Denver bishop to Biden: Abortion “foundational” issue
posted at 9:30 am on September 9, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
Archbishop Charles Chaput has issued a more direct response to a Catholic politician than seen in many years. Chaput takes Joe Biden to task for his strange and contradictory statements on Catholicism and abortion, and indirectly addresses Nancy Pelosi at the same time. He destroys the argument that Catholics can support abortion and calls on Catholics to understand the difference between social-justice programs and abortion:
In 2008, although NBC probably didn’t intend it, Meet the Press has become a national window on the flawed moral reasoning of some Catholic public servants.On August 24, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, describing herself as an ardent, practicing Catholic, misrepresented the overwhelming body of Catholic teaching against abortion to the show’s nationwide audience, while defending her “pro-choice” abortion views. On September 7, Sen. Joseph Biden compounded the problem to the same Meet the Press audience.
Sen. Biden is a man of distinguished public service. That doesn’t excuse poor logic or bad facts.Asked when life begins, Sen. Biden said that, “it’s a personal and private issue.” But in reality, modern biology knows exactly when human life begins: at the moment of conception. Religion has nothing to do with it. People might argue when human “personhood” begins – though that leads public policy in very dangerous directions – but no one can any longer claim that the beginning of life is a matter of religious opinion. …
Abortion is a foundational issue; it is not an issue like housing policy or the price of foreign oil. It always involves the intentional killing of an innocent life, and it is always, grievously wrong. If, as Sen. Biden said, “I’m prepared as a matter of faith [emphasis added] to accept that life begins at the moment of conception,” then he is not merely wrong about the science of new life; he also fails to defend the innocent life he already knows is there.
I’ve written about the difference between social-justice policies and abortion in Catholic doctrine at least twice now, and it’s good to see the Church making the same distinction. They need to make this explicit, because Biden and Pelosi aren’t the only members of the flock who basically bargain socialist policy stands of poverty and health care in order to “buy” their support of abortion. Abortion and explicit cooperation in abortion carry an automatic excommunication from the Church, a burden not found often in the catechism. That is why Chaput calls it “foundational”; respect for human life springs from this belief that humans are at their conception sacred.
Chaput gives faint praise to Biden’s opposition to public funding for abortion, which he has trotted out this election cycle, but that doesn’t appear consistent, either, according to the pro-life site Life News:
As recently as February, Biden voted against an amendment that would permanently prevent abortion funding at Indian health care service facilities. The amendment from Sen. David Vitter would codify a longstanding policy against funding of abortions with federal Indian Health Service (IHS) funds. …
In April 2005, Biden voted against the Mexico City Policy, which President Bush instituted to prohibit taxpayer funding of groups that promote or perform abortions overseas. He also voted for international abortion funding in July 2003.
In a May 2003 vote, Biden also voted for a pro-abortion amendment to repeal the law that prohibits performance of abortions of military base hospitals, all of which are taxpayer-funded. …
Biden voted for taxpayer-funded abortions at military base medical centers in June 2002 as well along with votes in May 1999 and June 2000.
Biden represents himself as a Catholic and a moderate. He’s neither, at least not in terms of his stands on abortion. Instead, he presents a convenient Catholic for the pro-abortion lobby, one that can help bully Catholics into silence on the issue, or worse, mislead them into thinking abortion fits within Catholic doctrine. Chaput’s conclusion hits hard on this point:
American Catholics have allowed themselves to be bullied into accepting the destruction of more than a million developing unborn children a year. Other people have imposed their “pro-choice” beliefs on American society without any remorse for decades.If we claim to be Catholic, then American Catholics, including public officials who describe themselves as Catholic, need to act accordingly. We need to put an end to Roe and the industry of permissive abortion it enables. Otherwise all of us – from senators and members of Congress, to Catholic laypeople in the pews – fail not only as believers and disciples, but also as citizens.
Catholicism is a voluntary association. No one is forced to be Catholic. If Pelosi can’t accept the foundational teachings of the Church, then she should find a church that supports abortion and stop making ridiculous rationalizations about Catholicism. Biden needs something more if he believes human life begins at conception and fails to act to protect it. It’s time for Catholics to demand that politicians who run on their faith begin to act on it as well.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 Next »
How can this be an argument for your position? It actually destroys it.
The early church was receiving revelation in its day. The early church considered these letters inspired. Revelation stopped. It was only until the middle ages did the “the church” consider tradition to be equally revealled. Read that link I poste.
shick on September 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM
“Woe to him who calls evil good and good, evil…”
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM
Oh REALLY? Including the gospels of St James and St. Thomas?
Who determined that those books were not inspired?
Show me the date when the NT was formally recognized?
FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM
Revelation comes to mind :) “And the LORD said to me, ‘Unto the seven churches of Asia write…’” (Paraphrased, no Bible on hand)
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM
Show me where the Bible says Mary ASKED (emphasis YOURS) Jesus to turn the water into wine.
fossten on September 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM
I know because I have faith. I believe Christ when He said the gates of hell would not prevail against His Church and though it has tried, often more powerfully from within than without, Christ’s word has held (as it always will). I believe He gave Peter the keys to His kingdom. I believe it is unreasonable to think that this only applied to Peter. Did Christ not care about the Church after Peter’s death? Clearly, He knew there were things to come that would need clarity, thus the reason for giving Peter the keys in the first place. While it might not be specified anywhere in Scripture, I believe it is logical that Peter would have passed on the authority given him by Jesus to another, and others because the Church is a living entity. It was born in Christ, and did not die with Peter.
If Scripture is so clear, which I think it is, but…, why are there so very many interpretations of it? Clearly people see it different ways. I believe Christ in His infinite wisdom would have forseen this and so, He gave Peter, a mere man, the authority, the keys, to correct and clarify. Clearly we still need this today, and so, based on faith and sheer logic, I am Roman Catholic.
Of course, we all have differing opinions on what is logical as well. For example, the debate over the Virgin Mary. I think it is logical that God would preserve a pure vessel to carry His Son. I think “full of grace” means that she had only grace, and therefore no sin. Full indicates complete to me. Could the Angel not have said Hail Mary strong in grace or something like that?
You think I am wrong and 2000 years of Tradition is as well. You have the right to your opinion. I think you are wrong. I always find it so hard to believe that people, good people, do not see the fullness of the Truth preserved in the Catholic Faith. It seems so obvious and logical to me. Of course, clearly from some of the comments (not yours), many don’t bother to explore the actual Teachings in exchange for dismissing the entire Church for the failings of some of its members, but anyway…
We’ll have to agree to disagree on this.
pannw on September 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM
Inspired by Christ- through the CHURCH He left with us.
FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:21 PM
LOL you’re not aware that Noah preceded Moses, who wrote the first 5 books of the Bible…
fossten on September 9, 2008 at 2:21 PM
The gospels of St Thomas and St James were written by gnostics hundreds of years later. Please.
shick on September 9, 2008 at 2:21 PM
Never mind, I missed the context of the discussion…my bad.
fossten on September 9, 2008 at 2:22 PM
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:23 PM
Sorry, Peter didn’t go to Rome, Paul did. And Peter was married. And “Peter” means “little stone” or “pebble,” not “rock.”
fossten on September 9, 2008 at 2:24 PM
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:08 PM
Have you no experience with the divine? You are the one stuck on DEAD. Find life beyond death as the Christian Bible teaches. Meanwhile, be quiet or you’ll never hear the still small voice of Jesus’ Comforter and your heart will remain hard and cold. Give yourself a break, and treat us with your silence as you attempt to find Jesus’ gospel’s spirit. “Love one another as I have loved you.” “In as much as ye have offended one of the least of these my brethren,” you’re a millstone to be tossed overboard to drown, you have done it unto Jesus.
It doesn’t take a Christian to know that you don’t disrespect a good man’s good mother.
Sadly, you have your own issues. Go with God.
maverick muse on September 9, 2008 at 2:24 PM
John 2:3-5
When the wine ran short, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.”
(And) Jesus said to her, “Woman, how does your concern affect me? My hour has not yet come.”
His mother said to the servers, “Do whatever he tells you.”
I guess Mary just brought up the wine to Jesus in passing- huh?
FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:25 PM
I never mentioned or referred to Moses here.
I SAID that all things are possible and obviously are to God.
Someone asked — feigning preposterousness — how it is we even HAVE “the Old Testament” since there as that flood, donchyaknow.
I wrote, nothing’s impossbile to God. We don’t know His methods to bring about His Bible, we only know snatches of possible happenings that are said to have occured. Maybe more miraculous things than we can now imagine occured, was my point, regardless of recorded history.
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:26 PM
I may be wrong, correct me if so, but I believe by the context R4L is with me in the belief that such divine revelations and direct contact of the HS came to an end after Revelation.
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:26 PM
Really? So the NT was already written by then- huh?
FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM
right4life,
I’m back from lunch. With the exception of Jeremiah Chapter 7 (once) and Chapter 44 (4 times in the same paragraph), where else in the bible does it refer to the queen of heaven?
As a follow up question: how many translations has the bible gone thru before it reached your hands? Just written ones of course. It’s impossible to calculate how many times it was verbally told before reaching the first author.
natesnake on September 9, 2008 at 2:27 PM
That would be correct – the final book was Revelation, written in the later-middle of the 1st century.
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:28 PM
Clarifying earlier inaccurate HTML…
FOR OTHERS TO READ ABOUT ^^ that problem, quoted:
FALSE WITNESS.
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:28 PM
Thanks for your condensension… it was a rhetorical question… interesting you got on your high horse about it.
Born and raised Methodist, theres still a Family Pew in the Hometown church…
And at this point, since you say its OK… I will judge.
As this thread amply demonstrates, using Bible quotes to beat each other over the head with, and call each other EVIL when they are practicing what THEY think God wants, does not fit the whole CONCEPT of Jesus… Yes, he threw the moneychanges out of the Temple, but he sure didn’t go around yelling and screaming at people and calling the EVIL… because of a doctrinal difference.
People of good faith can disagree, without resorting to personal epithets.
I’m more of a “my father’s house has many mansions” kinda guy… and am not arrogant enough to believe that I can know the mind of an omniscient, and omnipotent Adonai, or Yaweh, or God, or Great Spirit… (but man, I sure wish I could get that secret number… or the Gnostic secret knowledge, sure would make things easier… LOL).
But on the original purpose of this thread… I applaud ANYONE who stands tall in their beliefs (as long as those beliefs don’t hurt other people), and so even though I’m not a Catholic, I’m cheering the Bishop’s for finally calling Politicians on their Hypocrasy.
Romeo13 on September 9, 2008 at 2:30 PM
thou doth protest too much!
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:31 PM
So the NT was already compiled in the first century in the form we have now? Can you or someone else show me evidence of this first Bible and tell me exactly when the first version was agreed upon?
FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:32 PM
Oh my, you are going to be one of those.
Here read this again real slow…
You see if you are a Christian you would know that there is the trinity…
Oh, wait, he didn’t use the word write, he said inscribe…
Anyway, guys like you will parse anything. Here you have an example of Him telling Him that he will inscribe.
Or go back to Luke 24:44 and realize that he is fulfilling a prophecy that He made, that was written. He had to have His prophecy written for Him to fulfill it. Now you were supposed to go back and do a little research and find out that the prophecy’s were to be written…
The problem is you want to be spoon fed all the information, then you can pick apart what you don’t want.
Try doing a little research and you will find the answers.
This is reminiscent of last year when some goof ball tried to tear apart the bible about cloven hoofs…he was pathetic because of the lack of basic understanding.
Here is my suggestion, if you don’t want to believe, don’t.
right2bright on September 9, 2008 at 2:33 PM
Well, then, you’ve abandoned any active faith in pursuit of the alternative.
Prayer itself is communication with God. God reveals Himself to the faithful in many ways but prayer is our most precious time with God and before God.
If there’s “no more” to be said, learned, heard or known, then you’re all there and you’re missing all that remains in front of where you are.
If you are not praying, your faith as a Christian (which I’m doubting based upon this thread, certainly your relationship with your peer here, who does not display much to any Christian association) is hollow to absent.
Prayer isn’t a one-way demand letter sent to God, we pray inorder to communicate WITH God, to hear and receive and talk to Him. If you’re not engaged with God, who are you engaging with?
I answsered my curiosity in that regard with right4life a while ago, I hope that also does not include you.
It’d be interesting to hear you name your denomination or faith affiliation. So far, neither you nor your peer/s here have done that.
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:33 PM
Oh, I didn’t say COMPILED. You said WRITTEN. In that sense yes – all the letters that would eventually be compiled into the Bible we hve now WERE all WRITTEN in the first century. Compilation, on the other hand, didn’t happen until later – I forget the actual date.
Tip: Please pick your words more accurately. :)
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:34 PM
blockquote>FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:19 PM
During the early years of the church the books and letters written by the apostles were thus accepted as Scripture. These were preserved and compiled, and by A.D. 175 the New Testament looked pretty much like it does today, being unanimously accepted by the church and its leaders. At the 3rd Council of Carthage in A.D. 397 the canon was confirmed and officially closed.
link <
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:34 PM
Again, I said YOUR EMPHASIS on the word ASKED.
fossten on September 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Biden appears to be a California Catholic
koypop on September 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Thou dost false witness make.
What is your faith affiliation? What’s the “name” of what it is you believe?
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Did you read my long post on Page 4? I explained what I meant in more detail. Please read that before responding further to discussions on this subject.
I’m not part of a denomination, since you asked. I’m just a member of the Church of Christ.
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:36 PM
thats it as far as I know, why?
since most english bibles come from greek…I’d say one.
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Rather then being coy, why don’t you just state what you really want to know and why.
These kind of questions are always a little trap.
Do you know when? If not then I say within 5 years of Christ’s death.
And your answer to that is???
right2bright on September 9, 2008 at 2:36 PM
I believe in JESUS…that name should make you flee this thread in terror…
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:36 PM
S: Here’s my explanitory post:
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/09/denver-bishop-to-biden-abortion-foundational-issue/comment-page-4/#comment-1401309
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:37 PM
you sure are big on judging other people. you are quick to condemn anyone who does agree with you. and you judge the state of their souls…which is what I thought God was supposed to do….
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:38 PM
It’s called the B-I-B-L-E.
fossten on September 9, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Agreed.
I think there are a handful or percentage of what I call “cultural catholics” (little “c”) — people who probably grew up with Catholic parents or a parent who attended Catholic schools (big “C”) but who grew up and never found Christ independently or genuinely, in other words, but just carried on with an assumption that, well, they’re from a Catholic School, they had Catholic parents, they know the dates and names and such and well, that’s their “religion.”
I’m sure (in fact, I know) there are those like these in Protestant groups. It’s just a case of some people assumign they’re of the faith because they wear the label but yet who are not individually, privately spiritually involved or if they ever were, wandered away by…almost always, by sin.
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:39 PM
My childhood friend, who is a dirt/tree worshiper, told me that she thought it would be ‘good’ if Mother Earth decided to destroy “the human plague” but, if She did that, the “green beings” would die as well. I told her that I knew she was kidding, (she was not), but I didn’t tell her if she was a mother she would have found that comment more than disturbing.
Women who use abortion as a method of ‘birth control’ are the antithesis of Motherhood and should do us all a favor and agree to having their tubes tied or their legs permanently crossed.
Christine on September 9, 2008 at 2:40 PM
I said Bible written.
To me “Bible” indicates “compiled”. ;)
FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:41 PM
Uh, why? Can’t he just ask for forgivness?
Romeo13 on September 9, 2008 at 2:42 PM
too funny!! a lot of those liberal women don’t have to worry, they’d make a grown man die of fright!!
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:42 PM
So you worship this B-I-B-L-E that you have? YOu have an alter set up and bow down before this piece of paper and cloth and worship “it”?
There is danger as it’s shown on these comments from people taking the Bible (as also in Judaism, but that’s another story) and then “studying” it without counsel or community and just wandering all over with any and all imagings abstracted from God’s word.
So you don’t attend any Church or fellowship, then, you have no shared counsel and community engagement with fellowship to participate in with learning about and from the Bible?
If you’re worshipping a giant book, you, my friend, ARE in fact, the actual idol worshippers.
Christianity is communal, so to speak. We’re asked to share and share alike inorder to ward against the dangers of being misled. Community and fellowship helps accomplish that, and, we all need to learn something now and then.
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Ah, difference in comprehension. To me “Bible” means “the contents of God’s divine will, now compiled in a book, originally in the form of letters – either separate or as a whole”.
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:43 PM
Coy? My questions are self explanitory.
FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:44 PM
I’m referring there to, say, Madonna’s example with Kabbalah.
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Are you affiliated with any religious group? Does it have a name?
Not the “B-I-B-L-E” as someone has just declared — that’s not a religious group or faith denomination, by the way — but with a group that has a name placed upon what it is you believe.
Say, “Name of Church Here,” for example.
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:46 PM
See, there again is another difference between you and I. The Bible’s written at something like a sixth-grade reading level. I very much believe that someone, just a regular person capable of comprehending simple text, can read and understand the Bible through their own study. No divine inspiration, no mystical revelation, no expert theologians or indoctrinated clergymen requried. I believe God intended everyone to be able to take the Bible on their own and learn his will from simply reading, studying, and comprehending.
Having a congregation and an instructor helps, but it isn’t required.
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:47 PM
How can they be seperate AND compiled? And if they are seperate- then how is that The Bible- by definition?
FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:48 PM
O.K., as I’ve already “stated” many times, are you affiliated with any religious group or church or formal denomination, and if so, what is that group/church/denomination’s name?
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:48 PM
I apologize if I made you think I was in any way saying I knew more about Catholic doctrine than a Catholic, Bishop or otherwise.
But you are aware that we do believe that we have additional revelation from God. I know that offends many. But it is what we believe. And we believe that there will be more revelation in the future.
Yes, I do think that earlier in the Church some of our leaders were harsh with Catholics. But it is not our doctrine that….whatever you said…I promise. I don’t think those leaders were any harsher on Catholics than on other religons. But I know the Brethern did apologize a while back if some of what was said in the past was quarrelsome. And not in the spirit of brotherhood.
We do not accept your authority and you do not accept ours. But we do believe that a sincere believer will gain light and knowledge, and direction from their faith in Jesus Christ.
And we recognize that the Catholic Church is a force for good in the world especially in the education and humanitarian efforts that you put forth. In fact I think that sometimes you have the best infrastructure for humanitarian relief that we give our goods to you to distribute. Our churches have been partners in many things.
The Catholics I know are really decent good people.
petunia on September 9, 2008 at 2:48 PM
God bless you and keep you, FiveWays. Have a great day.
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:49 PM
The Church of Christ. One of a small handful of names authorized in the Bible for God’s church. (Church of God is another, but we avoid that name because there is a denomination that has claimed it and we do not want to be affiliated with their beliefs.)
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:49 PM
You’re confusing tenses.
NOW Compiled
ORIGINALLY spearate
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Separate, even. :|
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:50 PM
And most Protestants I know are good people. In fact- I married one. ;)
FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:50 PM
All very clever arguments. But are they just as convincing to the Mormon? The mormon doesn’t think its logical to asume that Peter needed to pass on his authority. You’re both fallible. Which one should I pick?
Here’s a better question: Where does scripture describe what you think is logical and reasonable? It doesn’t.
I’m sorry but I chuckled when I read this one. You think it’s clear but….why the interpetations? That’s nothing but a waffle. Either it’s clear or it’s not.
I disagree with your logic but then again, I’m fallible.
Here in lies the problem. We are not to interpret the Bible into what it means to us but to what God had intended.
I disagree with you on what God has placed on us as an authority. I have come to trust in God alone for my salvation and not in my works. I trust in His written word alone. God is sovereign in all aspects of life. He is also sovereign in how men come to him. All men first are rebellious in nature, even the “good ones”. I no longer “find it hard to believe that people, good people, do not see the fullness” of scripture. Scripture mentions scales that are over the eyes of unbelievers. By God’s grace he reveals to men that they are sinners deserving His wrath and needing Him as a perfect saviour.
According to Rome, I am an apostate. I left Rome because it obviosly did not want to be reformed by God’s word.
It is also by God’s grace that he bestows a level of wisdom upon all men. Every men has a sense of right and wrong. Man feels at times a sense of injustice. He has even given you and I the opportunity to cordially disagree on key differences of faith and yet we can agree on other levels of injustice like abortion.
I have enjoyed our discussion.
shick on September 9, 2008 at 2:50 PM
I go to a non-denominational church…it is part of the pentecostal/charismatic movement. I won’t give you the name of the church itself, or the location…this is the internet after all…
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:50 PM
So….when was it first COMPILED?
FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:51 PM
Fossten, stop arguing with yourself and make up.
shick on September 9, 2008 at 2:52 PM
Great post and well said. I agree with you mostly in applauding the Church’s emphasis on what should be obvious without Church emphasis. But I get queasy at the notion that politicians must get their marching orders from a religious institution. I don’t like the concept of punishment from a religious organization for failure to comply. How someone acts politically should not affect their standing within the Church in a secular society.
ThackerAgency on September 9, 2008 at 2:52 PM
I answered this three times now. I don’t know off-hand, and I’m at work so I can’t look it up. Please stop asking.
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:54 PM
Yep.
shick on September 9, 2008 at 2:54 PM
Can we ALL agree that Biden is wrong?
FiveWays on September 9, 2008 at 2:54 PM
yeah the bible is closed, no more new revelations, until the next age when Jesus returns. the Holy Spirit still speaks through prophecies, miracles, tongues, interpretations, etc today.
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:54 PM
he’s a democRAT…its rather obvious…he’s wrong about almost everything, by definition…
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:55 PM
I think we did that back on page one. :D
Here’s where we differ then, I believe those too have come to an end.
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:55 PM
I already provided a link for you to check this out. Here it is again.
shick on September 9, 2008 at 2:56 PM
The answer is twice. The original version was Hebrew around 600 BC. The next was Greek. The last was English.
The reason I bring this up is because you conceeded earlier that “queen of heaven” referred to a specific pagan godess. One can only speculate why Jeremiah didn’t name her directly.
Is it beyond the realm of reason that the original intent of “heaven” may have been Hades or a place like that? Notice that in Jeremiah “heaven” was not capitalized. We already know he was speaking of a pegan god.
You kept asking why a Catholic church would call itself Queen of Heaven? I just wanted to point out your intellectual dishonesty.
Can’t comprehend why we would venerate the mother of God? Fine, I’ll stop trying. But I will not let you desecrate the Catholic faith by implying we are satanist.
natesnake on September 9, 2008 at 2:56 PM
fossten on September 9, 2008 at 1:30 PM
You have always made yourself a fly in the ointment, besetting the world with maggots. Your contaminated writings are flawed to say the least, definitely wrong on S. Wash your hands before joining the dinner discussion.
The Old Testament records encounters with God’s servants from heaven visiting earth. You can make of them as you will. The New Testament records not only Jesus’ resurrection, but the first fruits of the dead rising to join Jesus in Heaven. Regardless of your thoughts, accounts remain scriptural.
2 Kings 2: 5-15
The company of the prophets at Jericho went up to Elisha and asked him, “Do you know that the LORD is going to take your master from you today?”
“Yes, I know,” he replied, “but do not speak of it.”
6 Then Elijah said to him, “Stay here; the LORD has sent me to the Jordan.”
And he replied, “As surely as the LORD lives and as you live, I will not leave you.” So the two of them walked on.
7 Fifty men of the company of the prophets went and stood at a distance, facing the place where Elijah and Elisha had stopped at the Jordan. 8 Elijah took his cloak, rolled it up and struck the water with it. The water divided to the right and to the left, and the two of them crossed over on dry ground.
9 When they had crossed, Elijah said to Elisha, “Tell me, what can I do for you before I am taken from you?”
“Let me inherit a double portion of your spirit,” Elisha replied.
10 “You have asked a difficult thing,” Elijah said, “yet if you see me when I am taken from you, it will be yours—otherwise not.”
11 As they were walking along and talking together, suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire appeared and separated the two of them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind. 12 Elisha saw this and cried out, “My father! My father! The chariots and horsemen of Israel!” And Elisha saw him no more. Then he took hold of his own clothes and tore them apart.
13 He picked up the cloak that had fallen from Elijah and went back and stood on the bank of the Jordan. 14 Then he took the cloak that had fallen from him and struck the water with it. “Where now is the LORD, the God of Elijah?” he asked. When he struck the water, it divided to the right and to the left, and he crossed over.
15 The company of the prophets from Jericho, who were watching, said, “The spirit of Elijah is resting on Elisha.” And they went to meet him and bowed to the ground before him.
Mary is BLESSED. The scriptural Magnificat is her beautiful response to God’s touch. Mary is not dead, and neither are the holy saints who enjoy the first resurrection.
Read your own New Testament. How any person who adores Jesus would choose to disrespect his mother is for that person to explain to God, not to me.
maverick muse on September 9, 2008 at 2:56 PM
And I gave you the answer…within five years of Christs death…you have your answer.
Separate books compiled into the Bible.
Is a book a compilation of chapters, or is it a book separated by chapters? And without the chapters would it be a book?
That is what I mean about you being coy…why don’t you come right out and ask what you want and why?
Because you like to argue about nothing, because you can only take someone else’s research, and “separate” it. Try coming up with an answer yourself.
right2bright on September 9, 2008 at 2:56 PM
How many abortion apologists can dance on the head of a pin?
Akzed on September 9, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Well, actually, that’s not offensive to me as a Catholic and represents a parallel to what I understand our Catholic Church instructs: that God continues to reveal Himself through various ongoing revelations to and among the faithful.
The difference here is that the nomenclature varies. There are “fears” (obviously) by some who assume that “more information from God” would someohow trump or suppress the Bible, which of course it does not.
It is just that to even commune in prayer with God is to receive what a Protestant would call, “revelation knowledge” and in Catholicism, it’d be, well, about the same in meaning and import.
The Church simply recognizes that God continues to reveal Himself to the faithful and then also recognizes the infinite means by which God can and does communicate but our own, human, limited ability to comprehend that. Thus, we have the saints (the holy and faithful in God through Christ), we have prayers, we have lectures, we have testimonies, we have actual events that unfold, we have moments where anyone who is a Christian will understand without much more explanation.
This is all “revelation knowledge,” so to speak. There are more extreme examples of such in various Protestant groups, I realize, than what you’d frequently if commonly see in the Catholic Church, but it’s still representational of God speaking to the faithful. And continuing to.
S on September 9, 2008 at 2:57 PM
I’ve had some personal experience….;-)
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:57 PM
Yeaaaah, we don’t wanna debate that here <_<
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Samuel is not dead either…so why was it wrong to contact him? show me where Jesus actually called mary *mother*.
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 2:58 PM
I sorta see where your going… but saying your a Catholic is a choice they have. Its a voluntary thing. If they don’t like the rules, join another religion. I really don’t think most Americans would look down on them for that… not near as much as they look down on saying you believe in one thing, then doing another.
Heck, most American’s are even giving Barry a Pass on his Racist Church… as long as he switched.
Romeo13 on September 9, 2008 at 2:59 PM
That’s what my Obama-voting sister-in-law is saying… I don’t want to break open the can of worms that I know will erupt when I tell her I think his “leaving” of Wright’s church is a sham.
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 3:00 PM
And I note you did not identify yourself as Christian in affiliation with a Christian congregation.
S on September 9, 2008 at 3:00 PM
Mkay, you’re an idiot. You asked the name of what I believe, and I said the Bible. Now you’re twisting your own words and raising a straw man, claiming that I claimed to worship the Bible. You deliberately left out what YOU said so that you could play stupid games.
Here’s the proof of what I’m saying.
You are not interested in having a good faith discussion, and this latest argument of yours is either stupid or dishonest.
I’m finished with you.
fossten on September 9, 2008 at 3:01 PM
He does reveal Himself, but He does not contradict Himself, or come up with a new revelation that disagrees with the Bible. mary was dead by the time John wrote the Revelation…he does not mention her at all. there is no record in the NT of anyone asking an OT saint, for example, to intercede on their behalf…not did anyone ask for Stephen, the first martyr, to intercede for them…
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 3:01 PM
You are close, the first was a compilation of Hebrew(s) and Greek, the second Greek. The OT was of course Hebrew, and “ancient” Hebrew so even that was not just Hebrew as we know it.
Regardless, everything stems from original texts in the Old Testament, so no matter how many translations, we can go back to the original.
right2bright on September 9, 2008 at 3:02 PM
you don’t think the fastest growing part of christianity, the pentecostal movement, is christian?
this is too funny.
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 3:02 PM
Agreeing. So is Pelosi also wrong.
S on September 9, 2008 at 3:03 PM
Look, you dunderhead misleader of false witness (and you are one), I ASKED you what denomination, what name of what faith affiliation, you associated with.
You came back with gobblygook use of every single term available to your non-associated with any denomination you could think of BUT AVOIDED IDENTIFYING AS CHRISTIAN.
Don’t even try to pass off your deceitful conjecture on me or anyone else. When asked for personal testimony, YOU AVOIDED IDENTIFYING WITH CHRIST.
YOU did that.
S on September 9, 2008 at 3:05 PM
You missed my point. You were being obtuse and equated Catholics to satanists because one church calls itself Queen of Heaven even though you knew Jeremiah was referring to a pagan diety. That’s way off base.
natesnake on September 9, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Did I say Peter traveled to Rome? No for those who don’t want to have to read the entire post. Rome is just where the Papacy ended up. I see no reason for that to diminish my entire reasoning for being a Roman Catholic.
Peter was married. Okay, so? Paul said “it is good for a man not to marry.” The Church has decided that it is better for Priests to remain celibate. With the levels of divorce, distraction from married life, etc…I can see their point. It seems a perfectly logical position to take. It does nothing to change the Truth of Church Doctrine.
The name Peter…No, while in Greek, the word Petros means stone, (and Petra means rock and the two were interchangeable at the time), Christ did not speak in Greek, he spoke Aramaic and in Aramaic language the word Kepha is rock. This is the name Jesus gave to Simon, Cephas in the English translation. Peter was the rock.
pannw on September 9, 2008 at 3:06 PM
Had you simply said you were a Christian without any identifiable denomination among Christianty, that’d been far more believable than you trying to hide behind your double-evasive, snaking terms here.
S on September 9, 2008 at 3:07 PM
I agree that he goes against Rome. I can praise God that I have a pastor who would have corrected me a long time ago. He would have come to me and told me of my error. If I didn’t he then would have recommended to our local church that I be removed as a member until I repent of my evil ways.
shick on September 9, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Don’t bother answering S’s question about your church. He’ll just try to claim that you worship your church.
fossten on September 9, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Had you simply said you were a Christian without any identifiable denomination among Christianty, that’d been far more believable than you trying to hide behind your double-evasive, snaking terms here.
S on September 9, 2008 at 3:07 PM
S on September 9, 2008 at 3:08 PM
Okay, do you NOT understand that not all Christians are members of denominations? Is that impossible to comprehend?
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on September 9, 2008 at 3:08 PM
hey moron, I TOLD you, I go to a non-denominational church…DUHHHHHHHHH it must hurt to be so stupid.
I’m done casting pearls before swine like you.
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 3:09 PM
First, I am a catholic, just not the Roman variety.
Second, hostile comparisons of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (if that’s what he had in mind, if he ever even heard of it) to your garden variety mullah is offensive on its face and doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously, let alone to be disected and patiently argued.
Akzed on September 9, 2008 at 3:09 PM
No, to the contrary, that was “right4life”’s idiotic, creepy and deceitful lie about Catholics, the Catholic Church and the veneration of Mary.
I’m not the snarky, sarcastic one here, fossten. You and your weirdly accusational peers are.
S on September 9, 2008 at 3:09 PM
You don’t know what pearls are and certainly would not know to prize them if you ever comprehended God’s good wisdom.
I’m glad my faith has cast you off. Good riddance.
S on September 9, 2008 at 3:10 PM
Peter did go to Rome. His remains are there. BTDT.
You are very wrong as well when you trot out some lame “pebble” thing to describe the name of Peter given by Jesus of Nazareth. Cepha means rock NOT pebble. It would be insulting to say to his friend “Yer nothing more than a little pebble. I will build a church on you.” Only a complete idiot would bother to believe that as a form of the name. It comes from the Greek word πετρος (petros) meaning “stone” (petra in Latin), which is used in the form petro- to mean rock. You need to learn which would be feminine and which would be masculine. Obviously, talking to a MALE he would use the masculing form in ARAMAIC, which I do not specify here. Only the Greek and Latin.
JP1986UM on September 9, 2008 at 3:10 PM
yeah people like S probably think the pedophile priests were carrying out the will of God just because they are *holy* priests….
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 3:11 PM
CO-MEDIATOR – Mary is the co-mediator to whom we can entrust all our cares and petitions (Catechism 968-970, 2677).
There is only one mediator, and that is Jesus. 1 Timothy 2:5-6 says, “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all men — the testimony given in its proper time.”
right4life on September 9, 2008 at 3:11 PM
Most Americans give Catholics a pass on ignoring their church on birth control, or Protestants a pass on remarriage after divorce. Certainly abortion is a different issue, but judging someone by assuming the teaching of their church is, or should be, identical to their views on public policy is unnecessary. Dems are now trying to pin everything Rev. Ed Kalnins has said on Palin, and that seems unfair and equally pointless.
dedalus on September 9, 2008 at 3:13 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 Next »