Obama’s not the only amateur, apparently

posted at 12:45 pm on March 28, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

When I started the Obamateurism of the Day, I didn’t expect it to turn into a franchise.  Demonstrating that Amateur Hour continues at the State Department, Hillary Clinton managed to display an amazing degree of ignorance while making a pilgrimage to the shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico yesterday afternoon.  While viewing the famous image of Mary as a native peasant that Mexicans believe was divinely created, Hillary asked — well, you have to read the story:

During her recent visit to Mexico, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made an unexpected stop at the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe and left a bouquet of white flowers “on behalf of the American people,” after asking who painted the famous image.

The image of Our Lady of Guadalupe was miraculously imprinted by Mary on the tilma, or cloak, of St. Juan Diego in 1531. The image has numerous unexplainable phenomena, such as the appearance on Mary’s eyes of those present in the room when the tilma was opened and the image’s lack of decay.

Mrs. Clinton was received on Thursday at 8:15 a.m. by the rector of the Basilica, Msgr. Diego Monroy.

Msgr. Monroy took Mrs. Clinton to the famous image of Our Lady of Guadalupe, which had been previously lowered from its usual altar for the occasion.

After observing it for a while, Mrs. Clinton asked “who painted it?” to which Msgr. Monroy responded “God!”

Who painted it? Didn’t anyone brief Hillary on the history of the Guadalupe apparition?  As it turns out, no one should have had to brief the Secretary of State.  She told the Monsignor that she had visited once before, thirty years ago. She must have thought it was just a good place to take tourist pictures.

The Anchoress notes:

Doh! Another State Department error! It’s a good thing we have a “smart” State Department, now, instead of the “dumb” one we had for the last 8 years!

Some “smart diplomacy,” huh?  First Hillary doesn’t understand multiparty democracy, then she fumbles a snarky “reset button” by mistranslating it and putting it in Latin rather than Cyrillic script.  She can’t even get names straight, let alone sound intelligent when visiting national shrines.  A few more of these and we may have a new feature here at Hot Air.

Update: I just noticed that SondraK sent me this to my Obamateurism folder earlier.  Be sure to read her thoughts.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 3 4 5

a Google search on “virgin guadalupe pregnant” (thanks to Steve Z) gets this:

The Image of Our Lady is actually an Aztec Pictograph which was read and understood quickly by the Aztec Indians.

1. THE LADY STOOD IN FRONT OF
THE SUN
She was greater than the dreaded
Huitzilopochtli, their sun-god of war.

2. HER FOOT RESTED ON THE
CRESCENT MOON
She had clearly crushed Quetzalcoatl,
the feathered serpent moon-
god.

3. THE STARS STREWN ACROSS
THE MANTLE
She was greater than the stars of heaven which they worshipped.
She was a virgin and the Queen of the heavens for Virgo rests over
her womb and the northern crown upon her head. She appeared on
December 12, 1531 and the stars that she wore are the constellations
of the stars that appeared in the sky that day!

4. THE BLUE‑GREEN HUE OF HER MANTLE
She was a Queen because she wears the color of royalty.

5. THE BLACK CROSS ON THE BROOCH AT HER NECK
Her God was that of the Spanish Missionaries, Jesus Christ her son
who died on the cross for all mankind.

6. THE BLACK BELT
She was with child because she wore the Aztec Maternity Belt.

7. THE FOUR PETAL FLOWER OVER THE WOMB
She was the Mother of God because the flower was a special symbol
of life, movement and deity-the center of the universe.

8. HER HANDS ARE JOINED IN PRAYER
She was not God but clearly there was one greater than Her and she
pointed her finger to the cross on her brooch.

9. THE DESIGN ON HER ROSE COLORED GARMENT
She is the Queen of the Earth because she is wearing a contour map
of Mexico telling the Indians exactly where the apparition took place.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 1:45 AM

The Catholic church itself over the millenia has struggled with the interaction of commerce with faith.

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 12:58 AM

I suspect we may differ on our ideas of what exact restrictions are placed on the interactions of commerce and faith.

Hawthorne on March 29, 2009 at 1:45 AM

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 1:33 AM

Thanks for the response. Interesting info.

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 1:46 AM

I suspect we may differ on our ideas of what exact restrictions are placed on the interactions of commerce and faith.

Hawthorne on March 29, 2009 at 1:45 AM

Perhaps. It isn’t a point that I’ve thought much about. However, the Catholic Church has been much criticized for amassing wealth, owning property and selling indulgences. My thought was that the one act by Jesus bordering on violence led to his arrest, but didn’t necessarily prevent the Church in his name from falling into questionable practices with wealth.

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 1:50 AM

amazing…well you trust in mary, and I’ll trust in Jesus and we’ll see who wins in the end…

not about winning. about Love.

wkgdyw on March 29, 2009 at 1:51 AM

My thought was that the one act by Jesus bordering on violence led to his arrest, but didn’t necessarily prevent the Church in his name from falling into questionable practices with wealth.

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 1:50 AM

Mahoney is your bishop too?

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 1:57 AM

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 1:50 AM

Indeed, some of the past practices of the Church are indeed debatable. The selling of indulgences is probably foremost among them. What we need to be careful about is that the Church is not necessarily the same as the men who committed these acts. This is especially true for about 1500 years starting in roughly the third century. There were many men that used the power of the Church for personal gain during that period.

I prefer to focus on current practices of the Church since they reflect how the leaders of the Church have learned from past mistakes. The last two Popes have been especially active in returning the Church to the calling of our Lord. The task is not complete, but the effort is ongoing as well.

Hawthorne on March 29, 2009 at 1:59 AM

highhopes on March 28, 2009 at 11:28 PM
Give Hillary a break. I think she care a little and not as extreme pro-abortion as Obama who supports infanticide.
I did not know the whole story of Our Lady of Guadalupe until I search online prior to my pilgrimage. I think every apparition of our Lady has specific purpose or audience. Our Lady of Guadalupe pilgrims are different. The place has a feel of ‘fiesta’, a form of ‘joyful prayer’? It is crowded even on weekdays that meditation and reflection escapes me. And the power that be at the Basilica don’t bother about putting their signs in anything but Spanish.
Lourdes is a meditation and reflection place, maybe because it is high up in the Pyrennes.

atemely on March 29, 2009 at 2:05 AM

The selling of indulgences is probably foremost among them

I believe it to be correct, provided the money thus obtained is used for the good of the people (particularly the poor).

They then become synonymous with almsgiving, coupled with the Church’s power given by Jesus to forgive sin.

Luther’s dislike for them stemmed from the particular use to which they were put — building cathedrals. He also was moving toward scriptura sola, and indulgences glorified works.

[Of course, quite a few of Jesus' parables also glorified works, but we won't go there...]

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 2:07 AM

omg…*speechless*

And she campaigned heavily in Puerto Rico, where by wild guess 70% of the 4M worship La Virgen De La Guadalupe. How many trips, 3 or 4?

Who the heck does prep work for this situation? She could use some quick-study geek preparing her for 2 trips ahead of her visits. And for Pete’s sake, STUDY HARD!!!!

Worked with adoption agencies (int’l) and they are quite close with Russia, amongst other countries because bluffs are not allowed. It could mean the cancellation of the adoption program, therefore hundreds of children would not be up for adoption for the US.

Think about it in that context. We make them happy-comply with all rules and regulations-supply orphanages with anything and everything they need for the babies and facilities-make sure to get that certification from Russia to ease adoption process = happy country and happy adoption agency.

OT-If interested, here is the link (or look at very cute babies: http://www.eaci.com.

ProudPalinFan on March 29, 2009 at 2:24 AM

for anyone interested in the discussion about Eastern Catholics, here is a good article from Crisis Magazine that discusses all the Churches within the one Catholic Church, the Roman/Western/Latin Church that most people know and the 21 Eastern Catholic Churches.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1438500/posts

Elisa on March 29, 2009 at 3:28 AM

By the fruits of something you can tell if it is from God or not.

Anyone ANYONE, who prays to Mary and asks her to pray for them is always drawn closer to her Son. Because she never points to herself, she always points to her Son. “Do whatever He tells you.”

No matter how close someone is to Jesus, they become even closer. I did. There are many Protestants closer to Jesus than some Catholics who do pray to Mary, but they too would become even closer to Jesus if they asked Mary for her prayers. (We are all growing in our faith and God gives us each various graces at differnt times. But we are all on a path to grow closer to Jesus each and every day.)

The fact is that this is always the case. Mary is a shortcut to Jesus. So there are good fruits to this ancient Christian practice. Jesus came to us through Mary and there is nothing wrong with people going to Jesus through Mary. The warning of talking to the dead in the Old Testament are not about the Christian practice of talking to the dead. They are about sorcery and paganism.

the markings on the catecombs and tombs of the 1st and 2nd century Christian saints shows that they believed in sending messages to the dead saints – who are alive in Christ, not dead – and are part of all of us in the Church – the communion of Saints.

Elisa on March 29, 2009 at 3:42 AM

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 11:57 PM

thanks for detailing the Greek “full of grace”

Just wanted to add one thing for those reading here who want to understand our faith. In Luke chapter 1 where it says Mary is “full of grace,” this is the ONLY place in the Bible that this exact phrase is used. “chaire kecharitomene” The other mentions of grace in the Bible are different phrases and words.

2 quotes from EWTN and somewhere else:

Luke 1:28 has Gabriel saying “Hail full of Grace” to Mary. The Greek words in Luke are “chaire kecharitomene.”

The following is from EWTN.com Q& A:
“chaire kecharitomene”
“chaire” – means “hail” or “rejoice”
“charis” – means “grace”
“charitoo” – Greek verb ending in omicron omega (“oo”) means to put the person or thing into the state indicated by the root. The root being “charis” or “grace,” “charitoo” means “to put into a state of grace.”
“ke” – Greek perfect tense prefix indicates a perfected, completed present state as a result of past action. Thus, a perfected, completed present state of “charis,” or “grace,” as a result of past action.
“mene” – Greek passive participle suffix indicates the action was performed on the subject by another. Thus, a perfected, completed present state of “charis,” or “grace,” as a result of the past action of another. Since the speaker is the angel Gabriel, sent by God, the past action of “another” is that of God. Thus, a perfected, completed present state of “charis,” or “grace,” as a result of the past action of God.

Literally, then, “chaire kecharitomene” means:
“Hail, who has been perfectly and completely graced by God!”

However, Luke 1:28 uses a special conjugated form of “charitoo.” It uses “kecharitomene,” while Ephesians 1:6 uses “echaritosen,” which is a different form of the verb “charitoo.” Echaritosen means “he graced” (bestowed grace). Echaritosen signifies a momentary action, an action brought to pass. (Blass and DeBrunner, Greek Grammar of the New Testament, p.166). Whereas, Kecharitomene, the perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a permanent result. Kecharitomene denotes continuance of a completed action (H. W. Smyth, Greek Grammar [Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968], p. 108-109, sec 1852 ; also Blass and DeBrunner, p.175).

http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a116.htm

(end of quotes)

That is because Mary’s was a singular grace, given at a different time than grace is given to other Christians. Not before she was conceived (or she wouldn’t need a Savior and she did) and not after she was conceived (because the Church, East and West, has always taught from the first centuries that sin never touched her soul. “for all have sinned” read in context shows it to mean the general state of humanity, not that there are no exceptions.) The faith dogma of Immaculate Conception says that she received the grace (by the merits of Jesus Christ) at the exact moment of her conception. Not before and not afterwards.

And remember that the angel Gabriel said Mary was “full of grace” before Jesus was even conceived in her womb, before she said, “yes.” Certainly before He died and rose for our sins. God is outside of time and space and can apply His saving grace whenever He wants, even retroactively. He is God. And not bound by the norms He has set up for humanity.


Like the old story of the man walking down a path who fell into a puddle of mud and a man came and helped him up and cleaned him up. Then a woman walked down the same path and right before she fell in the puddle of mud, the man stretched out his arm and caught her. He still saved her from the mud and was still her savior. “My soul rejoices in God my Savior.”

Elisa on March 29, 2009 at 3:56 AM

The “Queen of Heaven” Christian title of Mary is not the same as the pagan and demonic “queens.”

Mary is the Queen Mother. Jesus it our Davidic King forever. Beginning with Solomon in the Old Testament, all the Davidic kings place their mother on throne at their right hand and people could come and ask favors of her son,the king, through his mother. The kings had many wives. It was their mother who was the Queen. And the Queen Mother is spoken of in several Old Testament passages and is the only other court position (along with the chief stewart/prime minister) that is mentioned in the Old Testament passages about the Davidic kings.

Elisa on March 29, 2009 at 4:01 AM

The Bible says that Mary is the mother of God.

Elizabeth was inspired by the Holy Spirit when she called Mary the “mother of my Lord.”

“When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the infant leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth, filled with the holy Spirit, cried out in a loud voice and said, “Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?” (Luke 1:41-43)

(Similar to what David said when the Ark of the Old Covenant was brought to him after traveling through the same exact hill country that Mary traveled to go to Elizabeth.)

Mary is not God. She is not divine. She is the beautiful creature and vessel He created with great care to hold the Word of God made flesh, the bread from Heaven, our High Priest forever. Just like God carefully crafted the Ark of the Old Covenant in several chapters of Exodus to hold the Ten Commandments (Word of God), the pot of manna (bread from Heaven) and the top of the High Priest, Aaron’s, staff, so too God carefully crafted the Ark of the New Covenant who held Christ within her.

Theotokos-Mother of God, Ark of the New Covenant and the New Eve were some of the first titles given to Mary already in the first 2 centuries of the Church.

Mary is “the woman” of the Bible.

Called by St. John in his Gospel “woman” at the start of Jesus’ Earthly ministry at Cana and “woman” at the end at the cross.

The “woman” from Genesis and Revelation Chapter 12, beginning and end.

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel.”(Genesis 3:15)

“Woman” was a way of addressing a woman with respect back then.

Thank you from the bottom of my heart to all the many people here who have defended the Church, East and West.

God bless you and God bless all the good people here.
Good night.

Elisa on March 29, 2009 at 4:12 AM

Just think… the media described the “democratic” field of candidates for President as one of the strongest ever offered. Sadly, we got both of the baffoons working full time to ruin this country and make us a laughing stock. You democrats must be so proud.

suzyk on March 29, 2009 at 6:54 AM

One of the obvious issues that anyone can notice in terms of the problems with catholicism vs. Christianity is so many, many things that they make up over the years out of thin air that they say must be accepted alongside scripture, on an equal basis. How convenient it is that they diminish the authority and power of scripture so that they can justify the nonsense some old white dudes make up out of nowhere.

TTheoLogan on March 29, 2009 at 9:09 AM

How convenient it is that they diminish the authority and power of scripture so that they can justify the nonsense some old white dudes make up out of nowhere.

TTheoLogan on March 29, 2009 at 9:09 AM

Even the apostles had to figure much out for themselves, but they were touched directly by the Holy Spirit. The Catholic Church believes that the Holy Spirit continues to work through the Pope.

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 9:21 AM

Elisa on March 29, 2009 at 3:42 AM

“While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, ‘Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed.’ But He said, ‘On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it.’” Luke 11:27-28

Send_Me on March 29, 2009 at 10:02 AM

Even the apostles had to figure much out for themselves, but they were touched directly by the Holy Spirit. The Catholic Church believes that the Holy Spirit continues to work through the Pope.

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 9:21 AM

Figure much out for themselves? They didn’t write scripture themselves, God wrote it through them. Not even all of them were allowed to write scripture, either.

The Catholic church has a lot invested in people not taking the bible literally because otherwise no one would pay attention to the catholic church and stuff it makes up constantly. The apostles didn’t make up silliness like the catholic church does constantly(the sign of the cross, how a pope is picked, etc). There’s no evidence they did any of that nonsense.

“holy tradition” is nothing more than someone decides to do something new, and someone else repeats it, and after a while it’s considered just as valid as God’s word. That’s insane. How the pope is chosen is a good example of this(the color of the smoke, etc).

But seriously, I don’t blame you guys from the point of view of wanting to have power over people. For a ridiculously long time you forbid people to be able to read the bible themselves and in a language they could understand. The proletariat are far more useful to you if they don’t know any better.

TTheoLogan on March 29, 2009 at 10:05 AM

“While Jesus was saying these things, one of the women in the crowd raised her voice and said to Him, ‘Blessed is the womb that bore You and the breasts at which You nursed.’ But He said, ‘On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it.’” Luke 11:27-28

Send_Me on March 29, 2009 at 10:02 AM

Good morning, Send Me.

Do you think that passage means that Jesus didn’t think that Mary was blessed? Mary did hear the word of God and observed it. He was agreeing that she was blessed. And saying she was blessed for more than family ties.

And the reason she was His mother in the first place was because she heard the word of God and observed it. So Jesus’ Words here tie to what the woman in the crowd said of Mary being blessed.

Because Jesus was telling all of us that faith is more important than family ties. And that by faith, as it says later in the New Testament, we are Jesus’ brothers. Spiritual brothers. And the Bible says that God the Father is our Father, too. Mary is our spiritual mother because of our faith connections to Jesus. If she is His mother, she is ours, if we are His spiritual brothers. Plus He gave her to us on the cross, when He gave her to St. John.

St. Paul tells us to be imitators of Christ in all things. Jesus was a good Jewish boy who “honored His father and mother.” So we should honor her, too, as Christians have done since the first centuries.

Secondly, Jesus, who is God, is not going to contradict the Word of God or someone inspired by the Holy Spirit like Elizabeth. “Blessed are you amongst women and blessed is the fruit of your womb.” And the same Gospel also says, “all generations shall call me blessed.”

Jesus would not contradict that.

I also heard once that “On the contrary or rather” are poor translations of the Greek word in Luke 11. That it really translates, “Yes, and additionally . . .”

But I am not a Greek scholar, so others here may be able to explain this better.

Have a good day and God bless you all.

PS I will be very busy today and probably won’t have time to come on here. So if any other Catholic wants to answer any things directed to my posts, please feel free. And thank you all.

Elisa on March 29, 2009 at 11:05 AM

The Catholic church has a lot invested in people not taking the bible literally because otherwise no one would pay attention to the catholic church and stuff it makes up constantly. The apostles didn’t make up silliness like the catholic church does constantly(the sign of the cross, how a pope is picked, etc). There’s no evidence they did any of that nonsense.

TTheoLogan on March 29, 2009 at 10:05 AM

Hello, sockepuppet-of-right4life,

How do you know the apostles didn’t “make up silliness”?

How do you know they didn’t make the Sign of the Cross?

How do you know they didn’t have to choose a successor to Peter?

When you go to church, isn’t there an Order of Service? Doesn’t your minister/pastor/whatever have a sermon?
Into what “tradition” of theology (you do know what that word means, don’t you?) does your officiant reach to interpret scripture?

So now we should determine to take the Bible literally? How many times did Jesus say we should forgive? Remember, he bounded us with a number. Under a literal interpretation, I’m free to not forgive after one over that number. And, if I make a claim that Jesus’ number really meant “always”, then I’m no longer literally interpreting his words.

So now literalists say, to get around such problems, that we have to interpret the intent of Jesus’ words, to interpret the intent of Paul’s and James’ writings, yada, yada yada….

And how do you interpret intent? Well, as a literalist, you might want to rely upon the traditions of the times.

And once you allow that those are authentic, then what about things the early Christians did which didn’t inform scripture, but yet were part of their everyday culture. How would a Christian under persecution have identified themselves to another Christian? If not by a Sign of the Cross, perhaps by something so similar as to be indestinguishable? How about a Sign of the Fish?

You are welcome to your silliness, as we are welcome to ours.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 11:51 AM

Considering she’s a Methodist, it’s not too surprising that she didn’t know the story. It would be something that Catholics would know more than any other denomination.

However, it does remind me of the time that Al Gore asked the identity of some statues. The reply was “Lafayette, Washington…”. Clinton was trying to hide his snickering in the background.

threeCents on March 29, 2009 at 11:53 AM

The Catholic Church relies on the Bible and tradition. Jesus’ various parables were not meant to be taken literally. They were later explained to the disciples. It’s been said that some stories in the Bible are true but they may not have happened. The stories are meant to illustrate a larger point about spirituality, morality, etc.

threeCents on March 29, 2009 at 12:01 PM

Seems our new era of “smart power” is neither smart nor powerful and just a huge oxymoron.

redfoxbluestate on March 29, 2009 at 12:05 PM

Considering she’s a Methodist, it’s not too surprising that she didn’t know the story. It would be something that Catholics would know more than any other denomination.

threeCents on March 29, 2009 at 11:53 AM

Considering she is considered an educated woman she should have known or at aleast her staff should have provided her that information before she visited there. Part of diplomacy is being sensitive and aware of the beliefs of those she is dealing with.

katiejane on March 29, 2009 at 12:12 PM

right4life on March 28, 2009 at 9:56 PM:

as far as I know catholic doctrine says that salvation relies upon what Jesus did, not what you do.

Wrong. What you do is an intrinsic part of the equation. Sin is something you do to separate yourself from God’s Salvation, and Catholicism certainly has the concept of sin in spades. We have venial and mortal sins, sins of commission and sins of omission… Jesus gives you a Salvation, but you certainly can screw that up with your own acts…or inaction in the face of evil (sin of omission). That’s why I always respond to you — to fail to do so is a sin of omission.

your last statement is idiotic. you may want to take the spec out of your eye before you take the log out of mine…

Ahem, after removing my specs, I see a veritable forest of living logs in yours. I’m not going to remove them, since you need a specialist…

as far as calling me a devil…well anyone who preaches a doctrine of works is preaching doctrines of demons…

Many of the parables of Jesus describe works and the salutory effects thereof. So Jesus was a demon. I get it.

My sister fell away from Catholicism because she didn’t like the rules, perticularly the part about making amends for the sins you commit (penance/reconciliation). She joined a small church whose pastor has the paradigm that faith conquers all — that sins, for example, are forgiven merely by asking God to forgive them. So she has a habit of stealing, on the principle that she is full of faith and if she asks God to forgive her theft of what she obviously needed, everything is OK.

In other words, she doesn’t need to perform works, because she has her faith.

It’s an interesting thought, and totally foreign to anything I believe. I’m aghast whenever a bill comes in (she’s living rent free in a house I own because she can’t get a job due to a shoplifting conviction). Example: she hired a plumber to move the water heater from a closet inside the house to the garage because she needed another closet, and then refused to pay because she didn’t have any money. I first find out when a lien notice is mailed to me…

Then, because the hot water pressure is now bad after the heater has been moved, she hires yet another plumber to put in a return line to increase pressure; this guy figures out she’s got no money mid way through the job and halts work with the system opened up. I get a crying phone call….

She’s the kind of person I imagine you to be — where faith is strong but is totally disconnected from any outward works of it…

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 12:20 PM

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Maybe it’s time for some tough love?

katiejane on March 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Actually Hillary’s error was logically reasonable but shows that she is not up to speed on Mexican Catholicism. In fact no one really knows who perpetrated that particular ‘Our Lady’ fraud.

Annar on March 29, 2009 at 12:53 PM

Actually Hillary’s error was logically reasonable but shows that she is not up to speed on Mexican Catholicism. In fact no one really knows who perpetrated that particular ‘Our Lady’ fraud.

Annar on March 29, 2009 at 12:53 PM

Congratulations on your two-for-one. You’ve managed to expose yourself as a racist and an anti-Catholic bigot – and on a Sunday, too.

tigerlily on March 29, 2009 at 1:34 PM

A question for all those who think that they can bash Mary and dishonor Her: Do you have a mother? What would you do to someone who treated her disrespectfully before others? Would you just stand there and let your mother be dishonored? How is that you so-called believers in Jesus think that you can dishonor His Mother and treat Her as if She is no one in particular and then think Jesus loves you and is going to bless you?

Indeed, when Gabriel addresses Mary, he does not use the word “rejoice”; remember, no Catholic Saint would stand for such a greeting. Gabriel addresses Mary with the word, “Hail.” A royal greeting.

And finally, why is that those who decry Mary’s special role refuse to comprehend history. How is that in your deluded minds you do not understand the historical significance of Our Lady of Guadalupe. Are you nothing more than just Hillaryites who are so blinded they think this miraculous tilma is nothing more than a “painting”? As many previous posts outlined so well, the symbolic significance of Mary’s appearance CONVERTED THE AZTEC empire from cannibalism and pagan idolatry to worshiping the One True God. Now, the Aztecs no longer have their priest eat part of the flesh of the beating heart and drink some of the blood of the poor victim sacrificed to the evil serpents of their former pagan culture. Today, these people go to the Sacrifice of the Mass where the priest feeds them the Body and Blood of the Savior of the world. A Body and Blood He received from the royal lineage of Mary, a descendant of King David.

And so, Mary has conquered. While Europe turned its back on Her, She, as God had shown the Aztec princess in a vision previously, converted the people of the Americas to the one true faith, not that halfway house called protest-ant. For what are you doing in that halfway house but protesting? And who do you protest against? The Woman Clothed With the Sun (Apocalypse 12) who gives birth to the Child who shall rule all the nations with a rod of iron!

There’s is only one Woman who gives birth to this Child, the Son of God. It is not Israel, nor the Church, nor the body of believers. It is Mary and when protest-ants ask, “where is that in Scripture,” how convenient you ignore this Woman who is shown to be clothed royally with the sun and the moon beneath Her feet.

The Woman who is Our Lady of Guadalupe, the One who crushes the serpent as She proved in the Americas.

Remember, Christ’s admonition: either you are with Him or against Him; either you gather or scatter. Mary, as has been proven with the Fact that She was at the Foot of the Cross, not these Mary-bashers, gathers with Her Son; while those who dishonor Her, are deceived, fighting against the royal Army of Heaven in which Jesus reigns as its King and Mary as the Queen. For remember, in the Book of Apocalypse, it is the devil who pursues the Woman, for he knows it is She who crushes the serpent!

As for me and my household, we will stand with Jesus and His Family: His Father, His Mother. For when we stand before Him, no one will sit at the Lamb’s table who had the audacity to dishonor a member of His CHOSEN Family!

simeon on March 29, 2009 at 1:44 PM

2. HER FOOT RESTED ON THE
CRESCENT MOON
She had clearly crushed Quetzalcoatl,
the feathered serpent moon-
god.

Hmm. We could sure use her against another crescent moon god.

Disturb the Universe on March 29, 2009 at 1:52 PM

simeon on March 29, 2009 at 1:44 PM

Wow! I think the words from Scripture apply to your missive:
“Well done, good and faithful servant.”

tigerlily on March 29, 2009 at 1:59 PM

Maybe it’s time for some tough love?

katiejane on March 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM

She’s actually improved from how she used to be, if that makes any sense. We’re starting on prodigal son turf and getting better.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 2:12 PM

Indeed, when Gabriel addresses Mary, he does not use the word “rejoice”; remember, no Catholic Saint would stand for such a greeting. Gabriel addresses Mary with the word, “Hail.” A royal greeting.

simeon on March 29, 2009 at 1:44 PM

“Rejoice” or “Hail” are both proper translations of the Greek word used. Just as “highly favored” or “full of grace” are apt translations of the word that follows immediately after. “Hail” was a common greeting in ancient times; the Greek translation is I state above, while the Latin one is (Ave!) (as in Ave Maria!)

“Ave” was used with your neighbor as well as your leaders. On the Appian Way, there is a marker labelled “Ave Sexte Iucunde — Vale Sexte Iucunde”, which, translated, is “Hello, Sextius Jucundus! Goodbye, Sextius Jucundus!” The Romans appear to have read aloud, and they believed that those who had their names spoken aloud lived on. So Sextius Jucundus died, and someone put up the marker so passers-by would read his name aloud…

The operative thing here is that Mary is being talked to by a Messenger of the Lord. The Messenger could be saying “Hello!” or “Hail!” or “Rejoice!”, but the meaning is identical.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 2:28 PM

Do you think that passage means that Jesus didn’t think that Mary was blessed? Mary did hear the word of God and observed it. He was agreeing that she was blessed. And saying she was blessed for more than family ties.

I’d like to know your interpretation of “on the contrary.” Yes, she is blessed for “hear[ing] the word of God and observ[ing] it,” nothing more.

And that by faith, as it says later in the New Testament, we are Jesus’ brothers. Spiritual brothers.

Book, chapter and verse, please. You will not find this in Scripture. Now, it does say in Romans 8:16-17 that “The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him.” Heirs ≠ brothers.

I also heard once that “On the contrary or rather” are poor translations of the Greek word in Luke 11.
Elisa on March 29, 2009 at 11:05 AM

Here are the different translations, as well as the Greek:
NIV: “He replied, ‘Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.’”
NASB: “But He said, ‘On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it.’”
KJV: “But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.”
CEV: “Jesus replied, ‘That’s true, but the people who are really blessed are the ones who hear and obey God’s message!’”
ESV: “But he said, ‘Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!’”
Greek: “αὐτὸς δὲ εἶπεν μενοῦν μακάριοι οἱ ἀκούοντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ φυλάσσοντες”
The combination between the Greek words “μέν” and “οὖν” are what account for the words “on the contrary.”

Send_Me on March 29, 2009 at 3:19 PM

I honestly cant believe you guys are arguing catholic doctrine and such here. This is a political blog.

Why dont you evangelical creeps who seem more interested in putting down other people’s religions, which shows your insecurity over your own absurd beliefs, take it to religiousgoons.com or something?

The Wall on March 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM

Most Americans don’t know what “Our Lady of Guadalupe” is. Go ahead and ask. Everyone in America isn’t Catholic, or Mexican.

Not yet, anyway.

BTW, someone did paint it.

Moesart on March 29, 2009 at 4:22 PM

My guess is when he said “God” she just brayed like an ass and thought he was kidding.

ctmom on March 29, 2009 at 4:25 PM

The Wall on March 29, 2009 at 4:06 PM

Thank you for your input. It was tremendous value added to this conversation.

Send_Me on March 29, 2009 at 4:58 PM

The Catholic church has a lot invested in people not taking the bible literally because otherwise no one would pay attention to the catholic church and stuff it makes up constantly. The apostles didn’t make up silliness like the catholic church does constantly(the sign of the cross, how a pope is picked, etc). There’s no evidence they did any of that nonsense.

“holy tradition” is nothing more than someone decides to do something new, and someone else repeats it, and after a while it’s considered just as valid as God’s word. That’s insane. How the pope is chosen is a good example of this(the color of the smoke, etc).

TTheoLogan on March 29, 2009 at 10:05 AM

Jesus didn’t mention Paul in the Gospels, yet we accept the vision on the road to Damascus and accept Paul’s writing and the changes he made to the law of the Old Testament.

dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 5:01 PM

not about winning. about Love.

wkgdyw on March 29, 2009 at 1:51 AM

really now? so Jesus lied when He said He was the only way to the Father?

the muslims, the hindus, the satanists are all just fine…since its all about ‘love’

spare me.

right4life on March 29, 2009 at 5:50 PM

So Protestants don’t pray for each other. Wow.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 10:43 PM

this is the level of discourse one would expect from you.

beyond stupid.

right4life on March 29, 2009 at 5:52 PM

You are welcome to your silliness, as we are welcome to ours.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 11:51 AM

ya got nothing…as usual, except anti-semitic hatred.

oh and a great deal of stupidity..

right4life on March 29, 2009 at 5:57 PM

BTW,

The catholic church has reversed itself on positions dozens of times, possibly hundreds, over the centuries(even the popes themselves have done so). Not really very “in tune” with the holy spirit, eh?

Or let me guess, you believe the apostles also reversed themselves on scripture as well? “Let’s redo that whole gospel all over again, because although I thought I was hearing from God, that was actually just my opinion at the time.”

TTheoLogan on March 29, 2009 at 6:03 PM

Oh the next ‘President is training’ truely is an idiot. aka Hillary.

johnnyU on March 29, 2009 at 6:15 PM

right4life on March 29, 2009 at 5:50 PM

What did Jesus say were the two greatest commandments?
Hint: It’s all about Love

clarifides on March 29, 2009 at 6:26 PM

I don’t know if this has been mentioned, but did any of you notice what’s at the bottom of the article?

This evening Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is set to receive the highest award given by Planned Parenthood Federation of America — the Margaret Sanger Award, named for the organization’s founder, a noted eugenicist. The award will be presented at a gala event in Houston, Texas.

I guess the Left and the media don’t mind an award named after a woman who was an advocate of eugenics as a good thing, because she was one of their own.

INC on March 29, 2009 at 6:46 PM

So when did HotAir turn into a Catholic blog? I’m tired of seeing all these stupid Catholic posts about nothing. I know Ed’s a Catholic, OK. But rename the site to HotCatholicAir and be done with it.

Viscount_Bolingbroke on March 29, 2009 at 6:56 PM

You know, stuff like this is good for a laugh and an “I told you so” to liberals.

However, what scares the hell out of me is the fact that we have bozos in charge. Some day, God forbid, that could result in the death of my family. This is real high stakes, not some freaking liberal coffee shop or campus Karl Marx club.

My wife and I do more research on things when we are travelling to another state on vacation… What kind of idiots has hitlary surrounded herself with???

I wonder what the response would have been had Sarah Palin Made ****ANY**** of these mistakes (hillary, obmaa or timmy turbotax’s)

Great job Katie “WIDE LOAD” couric.. You crucified Sarah Palin and you gave the Jugeared Jackass and the Hildabeast a free ride. I wonder how the hell you sleep at night.. Oh never mind, it takes intelligence to have remorse… my bad.

bullseye on March 29, 2009 at 7:34 PM

Is this story anywhere in the mainstream media?

Using the power of the press to suppress is how we got Presidente Pinnochio and is the reason the major media should be swinging from the lampposts if and when the tar and feathering begin!

dhunter on March 29, 2009 at 8:04 PM

Is this story anywhere in the mainstream media?

dhunter on March 29, 2009 at 8:04 PM

I was at a funeral and there was an 80 year old woman who seemed pretty sharp. She hadn’t heard anything about the Gordon Brown debacle, the “panic button” or the other gaffes.

Yep, the lid is being kept on reallllll tight. If you don’t listen to boortz, rush, hannity, beck etc or you don’t get out into the blogshpere, you don’t know about it.

So, Thanks Katie, Oblberdouche, Tingly leg and the SNL players…. You have helped elect a jugeared jackass who is less competenet with executive experience than the Afghani owner of our local 711. IF it hits the fan, those are some of the people responsible.

bullseye on March 29, 2009 at 9:07 PM

Come on, we all know Shrill is only there until she can leave under the most unfavorable circumstances for Odrama.

A week after she leaves her 2012 election committee will be formed.

Everything between now and than is just nuance to her.

FireBlogger on March 29, 2009 at 9:10 PM

So Protestants don’t pray for each other. Wow.

unclesmrgol on March 28, 2009 at 10:43 PM

this is the level of discourse one would expect from you.

beyond stupid.

right4life on March 29, 2009 at 5:52 PM

My comment above was rhetorical, since Protestants aren’t unified on this topic, but there are plenty enough who believe in intercession, which is nothing more than someone praying for someone else. And we Catholics also believe that intercession is possible, so there it stands. You don’t believe, we do.

I don’t think my comment was stupid. It cuts right to the core of your argument and overturns it.

I pwned you right here, right4life. You didn’t respond to this one because you couldn’t.

You don’t know ancient Greek, and I do. Maybe not as good as some others might, but it was my minor in college, so I have some expertise. You rely upon websearches of full words rather than word stems to locate Greek Scripture, not realizing that Greek is an inflected language, and that you have to know the declensions of the nouns and conjugations of the verbs to really do an adequate search. So a word you thought only appears in two places actually appears in many, and your whole argument of Mary vs. Jesus in biblical discourse fell on its head.

You are welcome to your silliness, as we are welcome to ours.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 11:51 AM

ya got nothing…as usual, except anti-semitic hatred.

oh and a great deal of stupidity..

right4life on March 29, 2009 at 5:57 PM

Let’s just say that, unlike at election time, ad hominem attacks don’t work in this particular forum. So, you think I’m anti-Semitic? Quote some anti-Semitic words from one of my posts to prove it. Some of my words — not some claims from your cohorts in that debate.

In other words, Where’s the Rebel Base? I grow tired of asking…

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 10:23 PM

the changes he made to the law of the Old Testament.
dedalus on March 29, 2009 at 5:01 PM

Such as?

Send_Me on March 29, 2009 at 10:51 PM

I guess the Left and the media don’t mind an award named after a woman who was an advocate of eugenics as a good thing, because she was one of their own.

INC on March 29, 2009 at 6:46 PM

She probably thinks Mary should have aborted.

unclesmrgol on March 29, 2009 at 10:51 PM

Countless churches have miraculously come up with bullsh1t artifacts like this one to amaze, terrify and enrapture the townsfolk.

That bozos actually still believe it is an embarrassment to the human race.

Dave Rywall on March 29, 2009 at 11:34 PM

Dave Rywall on March 29, 2009 at 11:34 PM

You need to keep your mouth shut about MY mother. All you have to offer is base and vulgar profanity. You are worse than a troll.

tigerlily on March 30, 2009 at 12:23 AM

Countless churches have miraculously come up with bullsh1t artifacts like this one to amaze, terrify and enrapture the townsfolk.

That bozos actually still believe it is an embarrassment to the human race.

Dave Rywall on March 29, 2009 at 11:34 PM

1. Ever heard of Pascal’s Wager???

2. To call Jews, Christians, Buddhists and Hindus who practice their faith bozo’s shows how low you are. I suppose that it’s OK for the left to show hatred predudice and ignorance though.

3. When People leave Judiasm, Christianity, Hinduism and Buddhism, they have to fill it with something.. What the IDOT left and THE BOZOS on the left have filled it with is

a fawning idolatry of an empty suit jugeared jackass. The messainic devotion is scary as hell to watch..

b. The church of global warming.. I am getting so sick of this glowbull warming garbage. The ice sheets in North america have been receeding for the LAST 90000 years. Hey plasterboard, get a clue. Humans have only existed for 30k years or so. The industrial age is only 200 years old. The great lakes didn’t even EXIST 5000 years ago, they were under 2 freaking miles of ICE.

So, go back to PAscals wager. You can laugh at religious people all you want. If you are right, you get a laugh. If you are wrong you end up spending eternity with Old Set sticking his barbed thing up your posterior.

BTW – I am NOT that religious. I believe in God but usually quietly. BUT, I do have respect for those who truly live their faith.. Something you wouldn’t be able to comprehend.,

So, Go suck mother Geeas teet (or gias or however they spell that)

g’day mate

bullseye on March 30, 2009 at 12:24 AM

Elisa on March 29, 2009 at 11:05 AM
Send_Me on March 29, 2009 at 3:19 PM

Hello, Send Me,

Sorry I was away from here today.

I thought all Christians believed that Jesus is our brother and that God the Father is our Father also. I’m pretty sure most believe this. You must also believe it, no? I hope I am misunderstanding you.

Also because we, the Church, are the Body of Christ spiritually, then spiritually Mary is our Mother. Christians have believed that Mary is our spiritual mother and that Jesus gave her to us on the cross (and have honored her accordingly) since the earliest days of the Church.

Revelation 12:17: “Then the dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus.”

Her other children are all of us, all Christians.

I disagree that heirs does not imply that we are God’s sons and Jesus’ brothers. But here is some other scripture, as you asked for. Not sure if there are other passages.

Romans 8:29: “For those he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, so that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.”

Hebrew 2:11-17:

He who consecrates and those who are being consecrated all have one origin. Therefore, he is not ashamed to call them “brothers,” saying: “I will proclaim your name to my brothers, in the midst of the assembly I will praise you”; and again: “I will put my trust in him”; and again: “Behold, I and the children God has given me.” Now since the children share in blood and flesh, he likewise shared in them, that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and free those who through fear of death had been subject to slavery all their life. Surely he did not help angels but rather the descendants of Abraham; therefore, he had to become like his brothers in every way, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest before God to expiate the sins of the people.

You said, “Yes, she is blessed for “hear[ing] the word of God and observ[ing] it,” nothing more.” I’m glad you agree that Jesus was agreeing with the woman in the crowd and saying she was blessed, but I wonder why you feel compelled to belittle that by adding “nothing more.” Nothing more? I can’t think of anything better than that. She was “blessed amongst woman,” as the Word of God says.

I am familiar with all the various popular English translations. Like I said, I heard that “rather and on the contrary” are poor translations. Maybe someone else here knows more about this than you and I do, since we are not Greek experts.

But it is clear from what Jesus says afterwards and from Luke’s Gospel (which is the Word of God, so God would not contradict it) that Jesus was not disagreeing with the woman in the crowd and saying that Mary was not “blessed amongst women.” So I would think our discussion on this is exhausted.

Good night and God bless you.

Elisa on March 30, 2009 at 12:36 AM

Countless churches have miraculously come up with bullsh1t artifacts like this one to amaze, terrify and enrapture the townsfolk.

That bozos actually still believe it is an embarrassment to the human race.

Dave Rywall on March 29, 2009 at 11:34 PM

Dave, everybody here is a bozo in your estimation, regardless of whether or not we believe in watery tarts handing out flaming swords.

It’s nice to know that your empathic wit extends into Mexico as well.

unclesmrgol on March 30, 2009 at 12:40 AM

You need to keep your mouth shut about MY mother. All you have to offer is base and vulgar profanity. You are worse than a troll.

tigerlily on March 30, 2009 at 12:23 AM
——-
The story of the apparitions and the image on the cloak are as much a clown show fraud as the Shroud of Turin or any other weeping statue or Jesus on a tortilla shell.

If your faith isn’t strong enough to withstand some skepticism and criticism from a complete stranger on an anonymous web board, then you’ve got some pretty weak faith there.

Dave Rywall on March 30, 2009 at 12:45 AM

“the catholic church and stuff it makes up constantly. The apostles didn’t make up silliness like the catholic church does constantly(the sign of the cross, how a pope is picked, etc). There’s no evidence they did any of that nonsense.

TTheoLogan on March 29, 2009 at 10:05 AM

I’m not going into all the scriptural support for the Pope being the steward here on earth of the Church, as set up by Jesus. Too long. Not to mention quotes from the early Church fathers from the first 3 centuries of the Church.

But I will quickly repost something about the sign of the cross that I have already previously written to you. Perhaps you have forgotten.

Actually the earliest Christians made the sign of the cross all the time. The full body one wasn’t until about the 4th century. But by the second century Christians marked the sign of the cross on their foreheads. Like we do today before we hear the Gospel reading.

The sign of the cross is a beautiful prayer and witness to both the Cross and to the Holy Trinity. (“In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”)

Around 200 AD Tertullian wrote:

We Christians wear out our foreheads with the sign of the cross” and

“In all our travels and movements, in all our coming in and going out, in putting on our shoes, at the bath, at the table, in lighting our candles, in lying down, in sitting down, whatever employment occupies us, we mark our forehead with the sign of the cross.

God bless you.

Elisa on March 30, 2009 at 12:46 AM

If your faith isn’t strong enough to withstand some skepticism and criticism from a complete stranger on an anonymous web board, then you’ve got some pretty weak faith there.

Dave Rywall on March 30, 2009 at 12:45 AM

So this was just a drive-by, eh?

unclesmrgol on March 30, 2009 at 1:08 AM

unclesmrgol,

I’ll scan this thread for the examples of bigots and post them on my blog later. Eventually, this will prove to be a big embarrassment for Hot Air. Someone bigger than me in the media will notice it eventually.

Sydney Carton on March 30, 2009 at 1:16 AM

Dave, everybody here is a bozo in your estimation, regardless of whether or not we believe in watery tarts handing out flaming swords.

It’s nice to know that your empathic wit extends into Mexico as well.

unclesmrgol on March 30, 2009 at 12:40 AM
———
People who actually believe that centuries ago, churches were these shining beacons of morality? Those people are bozos.

Dave Rywall on March 30, 2009 at 1:21 AM

Dave Rywall on March 30, 2009 at 12:45 AM

Was that the wind blowing through just now…?

tigerlily on March 30, 2009 at 1:25 AM

I’ll scan this thread for the examples of bigots and post them on my blog later. Eventually, this will prove to be a big embarrassment for Hot Air. Someone bigger than me in the media will notice it eventually.

Sydney Carton on March 30, 2009 at 1:16 AM
——–

“You are soooo right. The Church protects the unborn while covered up for years the rape of childern by priests. I guess you are procted while the in mother’s womb; but once you leave it: watch out for the priests!!!!!!
Chekote on March 29, 2009 at 11:34 AM”

Criticizing the appalling (and as yet unreconciled) behaviour of a number of churches is bigoted? Righttttt.

But keep up the good work copying and pasting things that upset you, Jimmy Olsen.

Dave Rywall on March 30, 2009 at 1:26 AM

Criticizing the appalling (and as yet unreconciled) behaviour of a number of churches is bigoted? Righttttt.

But keep up the good work copying and pasting things that upset you, Jimmy Olsen.

Dave Rywall on March 30, 2009 at 1:26 AM

Behavior? Think again. If it’s behavior you want to condemn, how about condemning the lies and slanders that I’ve shown to the world. Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness, remember? One day, Michelle Malkin will clean house of the bigots here. Until then, I’ll make them famous.

This thread is chronicled here: Hot Air Bigotry – second thread for the day!

Sydney Carton on March 30, 2009 at 2:07 AM

Behavior? Think again. If it’s behavior you want to condemn, how about condemning the lies and slanders that I’ve shown to the world. Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness, remember? One day, Michelle Malkin will clean house of the bigots here. Until then, I’ll make them famous.

This thread is chronicled here: Hot Air Bigotry – second thread for the day!

Sydney Carton on March 30, 2009 at 2:07 AM
———-
No, I don’t remember what it says in your Bible, because I don’t need to waste time reading a bunch of he said she said campfire stories and mythology passed down from generation to generation by people who needed (or in your case, need) magic to explain the natural order of things to make them (you) less afraid of the dark because, well, science is just too darned hard.

Lies and slanders? When it comes to the subhuman behaviour – wait, let’s call it sin so you can wrap your head around it – of officially sanctioned/supported/employed people of the church, the only lying going on has been committed by the church.

I’m pretty sure there’s a passage in the Bible somewhere that condemns child molesting. Can you find it for me? Thanks.

Dave Rywall on March 30, 2009 at 8:00 AM

If your faith isn’t strong enough to withstand some skepticism and criticism from a complete stranger on an anonymous web board, then you’ve got some pretty weak faith there.

Dave Rywall on March 30, 2009 at 12:45 AM

And I have to wonder why your LACK of faith is so challenged by those who do believe in something.

Why does it matter to non-believers whether someone believes Mary was “full of grace” or even if someone believes the world was literally made in 7 days? How does someone else’s faith hurt you? If you don’t believe in hell – why do you care if I believe you are “going to hell for your sins?

If believers are such an insignificant group their ability to force their religion down your throat is minimal. So if believers are such fools, why do you and the other people here put so much effort into trashing their beliefs? Why do you care if their faith gives them comfort or satisfaction?

katiejane on March 30, 2009 at 9:50 AM

And I have to wonder why your LACK of faith is so challenged by those who do believe in something.

Why does it matter to non-believers whether someone believes Mary was “full of grace” or even if someone believes the world was literally made in 7 days? How does someone else’s faith hurt you? If you don’t believe in hell – why do you care if I believe you are “going to hell for your sins?

If believers are such an insignificant group their ability to force their religion down your throat is minimal. So if believers are such fools, why do you and the other people here put so much effort into trashing their beliefs? Why do you care if their faith gives them comfort or satisfaction?

katiejane on March 30, 2009 at 9:50 AM
———-
It matters that the church has committed appalling crimes.

It matters that churches enjoy tax free status.

It matters that churches are messing with educational curriculums.

I have no problem whatsoever with people enjoying their faith (in whichever ludicrous pick and choose what to obey salad bar way they choose).
But keep it out of schools and the government. Religion lowers the bar on civilization.

Dave Rywall on March 30, 2009 at 9:58 AM

Considering she is considered an educated woman she should have known or at aleast her staff should have provided her that information before she visited there. Part of diplomacy is being sensitive and aware of the beliefs of those she is dealing with.

katiejane on March 29, 2009 at 12:12 PM

You make a good point about that. I’m sure that she would have been much more rigorous about other religions’ views and traditions in a similar visit (such as Muslims, etc).

threeCents on March 30, 2009 at 11:24 AM

You make a good point about that. I’m sure that she would have been much more rigorous about other religions’ views and traditions in a similar visit (such as Muslims, etc).

threeCents on March 30, 2009 at 11:24 AM

Wait, I forgot about the button translation into Russian where they “worked very hard to get it right” but failed to do so. Either they don’t do research or they need more careful researchers.

threeCents on March 30, 2009 at 11:35 AM

I think the word “Virgin” confused her…

right2bright on March 30, 2009 at 1:11 PM

I have no problem whatsoever with people enjoying their faith (in whichever ludicrous pick and choose what to obey salad bar way they choose).
But keep it out of schools and the government. Religion lowers the bar on civilization.

Dave Rywall on March 30, 2009 at 9:58 AM

Glad to see you agree with us about Obama speaking at Notre Dame. Great to have you on board…

unclesmrgol on March 30, 2009 at 4:42 PM

I’m pretty sure there’s a passage in the Bible somewhere that condemns child molesting. Can you find it for me? Thanks.

Dave Rywall on March 30, 2009 at 8:00 AM

Yes, here it is:

At that time the disciples approached Jesus and said, “Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”

He called a child over, placed it in their midst,

and said, “Amen, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children,

you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.

Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

And whoever receives one child such as this in my name receives me.

Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.”

This particular sin is individual, and, according to Church law, accrues also to those who wittingly aid and abet sin, or, through wilful inaction, allow it to occur.

It’s why I still pay into the collection for the Archdiocese here, although it pains me to do so. Even though my inaction was not wilful, still do I feel stained.

But I’d rather be a stained Catholic, Mr. Rywall, than be you, for you are in the class of persecutors mentioned in the verse above.

unclesmrgol on March 30, 2009 at 4:52 PM

for Dave Rywall

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKmwj29zH_8

“While all in America were watching the the Chicago riots at the Democratic Convention, or viewing live war zone broadcasts from Vietnam or were being mesmerized by the Watergate hearings on television, and the 6 day war just ended with Israel killing thousands of Egyptian youth and losing all of Sinai, the country was in a dissastrious depresssion. A year after the war the Mother of God was appearing for tens of thousands to see in the land of the pyramids at a Coptic Orthodox church constructed to commemorate the area in Egypt where she had come with Saint Joseph and Christ when they all fled from Herod. Starting in April, 1968, her apparitions of light changed the lives of thousands. Her appearances at Zeitun were astounding. She was seen by more than a million people. The apparitions were broadcast by Egyptian TV, photographed by hundreds of professional photographers and personally witnessed by Egyptian President Abdul Nasser. The apparitions lasted for three years with numerous unaccountable healings recorded by various medical professionals. The local police, who initially thought the apparitions were an elaborate hoax, searched a 15-mile radius surrounding the site to uncover any type of device that could be used to project such images. They were completely unsuccessful. This short film shows the amazing pictures taken by professional photographers during her Apparitions. “

lobosan5 on March 30, 2009 at 5:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5