Posted on 07/23/2008 2:47:21 PM PDT by Pyro7480
When Gov. Alfred E. Smith ran for president in 1928, his candidacy was derailed in large part by anti-Catholic prejudice. It has been nearly 48 years since John F. Kennedy became the first (and so far only) Roman Catholic president, but experts say that anti-Catholic sentiment — much of it originating in, or as a response to, immigrants in New York — remains an enduring force in American culture.
That was the consensus of a panel assembled at the Museum of the City of New York on Tuesday night to consider the question, “Is Anti-Catholicism Dead?”
...The Rev. Richard John Neuhaus — a leading conservative intellectual, a former Lutheran pastor and the editor of the leading Catholic journal First Things — offered a surprising view on the question.
“To be a Catholic is not to be refused positions of influence in our society,” he said. “Indeed, one of the most acceptable things is to be a bad Catholic, and in the view of many people, the only good Catholic is a bad Catholic.”
...He added that anti-Catholicism was as likely to come from the left — sometimes from commentators who believe that a “threatening theological insurgency is engineered and directed by Catholics,” with evangelical Protestants merely as the movement’s “foot soldiers.”
(Excerpt) Read more at cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com ...
They’re joking right? As far as I can tell it’s alive and well and being fed.
Aw shucks!
What is funny about that is Catholics have no problem telling Protestants they are going to hell because they don't belong to 'The Church', but when Protestants say something about what is wrong with the Catholic beliefs, they are horrible anti-Catholic bigots.
We can put that behind us now. RM gave me a very fair hearing.
Yep, I even took a shower!
I will second that.....I am so glad that Petronski is back...
It’s not Catholicism per se that’s hated by the Beautiful People, it’s any religion with a non-negotiable moral code.
Perhaps I should say, any religion with a non-negotiable moral code that does not enforce it’s writ with violence.
Violence wins plenty of respect from the Left.
BTW I met Father Neuhaus years ago when he was Reverend Neuhaus. My Theology professor at Fordham arranged for a group of us to interview him about the Lutheran liturgy for our class in comparative Christian Liturgy. Much younger then, you were still impressed with his intelligence, holiness, and faith, as well as his easy manner. He was a liberal then, giving sanctuary to two draft dodgers in his church.
Rats! I would have gone if I knew about it. I learned about the exhibit from the Society of St. Hugh of Cluny blog.
You said: Catholics have no problem telling Protestants they are going to hell because they don’t belong to ‘The Church’
Um. Wrong. Catholics in particular do not judge the eternal destination of anybody, Catholic or non-Catholic. There is not one person who has ever lived that the Catholic Church (or practicing Catholics) states is in hell or destined for hell. Catholic belief is that only God can judge.
Now I do not doubt that you can find some Catholics who would make a pronouncement like that, but they would be wrong. Just like the time when my kids were going trick or treating on Halloween many moons ago and a Baptist family down the street told them they were going to hell because they were Catholics.
Any good Catholic knows that decision is WAY above our pay grade.
About the only place you'll see that sort of pronouncement made is in something like Sister Mary Ignatius Explains It All for You, which is a Broadway secular anti-(ex-)Catholic's idea of an old-fashioned yardstick-wielding teaching sister.
So Catholics believe non-Catholics can be saved without the sacraments????
After all, divide and conquer and all that.
Sometimes I wonder if some of the really enthusiastic haters on this board aren't agents provocateurs from somewhere like DU (and I don't mean Ducks Unlimited! :o) )
I am going to the county fair right now, but I will find one over the next day. I am certain I can find many who stated we can't be saved, so maybe the hell part was only implied.
Not without Baptism -- but there's Baptism of Blood and even Baptism of Desire as well as the ordinary Baptism by water and the Holy Ghost.
So there is always the possibility of salvation. God has the power to reach out and save anyone, anywhere, as long as they truly desire it.
But we believe the safest and surest way is with the benefit of all the Sacraments of the Church -- especially that of Reconciliation (Confession).
And even if you do find a poster who said that, they are wrong and in conflict with the teaching of the Church.
Clearly the NYT is carrying out its mandate to propagandize "balance" for the good of its constituency.
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.