Posted on 10/13/2009 12:56:05 PM PDT by editor-surveyor
Liberal and conservative Catholics alike would prefer not to discuss how the Catholic Church, here and abroad, functions like a liberal/left-wing political lobby.
Some pro-life Catholics are acting shocked that the Vatican warmly greeted the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama, who is pro-abortion. They don't seem to understand that the Vatican and Obama agree on most major international issues.
This is the untold story-how Obama and the Vatican accept major ingredients of what has been called a New World Order.
Another untold story is how, despite a disagreement over abortion, the U.S. Catholic Bishops and the Obama Administration agree on major aspects of so-called health care reform.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldviewtimes.com ...
Not one of the authors of the Bible had anything to do with the apostate human corporation euphemistically known as the Roman Catholic Church. They were all dead at least 400 years when it was founded.
My point is... the Pope who is head of the Catholic church has had no condemnation of obummer, neither have most of the hierarchy of the RCC, he/they have embraced him. Very telling IMHO.
Astute observation. Thx.
well put, imho.
Right.
It only represents the old lady shoe polisher’s peculiar fantasies and opinions around the corner.
Given the observations of the Southern Baptist Convention reported by Citizen Soldier, my recollection of the joke was entirely appropriate and I was surprised no one else mentioned it. I don't really have anything against Baptists but it's a free country and people with a sense of humor are still allowed to make jokes.
“your satanic world view” is not the same as satanic nature
Not too much difference that I can see
nor was it on this thread.
You know the rules here.
Actually I did not recall that particular rule, if it indeed exists, even though I have been around here for a very long time. I do recall that after that particular thread I concluded that you were one of the very few "freepers" who are so unreasonable that is is just not worth getting into a discussion with them.
Liberal Roman Catholic social theory is what the church at Rome is. It's an oxymoron to say the papacy is conservative. The papacy is autocratic. It believes in a centralized power structure which controls all and therefore must go unchallenged.
It is the original "Big Brother."
Yes, all that reject the wide hole in the wide mind are unreasonable.
Fascist is the best word - total control!
LOL. I knew I could trust you to ignore the gist of my post and focus on the part that requires no knowledge of _CiV_ in order to frame a reply.
Given many of the Catholic responses, should it be any surprise to anyone that our Catholic friends simply ignore the truth? If the Vatican came out tomorrow and said “Fox News is bias.”, I believe our Catholic friends would be tuning to MSNBC.
Fact is, the Vatican has held a one-world view for over 500 years.
>>> A careful reading, in the context of prior Church Encyclicals and Doctrine, clearly establishes that it says exactly that. A quick scan of the document looking for an out of context quote to refute or criticize the Church is not an objective standard worth debating. <<<
Why haven’t you addressed the specific points I made about how your excerpt from _CiV_ doesn’t support your claim that the encyclical doesn’t advocate a version of globalism?
Those who have read _CiV_ with a modicum of care can see that the points I made are accurate, even trivial.
>>> The Caritas in Veritate calls upon each individual and each government to remember Christ’s First law above all others; to love thy neighbor as thyself. If anyone is surprised by this they do not understand the Church or Christ’s Gospels. <<<
Even a casual reader of _CiV_ will note that the encyclical goes much farther than merely asking us to remember that we should love our neighbor as ourselves. As usual, the devil is in the details.
For example, Section 62 discusses an “integral” approach to the migration (re: immigration) problem. It advocates policies that would not just involve “close collaboration between the migrants’ countries of origin and their countries of destination” but also “adequate international norms able to COORDINATE DIFFERENT LEGISLATIVE SYSTEMS...”
I don’t know about you, but I think that the leap from “love thy neighbor as thyself” to “adequate international norms able to coordinate different legislative systems” is quite a jump. Quite a few bridging arguments would be necessary to make such a connection, and such arguments _CiV_ does not provide. A casual reader of _CiV_ could recount many examples like this throughout the encyclical: i.e., policy recommendations that are essentially political and which are made in a global and globalist framework (albeit a globalism that’s supposed to be tamed by the efforts of groups such as a reformed UN). To reduce them all to “love thy neighbor as thyself” would be a Herculean task, and one which neither BXVI nor you attempts to carry out.
And by the way, what do you mean by “Christ’s first law”? What is your authority for this?
According to Matthew 22: 36-40, we see:
“Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
This is the first and great commandment.
And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”
The same order is present in 10 Luke. Looks to me like you’ve gotten the order mixed up. God comes first, something we should never forget.
Thanks for the kind words.
I wonder if some people are just reading editorials and fact sheets from the “proper” news sources.
INDEED.
It is very telling that you terminated your quote where you did leaving the impression that the Vatican was advocating illegal and unconditional immigration. The sentence you excepted continues:
"...with a view to safeguarding the needs and rights of individual migrants and their families, and at the same time, those of the host countries.
So to even the "casual reader" you are either wrong or are advocating for lawless (illegal) immigration.
And by the way, what do you mean by “Christ’s first law”? What is your authority for this?"
I was too cute with the phrase. I attributed the First Great Law to the Mosaic Covenant and the second to Christ. I apologize if I confused.
why are you railing against me Quix? Is this one of your broad brushes?
PROBABLY. I’ll have to check.
Still at the college. Maybe when I get home.
Probably more at the ideas you posted than anything . . . or you as a rep of some other more habitual sorts hereon.
I don’t recall.
How do you know what "it" believes? How too do you know what Catholic Social Policy is? My advice is that you do some research beyond accepting the opinions of Cliff Kincaid or the honorable Rev. Billy-Bob Rolex.
The Compendium for the Social Doctrine of the Church clearly states: "The Church does not assume responsibility for every aspect of life in society, but speaks with the competence that is hers, which is that of proclaiming Christ the Redeemer[91]: “Christ did not bequeath to the Church a mission in the political, economic or social order; the purpose he assigned to her was a religious one. But this religious mission can be the source of commitment, direction and vigour to establish and consolidate the community of men according to the law of God”. This means that the Church does not intervene in technical questions with her social doctrine, nor does she propose or establish systems or models of social organization. This is not part of the mission entrusted to her by Christ. The Church's competence comes from the Gospel: from the message that sets man free, the message proclaimed and borne witness to by the Son of God made man."
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html#The Church, the Kingdom of God and the renewal of social relations
>>> It is very telling that you terminated your quote where you did leaving the impression that the Vatican was advocating illegal and unconditional immigration. The sentence you excepted continues:
“...with a view to safeguarding the needs and rights of individual migrants and their families, and at the same time, those of the host countries.”
So to even the “casual reader” you are either wrong or are advocating for lawless (illegal) immigration. <<<
Wrong about what? For the purpose of the argument I made in my last post, it is irrelevant whether or not the Vatican advocates illegal or legal immigration, or putting an end to all immigration, or whatever. The significant point is that it is advocating anything at all as a solution to the global “migration problem.” I didn’t quote the entirety of the sentence because I didn’t want to get sidetracked from the main thrust of my argument.
Whether you agree or disagree with the particular technical solution advocated by _CiV_, think it profound or trite, or believe it to be practical or utopian is irrelevant to the issue at hand: what is germaine is the fact that _CiV_ here is “inserting the Magisterium” into an international issue that is a political hot potato, and that it is doing so in a GLOBAL and GLOBALIST way in pursuit of a GLOBALIST end. Also, it’s obvious that this insertion arguably has a distant and tenuous relationship to our Lord’s command that we love our neighbor as ourself.
I don’t think that misrepresenting my postion or attempting to change the topic are means of honestly addressing the points I’ve raised about _CiV_.
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.