Does Ryan have a “Catholic problem”?

posted at 6:31 pm on August 19, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

That question has come at me several times in the nine days since Paul Ryan joined the Republican ticket as Mitt Romney’s nominee — and not meant in the same way that JFK had a “Catholic problem” in 1960.  People wondering about Ryan’s relationship with Catholic voters usually results from Ryan’s attempts to restructure federal spending, or his supposed devotion to Ayn Rand.  The last question is easiest to answer, since I’ve read Rand and admired the ideas in Atlas Shrugged while rejecting completely the philosophies of objectivism and atheism Rand embraced.  One hardly needs to be an atheist to appreciate limited government, especially after the HHS contraception mandate being imposed on religious organizations and charities.  Reading Atlas Shrugged and appreciating the wisdom of limited government is not an excommunicating act in the Catholic Church, I assure you.

What about Ryan’s budget?  It’s no secret that liberals dislike it, although some conservatives might wonder why, considering the moderate approach Ryan took toward deficit and entitlement reform.  Our colleague Kate Hicks notices a new group of Catholics who want Ryan to have a change of heart … in the middle of an election:

It’s the ultimate in Catholic double standards: a website called www.PrayForPaulsChangeOfHeart.org launched this week, calling for Catholics to pray that he abandons his Path to Prosperity budget in favor of something more in line with the Church’s social justice teachings. If you click around, you can also find a page with one sentence requesting prayers for Vice President Joe Biden, noted adamant supporter of the pro-choice cause. (It says nothing of Kathleen Sebelius, whose Mass attendance doesn’t exactly jive with her record ofeschewing established Catholic doctrine.)

In condemning Ryan’s budget, the site pulls from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ letter to Ryan, which outlines the criteria the Church feels a Catholic policymaker ought to consider when crafting budgetary policy …

Of course, it’s very easy for a Catholic capitalist to dispute each of these claims – first and foremost, how does it serve the poor if the government continues down its current path to bankruptcy? – and this potential for argument creates a crucial distinction between budgetary policy and life issues. A budget has room for interpretation, and there are different ways to construct the social safety net; abortion, however, is a clear-cut issue, a literal matter of life or death.

So I’m going to be a little blunter about it: the Catholic Church needs to shut up about Paul Ryan’s budget.

Well, I’m not going to go that far, because this group isn’t the Catholic Church.  It’s a small group of the laity — in fact, it might be just one person with an amateurish website, one that offers no explanation of whether the owner of the site is even Catholic at all.  The act of offering a Rosary prayer for the “Conversion of Representative Paul Ryan” (one of the events listed on the main page) comes close to the sin of judging another person’s standing with God, something that a proper Catholic would recognize as dangerous ground. One can certainly judge the standing of a member within the faith (although that’s best left to pastors and bishops), but “conversion” strongly implies that the petitioner doesn’t consider Ryan a real Catholic.  I’m skeptical of this website being anything more significant than someone’s idea of gadflyism.

My good friend Deacon Greg Kandra notes a somewhat more established group in the laity supporting Barack Obama,  and their shift in emphasis from 2008 as “pro-life” in support of Obama to an economic message in 2012, presumably in response to Ryan’s selection as Romney’s running mate:

Catholics for Obama has launched its 2012 initiative with a focus on economic issues, in an apparent shift from its 2008 presentation of the presidential candidate as “pro-life.”

“We endorse the President because of his tireless focus on economic security for middle-class families,” the national co-chairs of Catholics for Obama wrote in an Aug. 13 letter, kicking off their effort to target a key voting bloc in the closely contested election.

Proclaiming their commitment “to our faith and our country,” the 21 signers devoted much of their letter to jobs and the economy, along with a variety of foreign policy items which have been seldom-mentioned in the presidential campaign. ….

The letter cited the Catholic teaching “that every human being is made in the image of God,” as a warning against Republican policies that the signers said “would shred our nation’s compassionate safety net” by “gutting” social assistance programs.

Here, though, we have no real change in status.  These same accusations against Republicans were also offered as secondary arguments in 2008 by this group, and are made every electoral cycle by liberal Catholics.  Ryan’s not going to win their vote simply by sitting in the same pews, but that’s not the same as arguing that Ryan damages Romney’s Catholic draw by being on the ticket.

The key question of whether Ryan’s budget violates his faith gets addressed best by the man who has the authority to speak on Ryan’s standing in the church — his bishop.  Bishop Robert C. Morlino addressed this accusation in a column on Thursday to members of the Diocese of Madison, instructing that Catholic social teaching involves both solidarity (with the poor) and subsidiarity — the principle that support for the poor should come from the sources closest to them, the individual members of the church, or the local communities.  Where “intrinsic evil” is not involved, the political solutions for the ills of the world should come from the laity, and not the church itself:

In these most fundamental matters, a well-formed Catholic conscience, or the well-formed conscience of a person of good will, simply follows the conclusions demanded by the ecology of human nature and the reasoning process. A Catholic conscience can never take exception to the prohibition of actions which are intrinsically evil. Nor may a conscience well-formed by reason or the Catholic faith ever choose to vote for someone who clearly, consistently, persistently promotes that which is intrinsically evil.

However, a conscience well-formed according to reason or the Catholic faith, must also make choices where intrinsic evil is not involved. How best to care for the poor is probably the finest current example of this, though another would be how best to create jobs at a time when so many are suffering from the ravages of unemployment. In matters such as these, where intrinsic evil is not involved, the rational principles of solidarity and subsidiarity come into play. The principle of solidarity, simply stated, means that every human being on the face of the earth is my brother and my sister, my “neighbor” in the biblical sense. At the same time, the time-tested best way for assisting our neighbors throughout the world should follow the principle of subsidiarity. That means the problem at hand should be addressed at the lowest level possible — that is, the level closest to the people in need. That again, is simply the law of human reason.

That doesn’t mean that Catholics have to like Ryan’s budget; there are plenty of areas of debate that it produces, just as any complex public policy will do.  It isn’t a matter of Ryan’s Catholicism, though, and Bishop Morlino is particularly emphatic when it comes to those who claim that in the debate:

It was no shock at all for me to learn that our diocesan native son, Paul Ryan, had been chosen to be a candidate for the Vice Presidency of the United States. I am proud of his accomplishments as a native son, and a brother in the faith, and my prayers go with him and especially with his family as they endure the unbelievable demands of a presidential campaign here in the United States. It is not for the bishop or priests to endorse particular candidates or political parties. Any efforts on the part of any bishop or priest to do so should be set aside. And you can be assured that no priest who promotes a partisan agenda is acting in union with me or with the Universal Church. …

As one looks at issues such as the two mentioned above and seeks to apply the principles of solidarity and subsidiarity, Catholics and others of good will can arrive at different conclusions. These are conclusions about the best means to promote the preferential option for the poor, or the best means to reach a lower percentage of unemployment throughout our country. No one is contesting here anyone’s right to the basic needs of food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, etc. Nor is anyone contesting someone’s right to work and so provide for self and family. However there can be difference according to how best to follow the principles which the Church offers.

Making decisions as to the best political strategies, the best policy means, to achieve a goal, is the mission of lay people, not bishops or priests. As Pope Benedict himself has said, a just society and a just state is the achievement of politics, not the Church. And therefore Catholic laymen and women who are familiar with the principles dictated by human reason and the ecology of human nature, or non-Catholics who are also bound by these same principles, are in a position to arrive at differing conclusions as to what the best means are for the implementation of these principles — that is, “lay mission” for Catholics.

Thus, it is not up to me or any bishop or priest to approve of Congressman Ryan’s specific budget prescription to address the best means we spoke of. Where intrinsic evils are not involved, specific policy choices and political strategies are the province of Catholic lay mission. But, as I’ve said, Vice Presidential Candidate Ryan is aware of Catholic Social Teaching and is very careful to fashion and form his conclusions in accord with the principles mentioned above. Of that I have no doubt. (I mention this matter in obedience to Church Law regarding one’s right to a good reputation.)

So what does constitute the criteria the church uses to decide when to weigh in on policy matters?  Morlino is also emphatic on what constitutes intrinsic evil:

However, the formation of conscience regarding particular policy issues is different depending on how fundamental to the ecology of human nature or the Catholic faith a particular issue is. Some of the most fundamental issues for the formation of a Catholic conscience are as follows: sacredness of human life from conception to natural death, marriage, religious freedom and freedom of conscience, and a right to private property.

Violations of the above involve intrinsic evil — that is, an evil which cannot be justified by any circumstances whatsoever. These evils are examples of direct pollution of the ecology of human nature and can be discerned as such by human reason alone. Thus, all people of good will who wish to follow human reason should deplore any and all violations in the above areas, without exception. The violations would be: abortion, euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, same-sex marriage, government-coerced secularism, and socialism.

The answer to whether Ryan has a “Catholic problem” in terms of gaining or losing Catholic votes for the GOP will only be answered in the exit polls after the election.  Without question, though, Ryan does not have a problem with the Catholic Church or its teachings, as Ryan’s own bishop makes plainly clear.  While the laity and the ordained may have issues with Ryan’s budget proposals, they don’t rise to the level of intrinsic evil, and so those individuals and groups that engage in the debate over budgetary matters speak for themselves, and not for the church itself.  As far as offering Rosaries for conversion, we Catholics should be doing that for the whole world, and in particular for an end to abortion and the other intrinsic evils Bishop Morlino notes in his excellent column.

Addendum: Via ConservativeLA on Twitter, Antony Davies and Kristina Antolin take up the opposite argument — that government programs represent involuntary coercion and therefore cannot be acceptable to Catholics:

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has long supported government interference in the economy as a means to help the poor. But we suspect the bishops haven’t fully thought this through: If God really did favor a top-down approach to poverty reduction, why wouldn’t He establish a government with the power to wipe away poverty on demand instead of leaving things to chance and the possibility that someone like Mr. Ryan would come along and mess up His plans?

Perhaps we dehumanize the poor when we treat them as nothing more than problems to be solved, and we dehumanize the rich when we treat them as wallets to be picked.

Wealth and poverty are catalysts for bringing the rich and the poor together in community, and community is the hallmark of the church’s mission on Earth. Government is not community. Government is one of community’s tools, a coercive one we use when it is necessary to force people to behave in ways they would not otherwise behave voluntarily.

But that word—voluntarily—is key, and it’s where Mr. Ryan’s religious detractors go awry: Charity can only be charity when it is voluntary. Coerced acts, no matter how beneficial or well-intentioned, cannot be moral. If we force people to give to the poor, we have stripped away the moral component, reducing charity to mere income redistribution. And if one really is as good as the other, the Soviets demonstrated long ago that it can be done far more efficiently without the trappings of church and religion.

While I agree with their argument on the policy merits, I think this overshoots the mark, too.  Government programs and their funding through taxation are involuntary once passed into law.  However, the democratic processes in our republic are intended to establish self-government, which derives from the consent of the governed.  In such a system, one cannot declare that they will not abide by laws with which they disagree, unless those laws become tyrannical or (in the Catholic case) impose an “intrinsic evil.” The passage of entitlement programs has been part of that process of self-government, as are the debates on their current funding and need for reform, and which forms reform should take.  There is nothing intrinsically immoral or amoral about systems of self-government creating legitimate safety net programs for the truly needy, even if tax dollars go to their funding, although the relative merits of such programs vis-a-vis crowding out private charity, the scope of the programs, and the best level of governance for tending such systems are also legitimate issues for debate among Catholics and non-Catholics alike.

There are many reasons to believe that the policies of the nanny state will deliver more misery than it relieves — Bishop Morlino refers to that in his column — but that is a measure of policy effectiveness, which as Bishop Morlino states does not directly relate to church doctrine.  The USCCB acknowledges a wide variety of fair-minded opinion on how best to deliver on Catholic social teachings through public policy, and exhorts only that public policy should be formed with the needs of the poor and infirm in mind to deliver the best possible solutions to their circumstances.  Just as liberals should not claim Ryan’s efforts to be outside of Catholic moral thought, we should be careful not to unfairly delegitimize others in the Catholic community who honestly see other solutions for social ills as more effective.

As I wrote before, the Catholic Church goes far beyond political agendas, and encompasses a wide diversity of thought.  Attempting to politically pigeonhole people on the basis of faith is usually a recipe for failure.  In my opinion, a system on track to put a third of the citizens and residents of the world’s richest nation on federal welfare programs outside of Social Security and Medicare (technically contribution programs) is a nation that is taking too much capital out of systems that would otherwise expand the sources of real prosperity and improved living standards, and is diluting the ability to assist the truly needy of our nation.  The need to reform such a system to return capital to those who can expand prosperity and raise living standards while making assistance to the needy more effective and efficient is well within the purpose, motives, and spirit of Catholic social teaching — but I’m not going to be arrogant enough to claim that my perspective is the only one that fits within those parameters.

Update: The reference to the near occasion of sinfulness in the way the website demands the “conversion” of Ryan comes straight from Scripture.  When Jesus said, “Judge not, lest ye be judged,” He meant that to arrogate to ourselves the authority to judge the status of another’s soul in relation to God was to infringe on God’s prerogative — and to operate far above one’s pay grade.  We can argue whether one’s policies fit within Catholic doctrine, especially when it comes to intrinsic evils such as abortion, but we have no more standing to judge the status of Nancy Pelosi’s soul than Paul Ryan’s.  As Jesus taught, we’re better off focusing on the status of our own souls and our relation to God.


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 2 3

I am Catholic. And I have no problem with Ryan.

Indeed, it would be awesome to have a true Orthodox Catholic as President in 2020 :)

Not like those “catholics” like John F Kerry or Nancy Pelosi…

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 6:33 PM

It depends on which Catholic you ask.

Pattosensei on August 19, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Does Ryan have a “Catholic problem”?

Did John F Kennedy have a Catholic problem?

What does “You didn’t build that” really mean?

SWalker on August 19, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Does Ryan have a Akin problem might be more pertinent.

rob verdi on August 19, 2012 at 6:35 PM

They shouldn’t vote for him since he is catholic anymore than black people should vote for for Obama. It is what their policies are. If Obama held my views and pushed them better than others I would vote for him. It shouldn’t be so hard.

tomas on August 19, 2012 at 6:37 PM

BY the way, having read most of Rand’s work and being a Catholic its not that hard to square the circle and accept her believe that socialist countries will collapse and the overall positive benefits for the person and the nation for an organized religion.

rob verdi on August 19, 2012 at 6:37 PM

He doesn’t have a problem because the Catholics who won’t like his budget cutting leanings, are already democrat voters, as most Catholics are, and aren’t going to vote GOP in any case.

keep the change on August 19, 2012 at 6:37 PM

He doesn’t have a problem because the Catholics who won’t like his budget cutting leanings, are already democrat voters, as most Catholics are, and aren’t going to vote GOP in any case.

keep the change on August 19, 2012 at 6:37 PM

The Catholics who don’t like Ryan’s policies are not real Catholics.

Christ never said “render unto Caesar that which will keep your brother”.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Maybe he has a Catholics-In-Name-Only problem. That’s a problem I could embrace.

22044 on August 19, 2012 at 6:40 PM

A tad long for my tastes. Strip Rand of her virulent atheism, and replace with some Aquinas, C.S. Lewis, St. Augustine. Mix thoroughly.

andy85719 on August 19, 2012 at 6:40 PM

So these Catholics support charity by force interesting.

Pope John Paul differed–

Religion & Liberty
Volume 6, Number 4 – July and August 1996
The Principle of Subsidiarity
by David A. Bosnich
“One of the key principles of Catholic social thought is known as the principle of subsidiarity. This tenet holds that nothing should be done by a larger and more complex organization which can be done as well by a smaller and simpler organization. In other words, any activity which can be performed by a more decentralized entity should be. This principle is a bulwark of limited government and personal freedom. It conflicts with the passion for centralization and bureaucracy characteristic of the Welfare State.

“This is why Pope John Paul II took the “social assistance state” to task in his 1991 encyclical Centesimus Annus. The Pontiff wrote that the Welfare State was contradicting the principle of subsidiarity by intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility. This “leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending.

“In reviewing John XXIII’s encyclical Mater et Magistra, Father Robert Sirico observes that the Pontiff’s desire was to strengthen mediating institutions in order to protect the primacy of the human person. Far from advancing any form of collectivism, Pope John wanted to “multiply social relationships” so that the individual would be free to pursue the common good. Socialization does not mean centralization. Rather, it refers to the voluntary associations which Alexis de Tocqueville praised as being a vital part of American freedom in the 1830s.

“The principle of subsidiarity is both thoroughly Catholic and thoroughly American.

“When the federal government usurps the rights and responsibilities of state and local governments, a flagrant violation of the principle of subsidiarity has occurred. If upper echelon bureaucrats in a Cabinet department operate in a top-down manner and deny any flexibility to their subordinates, the effectiveness of this department will be diminished. Higgins’s interpretation of subsidiarity exempts the internal operation of the various levels and branches of government from any critical scrutiny.

“The top-down, centralized planning of the Soviet system could not succeed because it contradicted the subsidiarity principle. When producers and consumers are not allowed to bargain freely, prices cease to reflect meaningful information and become arbitrary dictates of the bureaucracy.”

http://www.acton.org/pub/religion-li…e-subsidiarity

CW on August 19, 2012 at 6:40 PM

I think Her major issue is the HHS mandate…

MGardner on August 19, 2012 at 6:42 PM

I am Catholic. I left this prayer for their prayer team to consider:

I pray that the people who run this site will embrace true Catholic teachings on the matter of individual action in almsgiving. I pray that they will release the thought that taking from someone by force of Government is anything other than theft pure and simple. I pray that they will realize that Caesar is nowhere near God. I pray that they will not pray to require me by power of our Government to give alms toward the murder of babies. This I ask through Jesus Christ, Our Lord, who reigns with the Father and the Holy Spirit for ever and ever. Amen.

unclesmrgol on August 19, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Now then, if American Roman Catholics really wanted to show that they (as a group) are clear thinking individuals who truly love this Nation…they’d have gone after the likes of Nancy Pelosi, and her fellow travelers, and jumped aboard the anti-Socialist Dump-Obama bandwagon, a long long time ago….

If they have a “problem” with Paul Ryan, and no problem with Nancy Pelosi (et al.) and still consider voting for Obama …then, speaking as a Roman Catholic, I have a major problem with them.

coldwarrior on August 19, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Many Catholics are sick to death of the church’s “social justice” push, despise Pelosi’s CINO brand of Catholicism, and are very supportive of Paul Ryan. Catholics and other people of faith who support Obama are misguided fools, IMHO.

indyvet on August 19, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Does Ryan have a “Catholic problem”?

…I think it is the Catholic Church that has a problem!…they have no problem with Biteme and Pelosi…etc.

KOOLAID2 on August 19, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Maybe he has a Catholics-In-Name-Only problem. That’s a problem I could embrace.

22044 on August 19, 2012 at 6:40 PM

They can call themselves Catholic… So can a number of bishops and priests… maybe even this Pope, who is nothing compared to his predecessor… But they aren’t. Not if they believe in government stealing from your neighbor to support your brother.

YOU are your brother’s keeper.
NOT your neighbor.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 6:50 PM

The Catholics who don’t like Ryan’s policies are not real Catholics.

That’s a pretty silly statement. That would mean that most Catholics aren’t real Catholics. And who gets to decide that? Especially in the poor Catholics countries, which is almost all of them, there is a strong tradition of looking to government for just about anything. And even in wealthy America, Aatholics are a traditional democrat constituency. Just as Jews are. As are blacks. And Hispanics. Are those people not really who they claim to be? Are they frauds for voting democrat? While it is possible to be a good catholic and vote GOP, the salient point is that it is even easier to be a good Catholic and vote socialist.

keep the change on August 19, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Many Catholics are sick to death of the church’s “social justice” push, despise Pelosi’s CINO brand of Catholicism, and are very supportive of Paul Ryan. Catholics and other people of faith who support Obama are misguided fools, IMHO.

indyvet on August 19, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Many not most. I suspect they believe it relieves them of their personal responsibility. It is much easier.

CW on August 19, 2012 at 6:54 PM

The Catholics who don’t like Ryan’s policies are not real Catholics.

Christ never said “render unto Caesar that which will keep your brother”.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 6:39 PM

Ed just said it’s sinful to question the real-ness of another Catholic.

MeatHeadinCA on August 19, 2012 at 6:54 PM

No

SouthernGent on August 19, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Paul Ryan has already addressed this issue of the principle of subsidiarity. His thinking is in line with Catholic teaching as defined by Pope John Paul mentioned above.

I’m with you, coldwarrior. The hypocrisy of this group that gives a pass to Pelosi (et al) stinks to high heaven.

onlineanalyst on August 19, 2012 at 6:55 PM

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 6:35 PM

That has to be the most shocking Newsweek cover ever. I can’t wait to see how the rest of the MSM deals with it. Could the media finally be turning on Obama? I hope so.

joekenha on August 19, 2012 at 6:56 PM

Ed just said it’s sinful to question the real-ness of another Catholic.

MeatHeadinCA on August 19, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Well, I question it.

Christianity, which has always been led by the Catholic Church, which was founded by the Apostle Peter, does not stand for coercion.

Those who believe in using Caesar to coerce “charity” aren’t Christians.

They believe in using FORCE to force themselves and others to do that which they won’t do from their own hearts.

That isn’t charity. That isn’t Christian.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 6:57 PM

One hardly needs to be an atheist to appreciate limited government,

Just as one does not have to be an atheist to appreciate the electric light bulb. Is this the dimwits latest gasp of desperation? Nah, they probably have a few more before they drown in November.

VorDaj on August 19, 2012 at 6:59 PM

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Just saw the headline on Drudge. That’s pretty huge.

John the Libertarian on August 19, 2012 at 6:59 PM

The “social justice” wing of Catholicism has been riddled with activist clergy and religious more attuned to the tenets of socialism.

I believe that it was many of this “social justice” group who allied themselves with the Communists in South and Central America.

onlineanalyst on August 19, 2012 at 6:59 PM

The economic foundation for Catholicism is socialism–paying for other people’s problems. Aside from abortion/gay-marriage the Catholic Church’s platform is the same as the DNC. Interestingly, just like limousine libs, the church tells people to spread the wealth while the pontiff walks about in fine silks and gold. After Vatican II, things just went downhill.

andy85719 on August 19, 2012 at 7:00 PM

hat’s a pretty silly statement. That would mean that most Catholics aren’t real Catholics. And who gets to decide that? Especially in the poor Catholics countries, which is almost all of them, there is a strong tradition of looking to government for just about anything. And even in wealthy America, Aatholics are a traditional democrat constituency. Just as Jews are. As are blacks. And Hispanics. Are those people not really who they claim to be? Are they frauds for voting democrat? While it is possible to be a good catholic and vote GOP, the salient point is that it is even easier to be a good Catholic and vote socialist.

keep the change on August 19, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Christians should look to God, not to government.

Christ didn’t much like his government. The only thing he ever said was you should pay Caesar what is his. He never said BLINDLY obey government!

Neither did the Old Testament Prophets, after King David, who was the ideal King (who himself had flaws) they didn’t have much good to say about Kings of Israel and Judah…

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:00 PM

Millions of unborn innocents murdered and this is the issue????

CW on August 19, 2012 at 7:00 PM

The “social justice” wing of Catholicism has been riddled with activist clergy and religious more attuned to the tenets of socialism.

I believe that it was many of this “social justice” group who allied themselves with the Communists in South and Central America.

onlineanalyst on August 19, 2012 at 6:59 PM

This is why I’ve contemplated no longer being Catholic.

Until I realize that if the Church establishment stands for communism that the problem isn’t me. I *AM* Catholic. The establishment isn’t.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:01 PM

RE: The Newsweek cover article, it’s written by Niall Ferguson, which means it’s probably worth reading.

The magazine? Still worthless sh*t. But Niall Ferguson is a really great writer.

Esoteric on August 19, 2012 at 7:01 PM

I’m with you, coldwarrior. The hypocrisy of this group that gives a pass to Pelosi (et al) stinks to high heaven.

onlineanalyst on August 19, 2012 at 6:55 PM

I also suspect many of them really don’t have an issue with abortion. That with their belief in the welfare state makes them the 21st century liberals.

CW on August 19, 2012 at 7:02 PM

That’s a pretty silly statement. That would mean that most Catholics aren’t real Catholics. And who gets to decide that? Especially in the poor Catholics countries, which is almost all of them, there is a strong tradition of looking to government for just about anything. And even in wealthy America, Aatholics are a traditional democrat constituency. Just as Jews are. As are blacks. And Hispanics. Are those people not really who they claim to be? Are they frauds for voting democrat? While it is possible to be a good catholic and vote GOP, the salient point is that it is even easier to be a good Catholic and vote socialist.

keep the change on August 19, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Deciding who is a “REAL” Catholic and who isn’t is very easy. As is the question of who gets to do it. The answers to both questions can be found in the very scriptures that form the bedrock foundation of the Catholic Faith.

So, in other words, the “REAL” Catholics, are as Jesus Christ said, Those who keep his commandments, not those who disregard the commandments that they either do not like or find offensive.

As to who get’s to decide, again, it’s in the Bible, the Apostle Paul wrote extensively on the subject.

SWalker on August 19, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Does Ryan have a “Catholic problem”?

Only with the Maryknoll wannabes.

CC Senor on August 19, 2012 at 7:03 PM

This is why I’ve contemplated no longer being Catholic.

Until I realize that if the Church establishment stands for communism that the problem isn’t me. I *AM* Catholic. The establishment isn’t.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Add to that their selfish, pathetic, miserable and criminal handling of the homosexual pedophile priests and the Church is pretty much dead to me.

CW on August 19, 2012 at 7:03 PM

The economic foundation for Catholicism is socialism–paying for other people’s problems. Aside from abortion/gay-marriage the Catholic Church’s platform is the same as the DNC. Interestingly, just like limousine libs, the church tells people to spread the wealth while the pontiff walks about in fine silks and gold. After Vatican II, things just went downhill.

andy85719 on August 19, 2012 at 7:00 PM

I predict at some time in the near future, the Catholic establishment adopts “flexibility” on abortion.

It’s truly the ONLY Catholic doctrine they stand on now. And not that strongly given how they tolerate the Kennedys, Pelosi, amongst many who claim to be “Catholic” by not denying them communion.

The Church’s stand on abortion is weak. Extremely weak. They give it great lip service. They give it little action.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:04 PM

This whole Rand thing against Ryan is absurd and he shouldn’t fall for any of it. Thomas Edison was an atheist so should Ryan denounce light bulbs and phonographs and motion pictures? Darwin was something of an atheist so should Ryan denounce his Theory of Evolution? Pope John Paul II didn’t, in fact he largely agreed with it, just adding that God induced a soul at conception. Should Ryan denounce Pope John Paul II? Thomas Jefferson was certainly arguably something of an “atheist” (as a deist, he did not believe in a personal God anyway) so should Ryan denounce Jefferson and the United States Constitution? Abraham Lincoln was an atheist (believe that or not, he was) so should Ryan denounce Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation? If as good a Catholic as Pope John Paul II could find merit in Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Ryan can certainly find merit in Ayn Rand’s philosophy.

Anything for these ding bat dimofascistcrat hate mongers that they can use to try and change the subject from their Idiot Child Emperor’s abysmal record. Don’t fall for it.

FeralCat on August 19, 2012 at 7:04 PM

If we accept a Mormon, than surely a Ryan Catholic is acceptable…

right2bright on August 19, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Are those people not really who they claim to be? Are they frauds for voting democrat?

keep the change on August 19, 2012 at 6:52 PM

Nope, they’re just friggin idiots….

Tim Zank on August 19, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Ed just said it’s sinful to question the real-ness of another Catholic.

MeatHeadinCA on August 19, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Maybe not, but as liberalism destroys everything it touches, someone’s Catholicism isn’t exempt from that.

22044 on August 19, 2012 at 7:05 PM

O/T sort of

Isn’t it interesting that the boy king and family attended Church services this morning for only the second or third time this year?

Flora Duh on August 19, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Or is it surly…

right2bright on August 19, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Deciding who is a “REAL” Catholic and who isn’t is very easy. As is the question of who gets to do it. The answers to both questions can be found in the very scriptures that form the bedrock foundation of the Catholic Faith.

So, in other words, the “REAL” Catholics, are as Jesus Christ said, Those who keep his commandments, not those who disregard the commandments that they either do not like or find offensive.

As to who get’s to decide, again, it’s in the Bible, the Apostle Paul wrote extensively on the subject.

SWalker on August 19, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Pope John Paul II wasn’t perfect. He had many failings, such as not cracking down on the homosexual predators in the priesthood.

But he was Catholic on the fundamentals. He spent HIS WHOLE LIFE fighting communism. He stood for the sanctity of life.

Benedict XVI, not so much. He’s a terrible successor. He’s worse than John Paul II on his WORST failings and has none of his virtue.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Many Catholics are sick to death of the church’s “social justice” push, despise Pelosi’s CINO brand of Catholicism, and are very supportive of Paul Ryan. Catholics and other people of faith who support Obama are misguided fools, IMHO.

indyvet on August 19, 2012 at 6:49 PM

I stopped going to the Catholic church a couple of years ago when they started supporting amnesty for anyone who came over the border and slipping in flyers in the bulletin. Look at Cardinal Mahony who marched with a bunch of illegals in CA and held hands with organizers as they announced “no somos criminales” or “we are not criminals.”

I’m sick of it and think their tax exempt status ought to be revoked since they’ve become a political action committee. They want all illegals to have healthcare and every other freebie, then the Catholic Church can pay for it.

TxAnn56 on August 19, 2012 at 7:07 PM

Which side it is that keeps making a candidate’s religion an issue, but the left? And who but the likes of Nancy Pelosi will scream she’s a devout Catholic in front of certain audiences, then politically do everything against traditional Church doctrine?

I’m getting as tired of religious slanders as I am of the Democrat racist charge at every turn.

Liam on August 19, 2012 at 7:08 PM

Isn’t it interesting that the boy king and family attended Church services this morning for only the second or third time this year?

Flora Duh on August 19, 2012 at 7:05 PM

A man can be Jew or Christian, or he can be an Obama supporter, but he can’t legally be Jew or Christian, and be an Obama supporter … except in the usual way: one of the two with the mouth, the other with the heart. The spirit of Judaism and Christianity proclaim the survival of Israel and the meaning of that has no longer been left to guesswork, but made tremendously definite … the Jew and the Christian must fight all who would commit or enable another genocide or enslavement of the Jews. That is the spirit and the law of Judaism and Christianity.

Well, Obama has his beliefs and actions and it is a perfectly definite set, there is no vagueness about it. He commands that the Jew bow to the Muslim at every turn they do him hurt or threaten him and his children with death. Word it as softly as you please, the spirit of Obama is the spirit of the evil shadowed specter of the Beast of Austria insidiously billowing in and building and building to ever more horrific heights. The moment there is a question about a boundary line or a building or some Muslim somewhere complaining about any matter, see Obama rise, and see him spit at the Jew from the corner of his twisted mouth. The spirit of Obama being in its nature narcissistic and selfish — it is in the man’s line, it comes natural to him — he can fully live up to all of the teachings of Jeremiah Wright and even Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for the spirit of Judaism and of Christianity are entirely impossible to him.

FeralCat on August 19, 2012 at 7:08 PM

I can’t speak for other Catholics, but I know for a fact if the government took less of what I make, I would give more to organizations (like the Catholic church) who serve those in need.

People who support levels of government spending that are unsustainable by claiming that this gives them the moral high ground are simply delusional. Government has usurped the role of family, church and local charities by setting up one after another ineffective, bureaucratic, inefficient and expensive program. Cutting back on that profligate and wasteful spending is not morally wrong — it’s morally imperative.

natasha333 on August 19, 2012 at 7:08 PM

If we accept a Mormon, than surely a Ryan Catholic is acceptable…

right2bright on August 19, 2012 at 7:04 PM

I am willing to accept Romney because despite his religion (which I don’t like and don’t agree with) I feel in my heart by how he’s lived his life he IS a good man.

There is no question about that.

I wish he’d abandon the mormonism cult (and yes, that is what it is) and embrace Catholicism, but it is obvious by his deeds that he IS a good man, a Christian in all but name.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:09 PM

Isn’t it interesting that the boy king and family attended Church services this morning for only the second or third time this year?

Flora Duh on August 19, 2012 at 7:05 PM

Actually, I think that may be only the second or third time in his entire presidency?

natasha333 on August 19, 2012 at 7:10 PM

Ed just said it’s sinful to question the real-ness of another Catholic.

MeatHeadinCA on August 19, 2012 at 6:54 PM

What did you expect a Marxist lite RINO like Ed to say? That he’s ever actually read any of the epistles of the Apostle Paul? That he understands that Abortion is murder and the homosexuality is an abomination before God?

Does this honestly sound like Paul is suggesting that it a sin to judge whether someone claiming to be a Christian is really a Christian?

1 Corinthians 5:1-13 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have gone into mourning and have put out of your fellowship the man who has been doing this? 3 For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus on the one who has been doing this. 4 So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5 hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh,[a][b] so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.

6 Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough? 7 Get rid of the old yeast, so that you may be a new unleavened batch—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8 Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister[c] but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”[d]

SWalker on August 19, 2012 at 7:10 PM

I can’t speak for other Catholics, but I know for a fact if the government took less of what I make, I would give more to organizations (like the Catholic church) who serve those in need.

People who support levels of government spending that are unsustainable by claiming that this gives them the moral high ground are simply delusional. Government has usurped the role of family, church and local charities by setting up one after another ineffective, bureaucratic, inefficient and expensive program. Cutting back on that profligate and wasteful spending is not morally wrong — it’s morally imperative.

natasha333 on August 19, 2012 at 7:08 PM

That is my biggest problem with the Church right now.

The establishment doesn’t understand that the most conservative institution in the world needs to stop embracing LIBERALISM if it wants to stay true.

In many ways, Orthodox Catholics have the same problem with our Church establishment we conservatives have with the Republican establishment!

I have no doubt the Catholic Church is headed for a Schism in the near future, between the Cafeteria faction and the Orthodox faction…

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:11 PM

Answer: No. I’m with CW – what issue? The Catholic Church has a whole lot of things to worry about. Paul Ryan isn’t one of them.

Would they prefer Obama, who tried to force Church institutions to cover birth control and abortfacients in their insurance policies? Duh Won, who lied about Obamacare not covering abortions?

Please. More manufactured outrage. Direct that effort toward solving real problems.

Philly on August 19, 2012 at 7:12 PM

I can just imagine the inferences and outright slanders if a Jew ever ran for the White House on the Republican ticket. A certainty of accusation on the left: “He’ll be more dedicated to Israel than the United States.”

Liam on August 19, 2012 at 7:12 PM

So what does the koran say about budgets and free contraception ?

burrata on August 19, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Why did Ed slide over the fact that the main organizational arm of U.S. Bishops condenmed Ryan’s budget?

libfreeordie on August 19, 2012 at 7:15 PM

I am not Catholic. I, however, don’t understand the argument for social justice while advocating the murder of the truly innocent. Where is the social justice in Catholics supporting a pro abortion agenda?

obsessedinga on August 19, 2012 at 7:18 PM

Answer: No. I’m with CW – what issue? The Catholic Church has a whole lot of things to worry about. Paul Ryan isn’t one of them.

Would they prefer Obama, who tried to force Church institutions to cover birth control and abortfacients in their insurance policies? Duh Won, who lied about Obamacare not covering abortions?

Please. More manufactured outrage. Direct that effort toward solving real problems.

Philly on August 19, 2012 at 7:12 PM

If the establishment decides Pelosi is a Catholic and Paul Ryan isn’t, then the Church is dead.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Ed just said it’s sinful to question the real-ness of another Catholic.

MeatHeadinCA on August 19, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Are you kidding me? No Catholic would ever say such a thing.

FeralCat on August 19, 2012 at 7:22 PM

I doubt these “Nancy Pelosi Catholics” could come up with a rosary and if they did by some miracle, they wouldn’t know how to say it.

It’s funny they have no problem with Catholic politicians who are pro-abortion.

I don’t remember Jesus saying the government should support those that don’t want to work.

bw222 on August 19, 2012 at 7:22 PM

More MSM projection in service of Obama. Obama’s the one with a Catholic problem (he’s also got a Jewish & Evangelical problem too, FWIW).

Dark Star on August 19, 2012 at 7:23 PM

Take it from an agnostic:

Ryan has a Catholic problem? My azz. Get real, jerks.

petefrt on August 19, 2012 at 7:24 PM

Here is the choice Catholics face: Elect Romney/Ryan, and Catholics have jobs, less taxes, and more money to put in the collection plates and poor boxes every Sunday (more jobs = less poverty to begin with); or elect Obama, and we have less money to donate because the government confiscated it and we still don’t have jobs.

With the second choice, there also will be less people because Obamacare permitted them to be murdered in the womb on the taxpayer’s dime.

You decide which choice is worse.

Philly on August 19, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Why did Ed slide over the fact that the main organizational arm of U.S. Bishops condenmed Ryan’s budget?

libfreeordie on August 19, 2012 at 7:15 PM

So your concerned that the bishops are not taken seriously enough in our government. Interesting.

Say when will stand up for the MILLIONS Of DEAD unborn BLACK CHILDREN….I know you’re concerned.

*You’re a gross disgusting vile puke.

CW on August 19, 2012 at 7:25 PM

More MSM projection in service of Obama. Obama’s the one with a Catholic problem (he’s also got a Jewish & Evangelical problem too, FWIW).

Dark Star on August 19, 2012 at 7:23 PM

You nailed it.

petefrt on August 19, 2012 at 7:25 PM

That he’s ever actually read any of the epistles of the Apostle Paul? That he understands that Abortion is murder and the homosexuality is an abomination before God?

SWalker on August 19, 2012 at 7:10 PM

I don’t see the last two points in the citations you gave. Paul never touches abortion, except in describing his path to The Way. Immorality is extremely vague and encompassing. The only time Paul refers to homosexuality, he is also referring to fornicators — anyone who lusts. He also strongly urged early followers NOT to get married, but to abstain altogether, and if you couldn’t extinguish that flame, then get married to someone who shares the faith. Remember that for most of Paul’s life, he believed it was End of Days.

John the Libertarian on August 19, 2012 at 7:26 PM

I stopped going to the Catholic church a couple of years ago when they started supporting amnesty for anyone who came over the border and slipping in flyers in the bulletin. Look at Cardinal Mahony who marched with a bunch of illegals in CA and held hands with organizers as they announced “no somos criminales” or “we are not criminals.”

I’m sick of it and think their tax exempt status ought to be revoked since they’ve become a political action committee. They want all illegals to have healthcare and every other freebie, then the Catholic Church can pay for it.

TxAnn56 on August 19, 2012 at 7:07 PM

No they prefer the IRS and their henchmen to force everyone else to pay for it.

CW on August 19, 2012 at 7:27 PM

The Church is like many Industrialists and Conservatives who embraced Hitler, prior to 1933. They can’t see that with one you get the other…in 1930-32 Germans liked the Nazi opposition to Communism and the appeal to overturn the Versailler Diktat…but along with that yuo had Authoritarianism, Messianism, anti-Semitism, and Revanchism…they hoped to have the things they LIKED, but be able to control the NSDAP in order to prevent the things they didn’t like. Sadly, as I say, one couldn’t have one without the other.

The Church likes welfare and ObamaCare, but doesn’t like the Mandate and Gay Marriage and Gay Rights….the hierarchy can’t see that if you have the one you HAVE to have the other, the Modern Liberal Welfare State will almost AUTOMATICALLY give you Gay Marriage and Abortion. You canNOT have WIC or SNAP or S-CHIP and not have Gay Marriage. Like the Conservatives in 1932 they keep telling themselves that they can have all the good, and none of the bad…and like the Conservatives the Church hierarchy is going to have an unpleasant awakening. Hopefully, it will not be as disastrous for them and the rest of us as it was for the German Conservatives.

JFKY on August 19, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Obama is at war with both Jews and Christians, especially Catholics. That any among them can not see this is simply astounding.

FeralCat on August 19, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Here’s what I tweeted, Ed, so it will be here in comments as well:

The John Paul II and Sirico quotes from commenter CW are spot on. (But full disclosure: I am an atheist ex-Christian.)

Perhaps more to the point: I never for a moment read the NT and thought the topic was increasing the reach of Federal agencies.

Government is nowhere in NT presented as a solution to poverty. It just isn’t there. Creatio ex nihilo. Local compassion is.

Thanks for the mention, Ed. :)

ConservativeLA on August 19, 2012 at 7:28 PM

I doubt these “Nancy Pelosi Catholics” could come up with a rosary and if they did by some miracle, they wouldn’t know how to say it.

It’s funny they have no problem with Catholic politicians who are pro-abortion.

I don’t remember Jesus saying the government should support those that don’t want to work.

bw222 on August 19, 2012 at 7:22 PM

The bible says NOTHING about government welfare.

Nothing at all. It says A LOT about you doing charity as an individual…

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:28 PM

No they prefer the IRS and their henchmen to force everyone else to pay for it.

CW on August 19, 2012 at 7:27 PM

Coerced charity isn’t charity.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:29 PM

If the left tries to use this I say lets hit them with * Does Obama have a Muslim problem*!!!!!!!

angrymike on August 19, 2012 at 7:30 PM

I can’t see Ryan having any more of a Catholic problem than Biden. I think the ‘Nuns on the Bus Tour’ is going to visit Biden for some serious scolding having already delivered a stern reprimand to Ryan earlier.

It’s odd to me that Ryan is getting associated with Rand. Greenspan was a much more serious devotee of Rand.

lexhamfox on August 19, 2012 at 7:31 PM

The letter cited the Catholic teaching “that every human being is made in the image of God,” as a warning against Republican policies that the signers said “would shred our nation’s compassionate safety net” by “gutting” social assistance programs.

Not being Catholic I won’t pretend to fully understand the teachings of the Catholic Church, but I do have a question, who was providing these “compassionate safety nets” before the government decided it was their role to do so?

Flora Duh on August 19, 2012 at 7:32 PM

If the left tries to use this I say lets hit them with * Does Obama have a Muslim problem*!!!!!!!

angrymike on August 19, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Obama clearly likes muslims more than Christians and Jews.

I don’t thing he’s an actual muslim though because I can’t see Barry Hussein Soetoro ever holding another god above himself…

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Here is a bigger problem, and it is not one limited to the Catholic Church:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/08/the_silence_of_the_pulpits.html#.UDCRfhum-VI.blogger#ixzz23z67Xmdj

Why are not organized faiths speaking out against the atrocities being committed in the name of Islam?

onlineanalyst on August 19, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Not being Catholic I won’t pretend to fully understand the teachings of the Catholic Church, but I do have a question, who was providing these “compassionate safety nets” before the government decided it was their role to do so?

Flora Duh on August 19, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Churches were largely.

Today they can provide less BECAUSE government confiscates so much from individuals.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Let those who have acquiesced to this tyrant against their own consciences now fight in a proper way against this tyrant. Let those who have been wearing themselves out in both body and soul in vain attempt to appease him now labor for glorious honor against him. Behold! On the one side will be the completely destroyed tyrant, on the other the fierce and righteous protectors of the Constitution and Christianity. On the one side will be the destroyed enemy of the Lord, on the other, his friends who will shout at the tyrant as they destroy him in November, “It is for the Founding Fathers!”, “It is for the Founding Fathers!, and “Deus lo volt! Deus lo volt! Deus lo volt!”

RasThavas on August 19, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Here is a bigger problem, and it is not one limited to the Catholic Church:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/08/the_silence_of_the_pulpits.html#.UDCRfhum-VI.blogger#ixzz23z67Xmdj

Why are not organized faiths speaking out against the atrocities being committed in the name of Islam?

onlineanalyst on August 19, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Because people who criticize islam are killed by muslims.

No one has any fear of criticizing Christians or Jews because we aren’t violent like muslims.

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Why did Ed slide over the fact that the main organizational arm of U.S. Bishops condenmed Ryan’s budget?

libfreeordie on August 19, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Probably for the same reason most of us slide over your comments and your very existence, it’s simply unimportant…

Tim Zank on August 19, 2012 at 7:36 PM

It’s the ultimate in Catholic double standards: a website called http://www.PrayForPaulsChangeOfHeart.org launched this week, calling for Catholics to pray that he abandons his Path to Prosperity budget in favor of something more in line with the Church’s social justice teachings.
=============

Yup,I seen that across the news feeds,but,I thought is was laughable,
praying for Ryan,on Social Justice!

canopfor on August 19, 2012 at 7:36 PM

Libfreeordie.,,,,

I wonder if you go to leftist sites and ask them why they seem to forget the fact that the same group of bishops has admonished the Obama administration for their stand on the HHS mandate.

I wonder will you demand of those of your ilk the sharing of the bishops view of abortion.

*we both know the answer. It’s rhetorical.

CW on August 19, 2012 at 7:36 PM

Catholic problem? Wait a minute, I thought it was a women problem. Or was it a race problem? Gay problem? Muslim problem? Poor people problem? There’s got to be a “problem” in there somewhere. We need a problem!

The media has really gotten into everybody’s brain.

The only problem I see is the Left’s problem.

rrpjr on August 19, 2012 at 7:37 PM

The Catholics who hate Ryan also hate Pope Benedict as they hated his predecessors. The teachings of Marx, Savitri Devi & Margaret Sanger mean more to them than the teachings of Christ, even if they don’t know those names.

theCork on August 19, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Not being Catholic I won’t pretend to fully understand the teachings of the Catholic Church, but I do have a question, who was providing these “compassionate safety nets” before the government decided it was their role to do so?

Flora Duh on August 19, 2012 at 7:32 PM

Families, churches, and the local societies.

CW on August 19, 2012 at 7:38 PM

The Church should stay out of government affairs, period, especially when it comes to any effort to increase the welfare rate. It is outrageous, and was caused by Obama’s failed economic policies. Replace Obama as the first step to decreasing the need for public assistance. The Church acts like a quack doctor who treats the symptoms instead of curing the disease.

Philly on August 19, 2012 at 7:38 PM

There is really no such thing as conservative Catholics and liberal Catholics. There can only be faithful Catholics (who may be sinners) and catholics (small “c”) who hold to a different secularly selective faith of their own making, thus are always sinners having willfully rejected Christ’s Church’s truth and created their own convenient reality.

In the words of Christ, “You are either with Me or against me” or in the words of Pope Paul VI, “the smoke of satan has entered the tabernacle” said most likely in response to the spirit of Vatican II Jesuits and others that rejected Rome and followed a worldly god into Marxist liberation theology with belief in a Socialist paradise here on earth with the state playing the role of Caesar, unbelievably playing the role of a kind benefactor distributing (or more accurately-redistributing) the spoils of the producers to bribe and control, as it spurns and burns God’s faithful.

Don L on August 19, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Why are not organized faiths speaking out against the atrocities being committed in the name of Islam?

onlineanalyst on August 19, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Basically, because it’s the job of a pastor to preach the Word of God, not to use a sermon for political issues during services (like the ‘reverends’ Wright, Sharpton, and Jackson.

But if a man of the cloth says anything against Islam in public, outside a sermon, he becomes a target. Liberals only tolerate religious people when they spew the liberal line. Otherwise, as we see all the time, liberals only want traditional religious doctrines confined to churches and the home.

Liam on August 19, 2012 at 7:39 PM

I don’t see the last two points in the citations you gave. Paul never touches abortion, except in describing his path to The Way. Immorality is extremely vague and encompassing. The only time Paul refers to homosexuality, he is also referring to fornicators — anyone who lusts. He also strongly urged early followers NOT to get married, but to abstain altogether, and if you couldn’t extinguish that flame, then get married to someone who shares the faith. Remember that for most of Paul’s life, he believed it was End of Days.

John the Libertarian on August 19, 2012 at 7:26 PM

With all due respect, if I ever need an atheist to explain the bible or what it means to me, I’ll give you a call.

SWalker on August 19, 2012 at 7:39 PM

It’s the ultimate in Catholic double standards: a website called http://www.PrayForPaulsChangeOfHeart.org launched this week, calling for Catholics to pray that he abandons his Path to Prosperity budget in favor of something more in line with the Church’s social justice teachings.
===============

Maybe they aren’t to happy with this!
______________________________________

•August 17, 2012, 6:49 p.m. ET
If Only They Had Listened
**************************

Ryan was a voice for Fannie Mae reform while Obama opposed it
*************************************************************

On July 27, 2000, a first-term Congressman from Wisconsin signed his name to the Housing Finance Regulatory Improvement Act.

The 30-year-old legislator didn’t have much company.
****************************************************

Of 435 Members of the House,
****************************

only 12 were willing to join Paul Ryan in sponsoring a bill to reduce the taxpayer risks at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
********************************************************

Mr. Ryan’s embrace of reform in his first term in Congress compares favorably to the efforts of a freshman Senator from Illinois in 2005. President Obama likes to pretend he was a warning voice in the wilderness because he later issued vague statements of displeasure once the housing market was already cracking.

What Mr. Obama doesn’t say
**************************

is that he failed to support any of the serious reform efforts to reduce the role of Fannie and Freddie in the mortgage market.
*************************************************************

The same is true of old Senate hand Joe Biden.
**********************************************

Mitt Romney was never a Washington politician,

so he can’t be blamed for the legislative failures of the 2000s.
****************************************************************

This history bears further study,
*********************************

as Mr. Obama repeatedly attempts to tie the GOP candidates to Washington’s policy mistakes leading up to the financial crisis.

In Iowa this week, the President said that

Messrs. Romney and Ryan are proposing the same economic policies “that got us into this mess in the first place.”
************************************************

The truth is
************

that the President who loves to talk about the “mess” he “inherited”
************

did nothing to prevent it when he had the chance.
*************************************************

In contrast, his opponent’s new running mate was an early voice for reforms that might have helped America avoid it.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444318104577589462128032168.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

canopfor on August 19, 2012 at 7:41 PM

I think it is the Catholic Church that has a problem!…they have no problem with Biteme and Pelosi…etc.

KOOLAID2 on August 19, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Pope Benedict did have a problem with Pelosi on abortion. The following is a report from the 2009 meeting she had with the Pope. She may well have been Excommunicated. The only way we’ll ever know is if she states she has been.

“Following the general audience the Holy Father briefly greeted Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, together with her entourage.”His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church’s consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in co-operation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development.”

Pelosi should humbly heed the words of Pope Benedict that she heard and repent.

If not, Pope Benedict paved the way for her excommunication.

Bishops, priests and distributors of Communion, take note:

Failure to excommunicate Pelosi if she does not repent would be a huge public scandal that would undermine the credibility of the Roman Catholic Church.

Giving Pelosi Holy Communion if she does not repent would be a sacrilege as well as a public scandal that would undermine the credibility of the Roman Catholic Church.

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/gaynor/090220

McCain Hater on August 19, 2012 at 7:41 PM

The bible says NOTHING about government welfare.

Nothing at all. It says A LOT about you doing charity as an individual…

Precisely.

“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s” is the clearest indication in the NT of a delineation between secular authority and the obligations of being a follower of Christ; since the latter is what calls one to Christian charity, and not the former, there is not the slightest intimation that Caesar has anything to do with providing for the poor.

The fact that Christian Faith does not involve lobbying secular authorities to provide for the poor is not said explicitly, because it directly contradicts everything that is explicitly said about what should be done–person to person, directly, within voluntary communities.

ConservativeLA on August 19, 2012 at 7:42 PM

wildcat72 on August 19, 2012 at 7:33 PM

CW on August 19, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Yes, as it should be. The verses I have read in the bible dealing with caring for your neighbor have never mentioned the government.

2 Corinthians 9:6-7 has always been one of my favorites:

But this I say, He which sows sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which sows bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Every man according as he purposes in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loves a cheerful giver.

Flora Duh on August 19, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Pope Benedict did have a problem with Pelosi on abortion. The following is a report from the 2009 meeting she had with the Pope. She may well have been Excommunicated. The only way we’ll ever know is if she states she has been.

If the Pope did excommunicate, it would be seen as a political issue, with the Catholic Church ‘interfering’ in American politics.

The Vatican isn’t just the seat of a church. It’s also a State. The Dems could use any Pope’s religious actions as a political maneuver.

A fine line to tread.

Liam on August 19, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Out:…..War on Women(with Akin,maybe not…sarc)

IN:……War on Ryans Religion!!

canopfor on August 19, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Does Ryan have a “Catholic problem”?

…I think it is the Catholic Church that has a problem!…they have no problem with Biteme and Pelosi…etc.

KOOLAID2 on August 19, 2012 at 6:50 PM

KOOLAID2:Exactly:)

canopfor on August 19, 2012 at 7:47 PM

The Catholic church should not be looking at Paul Ryan, they should look at the false Catholics like pelosi, kerry, the kennedys et al. They should also reign in the left leaning Catholics or cut them loose because they go against the churches teaching. They have gotten sideways and wrongheaded with the social justice issue. Did the church not get the memo that it is Christians, Christ followers that are to serve others with our lives and our possesions not the government. To my Catholic friends, you have been stabbed in the back by the obama administration, learn from it and get out of the social justice business with them. Quit screwing with Ryan. As Christians, we need to step it up and follow in Christs footsteps. False teachers and churches that follow the world by following democrats and their platforms on abortion and gay marriage are leading their flocks toward the gate that Christ warned His followers about.

crosshugger on August 19, 2012 at 7:49 PM

I realize that Catholics and Jews can’t all be Sherlock Holmes, but that if Obama thought he could get away with it he would nuke both the Vatican and Israel is something even Inspector Clouseau would have figured out by now, even while being attack by Cato and being shot at by Chief Inspector Dreyfus.

FeralCat on August 19, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3