Replies

He argued that for example, a woman sues the Church to be a priest saying it is her right. She gets five justices to agree that it is a right. The Church cannot argue legally from a sacramental standpoint, because Roe v. Wade changed the argument from institutional and community to individual rights, as such the Church must argue on the basis of rights, and here has no argument. The Five justices decree women's ordination, the result is two churches. One a state sponsored Catholic Church and the other an underground Catholic Church. His actual timeframe was ten years.

This is a bit hysterical. I'm sure George is hacked over the California decision, where Catholic Charities must offer insurance for contraception.

If the Church continues to crawl into bed with the federal government (read: vouchers, Faith-based initiatives), and takes government money then it will have to do what the government tells it to do.

If the Church continues to crawl into bed with the federal government (read: vouchers, Faith-based initiatives), and takes government money then it will have to do what the government tells it to do.

You have a point... but... there is this thought, "government money" is the taxpayer's money, including the Catholic taxpayer. The services provided by Catholic Charities are not limited to Catholic recepients; in fact the religious affiliation of the recipient is irrelevant. Evangelization of the recipients is branded "proselytizing" and it is a big PC "no-no."

The court has no right to impose immorality on a Catholic institution and the local Bishop should scream "FIRE!" right away. If the Bishops begin to pact tenderly with the devil they will lose big time and the whole US Church will lose big time.

The strings attached to the Catholic Charities subsidies should never compromise the faith. "You cannot serve both God and money."

If the Church continues to crawl into bed with the federal government (read: vouchers, Faith-based initiatives), and takes government money then it will have to do what the government tells it to do.

Bingo. Dancing with the devil.

The Church ought to stay far away from "Faith Based Initiatives".

If the Church continues to crawl into bed with the federal government (read: vouchers, Faith-based initiatives), and takes government money then it will have to do what the government tells it to do.

Excellent point! Precisely correct. The decision in California was actually a good one because so-called Catholic Charities admitted in court that they did not meet the legal requirements of a religious organization. The Catholic Church will destroy the last remaining tiny vestiges of credibility it still possesses when it follows the advice of idiots like Deal Hudson and gets in bed with Republican party charity programs.

"This is a bit hysterical. I'm sure George is hacked over the California decision, where Catholic Charities must offer insurance for contraception."

What an outrage that decision was!

"If the Church continues to crawl into bed with the federal government (read: vouchers, Faith-based initiatives), and takes government money then it will have to do what the government tells it to do."

Malarkey. The Catholic Church only has to do that if liberal activist Judges mis-interpret the law and force secular values on groups that should be free to choose. Government does what Governmental officers tell it too. WE THE PEOPLE need to wake up and smell the coffee, and fix it so Government stops abusing the relationship. Give the charities more freedom. The private institutions dont have to accept anything from the Government, and STILL the secularists will drive them to redefine themselves and obey rules that they disagree with. If you doubt it, go look at how insidious the Federal Government Title IX and other rules are applied to *private* Colleges. It's draconian - it's wrong!

That California decision was a travesty, and you should pin the blame on the liberal activist judges where it belongs, not on the fine charitable organizations that do what they can to stretch their money to do good.

BTW, it is totally ABSURD to talk about religious health care organizations withdrawing from Governmental 'support' when the majority of healthcare dollars are spent via our semi-socialized health care system. Dont doubt for a minute that if charitable catholic organizations withdrew, the problem would get worse and 'more Govt spending' would be demanded by the socialists.

Both vouchers and faith-based initiatives are GOOD THINGS. They deflate the LIE that we have to descriminate against social service organizations that happen to have a religious basis. We dont. We shouldnt. A religious school serves a public JUST AS WELL IF NOT BETTER than a secular school. So it has every right to be funded for the public purpose. In fact, no religion should be harrassed into doing something against its moral viewpoint just because they are providing socially useful services. The PROBLEM is the excessive regulation (and the secularist moral agenda trying to undermine religious groups), not the participation by the religious organizations.

This hits home because in our city the city council pro-aborts are trying to make the Catholic hospital do abortions in exchange for 'getting' the city contract to manage the city hospital.
But wait, the Catholic hospital saved the city from disaster by taking over this city hospital that was grossly mismanaged and had lost tens of millions! the city went to them! The city knew the rules and what the Catholic hospital just will not do, and after the fact tries to twist arms and change it. They are immoral thugs if you ask me. The Catholic hospital is sticking to its consistent and moral position.

If you think the answer is for Christian groups to run away or hide under the covers, you really dont have a clue.
To buy into your argument is to *invite* the kind of harrassment that secularists unfairly use to drive a wedge to banish religious views from the public square
and to undermine morality. I am sure the secularists just love to have you on the 'other side' playing right into their hands on the issues!

Cardinal George is not being hysterical; if you understand the fervour and zeal of convinced secular transnational progressivists, you will understand that theirs is a crusade aimed at stamping out all opposition, if not to a one-world government, then governments worldwide under the secular progressivist principle.

The Catholic Church is the only body which can claim the same sort of worldwide reach and loyalty as the secular. For that reason, they will spare no effort to destroy it.

And if they think splitting the Catholic Church into state-run churches will do the job, they will.

They'll appeal to the patriotism of conservatives such as yourself to lure people into an American Patriotic Catholic Church, even as they appeal to the liberals with promises of easy morality and government money.

What he says is perfectly consistent with the purpose positivism of the Massachusetts decision. Sodomy is not un unnatural act, because there is no such ting as an unnatural act. The family is not a natural institution, because every social organization is simply what the state says it is.