Posted on 03/12/2007 8:14:39 PM PDT by Pyro7480
Positive Feedback from Fox Interview
Catholc ping!
I saw most of that exchange. Frankly, lately it seems like every time a priest is interviewed or reported upon, it has ended up being one with pro-sanctuary, semi-socialist leanings. This time was quite different. Fr. Euteneuer is right. Sean is a patriot and espouses conservative ideals, but not Catholic ones. Someone needs to tell Sean that the cafeteria is closed.
hey thanks for post #2! (in addition to this one) Very informative.
He may have gone to seminary but, if that is the case, his seminary background and knowledge of Latin (!) gives him a greater responsibility to get it right when he wants to spout off about Church teaching in the public forum.
I think Sean knows that he is not Catholic. His "I forgot it was Friday" story was a bit of coy mockery. If he was actually Catholic and actually forgot, he would know it is no big deal and not worth mentioning.
You tell 'em Padre! God Bless Fr. Euteneuer!
I would venture to say that Hannity's vociferous promotion of torture is not Catholic or even American either. He's only entertaining if one likes to listen to a rhetorical bully, but as for leadership, religious or political, he should be put on permanent ignore.
I agree. I have a lot of respect for Hannity and his Conservative ideals. He is a good spokesman for the Conservative movement. However (there is always a "however"!!), he was WAY out of line in his attacks on that Priest. I watched the video of their exchange, and I could not believe what I was hearing. The nasty things that Hannity said are more commonly heard from the mouths of San Francisco liberals.
On top of it all, not only was he wrong about Church teaching on birth control, and dissenting about it in public (which is technically called heresy), but then he started crowing about how he had attended a Seminary at some point in the past (apparently to make himself look like some sort of expert). Unbelievable.
He needs to check his ego at the door, eat some humble pie, and issue an apology. We have enough trouble with this sort of stuff coming from the left, and we don't need from within our OWN camp!! If he disagrees with a certain church teaching, there are civilized methods by which such things may be discussed without resorting to dissent. Full frontal attacks on a priest who is accurately describing church teachings is not the way to go about it. As much as it pains me to say it, that Priest was on-target when he said that he would deny Holy Communion Hannity.
I find it odd that an ordained Priest would choose to chastise Hannity in public prior to, say, Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, Giuliani, etc., etc. From a purely Catholic perspective, Sean and Kerry are in the same pile, though.
Fr. Euteneuer has criticized the pro-abortion Dems in public plenty of times.
Don't worry, he's told Pelosi the truth, too (Copied from this website; dated June, 2004):
Dear Congresswoman Pelosi,
Thank you for clarifying for all U.S. Catholics the meaning of the word "apostasy." Your May 10 letter to Cardinal McCarrick qualifies for what the Catechism of the Catholic Church defines as the "total repudiation of the Christian faith" (§2089). That, by the way, is a document you may wish to consult before writing another letter to a prince of Christ's Church.
Not only did your letter manifest an utterly infantile understanding of the Catholic Faith-the Blessed Sacrament is properly called the Eucharist, not the "sacrament of holy communion," please-it was intellectually dishonest in the extreme. Your lip service paid to the teaching office of the bishops while knifing their authority in the back is a treachery that deserves the scathing contempt of every honest person, Catholic or otherwise.
You have lost your faith. Just admit it. One either accepts the hierarchy of truths and the hierarchy of authority, or she doesn't. You obviously don't. In such case by continuing to call yourself Catholic you are gambling with the most precious of all birthrights, your own soul; and it's yours to lose. I can understand that it is not politically correct to care about your immortal soul-prescription drug benefits are more popular in Washington-but at least have the decency not to make the souls of others "twice as fit for hell" as you. Have you forgotten about the millstone? The Lord delivered that image to another group of sophisticated public officials who scandalized the weak in faith.
All those who dare call themselves Catholic while shamelessly advocating the death of Christ's "least brethren" will not have the Supreme Court to appeal to on the Day of Judgment. There is a Supreme Judge that you should be more concerned about. However, He obliges no one to remain in the Catholic Church. Membership is, above all, a free "choice." The door of the Church that opens wide to welcome every repentant sinner swings both ways. In the Name of Jesus, use it and spare the rest of us your perversity.
I hold out hope that some day you will see the light and want to reconcile with the Church you have so brazenly betrayed. If so, call me. I will hear your confession. But get ready to do some serious penance.
And he has a sense of humor too. =)
Cool. I have a lot of respect for linear Catholics.
You have to wonder about anyone who can claim to be friends with Alan Colmes.
&&
One of the reasons I stopped listening to Hannity is that everyone is his "good friend", including clintonistas like Lanny Davis and Leon Pannetta. I realize that a talk show host has to be polite to the opposition, but calling such jerks his good friends is disgusting pandering.
What a bizarre comment.
The Catholic Church doesn't really care about his "patriotism" or his "conservatism", but about his Catholicism. I believe that's what's at issue here.
If religious denominational litmus tests are to be required of one to be considered both patriotic and conservative in the USA, or the Republican party, then we have no freedom of and for religion in this nation.
A further bizarre comment.
Last time I checked, "freedom of religion" was intended to protect religious belief and expression from the government. It wasn't intended to censor the public rebuke, by a clergyman, of a member of his own denomination. In fact, it wasn't intended to censor a public rebuke by a clergyman, period.
then perhaps I should reevaluate my thoughts on the position of Catholicism in our society.
Now this isn't bizarre. It's chilling.
**Someone needs to tell Sean that the cafeteria is closed.**
He is a CINO Catholic in Name Only, and I didn't used to think that about him. Too bad. He came out looking really dumb on this interview. Did what he accuses a lot of dimocrats of doing on his interviews. He tried tochange the subject to blaming Fr. Enterneuer for the priest abuse scandal.
| 2399 The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception). |
| 2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" is intrinsically evil:
|
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.