a lot of money or pull (also not true, I know a fair number of regular folks who have received declarations of nullity)
o that children would be made illegitimate by annulment (also another falsehood, as legitimacy is a function of civil law)
o that annulment is a way out of a bad marriage (no, sorry, if you have a bad marriage, but were validly married, you're out of luck - I know folks in that very situation)
o that if one has a "good marriage" but finds it invalid, that one must "cast aside" one's spouse - in fact, if there were impediments to the marriage that have been overcome, the marriage can be readily made valid.
None of these assertions is true, and I merely posted the facts about them. You may still, if you wish, think poorly of the process, or believe it's hypocrisy.
You're entitled to your own opinion.
But you're not entitled to your own “facts.”
In any event, persuading you of the goodness of the process was beyond my goals. I never had much thought that you might be persuaded. But others read these posts, and I didn't want them to take as true the falsehoods that you posted.
Just making sure that the truth was posted about the process is sufficient for me.
sitetest
Well, it’s short hand for protestant. I’ve never heard the term ‘catholic.’ I think ‘pap’ works better as in ‘papist.’ But I’m not really aware of a monosylabic reference for Catholics.
Churchillspirit has done just that.
Ok, I will just have to take your word for that as I have never heard that word used in the manner.
But I’m not really aware of a monosylabic reference for Catholics.
Unless it is the word, "iconic", I don't know of one either.
P.S. great and touching article on Ann Coulter's dad, although the article did not mention that she was raised a prot.
That doesn't work, at least according to Webster, which does contain a definition of prot as shorthand for Protestant.
“P.S. great and touching article on Ann Coulter’s dad, although the article did not mention that she was raised a prot.”
Here is the money quote:
“Even in foreign countries where none of us spoke the language, Father went to Mass every Sunday until the very end.”
If Ms. Coulter were being raised as a Catholic, she might have said:
“Even in foreign countries where none of us spoke the language, Father took us all to Mass every Sunday.”
or
“Even in foreign countries where none of us spoke the language, we went to Mass with Father every Sunday.”
or even
“Even in foreign countries where none of us spoke the language, Father insisted on Mass every Sunday.”
But the construction actually used by Ms. Coulter says that her father attended Mass. And does not even suggest that anyone else went along with him.
A devout Catholic insists on the attendance at Mass of his Catholic children every Sunday, in that Sunday Mass is a grave obligation on every baptized Catholic, and parents are gravely obligated to assure the attendance thereof of their minor children.
sitetest
Dear sitetest: I think you are reaching.
They sure do, even to the point that one can't hear the Mass for the children crying out loud in church, banging their toys on the pews or loudly munching on the snacks that their "devout" parents have brought in little baggies for them to eat. Or at least they do in my inlaw's Catholic Church that we attend when we are in Memphis.
“I think you are reaching.”
I don't think so. Not by a good bit.
It's clear that it is her father who went to Mass, not any of the rest of the family. Nothing to even hint that she or any of the rest of her family went with him. Remember, too, that her mother was strongly anti-Catholic, as reported in the article, thus making it less likely that the children were raised Catholic.
“They sure do, even to the point that one can't hear the Mass for the children crying out loud in church, banging their toys on the pews or loudly munching on the snacks that their ‘devout’ parents have brought in little baggies for them to eat. Or at least they do in my inlaw’s Catholic Church that we attend when we are in Memphis.”
While one hopes that parents will manage to evoke appropriate behavior from their children while at Mass, or at least, retire to the crying room, it delights me to hear that in your in-law’s parish in Memphis, there appear to be young Catholic families with young children attending Mass.
Although, I will point out that the obligation for assisting at Mass does not apply to very young children.
sitetest
Yes you are..........
“Am not.”
“Are, too.”
“Am not.”
“Are, too!”
“AM NOT!”
“ARE, TOO!!”
LOL.
sitetest
LOL!
At my inlaws Church in Memphis, I see parents bringing infants in strollers into the Sanctuary. LOL, love the Sunday when just as the usher was walking by, a nursing mom had her two year old pull the towel off of her shoulder. The look on the man's face was priceless.
Extremely young children in church remind me of my favorite bulletin blooper. "For those of you who have children and don't know it, the church has a nursery next to fellowship hall.
A child isn't obligated to Mass attendance until, I think, about 7, but Catholic sensibility encourages Mass attendance even of babies. Some of my very earliest memories are of being at Mass at a tender age (3? 4? Not more than that). We WERE expected to behave, and were disciplined sharply for failure to do so. As your experiences suggest, there are folks who don't do as good a job of maintaining decorum as others. However, my own experience is that really bad examples of this are more the exception than the rule. When I go to Mass, there are always a number of babies, toddlers, and small children in attendance.
My wife and I took our children to Mass from the first Sunday after they were born. We usually sat in the back of the church, so that we could dart out the door in case they became unruly. But they seldom did. Our older son almost always slept through Mass. Our younger son didn't, but he was easily amused.
As I said, folks should take some care that their children don't become major disturbances, but frankly, I'm always heartened by a little bit of a baby's crying or laughing or fussing or carrying on.
The idea of sending the children out to a nursery isn't part of the Catholic sensibility. Mass is a family thing. Mass is a "we" thing, as in "What Mass shall WE go to today? The 9 am or the 10:30?" Or, "If we want to take that day-trip on Sunday, when will WE get to Mass?" Or, "Dad, are WE going to go to Mass while we're on vacation?" (Which, in my house, was answered the one time it was asked with, "Of course WE are. Would you like it if God took a vacation from His care and love for you?")
In Catholic families, if everyone isn't usually going to Mass, something is going on, and it's not generally positive from the perspective of a devout Catholic.
Perhaps, in the case of mixed marriages, the children are not being raised Catholic. Perhaps the children were formally baptized Catholic, but the obstruction of an anti-Catholic spouse makes it burdensome for the Catholic spouse to fulfill the requirements of a Catholic upbringing. Perhaps the children in adolescence rebel strongly against Mass attendance. This is more pronounced in mixed marriages where the non-Catholic spouse is not only not Catholic but fairly strongly opposed to Catholicism.
Our parish has a crying room, which will muffle the sounds of unruly children, but not entirely eliminate them. Most folks don't use the crying room, though. We don't have a nursery.
sitetest
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.