The Church is Rotten to the Core.Michelle Lobdell, Tuesday, November 10, 2009 (Refer to http://www.newswithviews.com/Kincaid/cliff366.htm (Opens in a New Window), by Cliff Kincaid, for the following remarks.) Vic, I have challenged you in the past regarding your loyalty to the church, (not your faith). I have yet to see an answer that refutes my position. The church is rotten to the core. See it for what it is. The Vatican is complicit in establishing the New World Order i.e. global slavery. There is just too much evidence for you to ignore. Not your fault - pray for Jesus to come swiftly. God Bless you.
Return to Arguments Pro and Con page Return to HOME PAGE Build/Host/Maintain Your Own Personal Website using SBI! (Advertisement) CommentsDate: Thu Nov 12 18:54:11 2009
Michelle: Thank you for the blessing. Forgive me but my memory fails me here; perhaps age is catching up with me. They say the first three things to go are your memory, and I forget the other two. If we conversed via e-mail before I eliminated the old CONTACT ME website option, all those e-mails are now gone forever. There were just too many diverse dialogues going on for me to keep track of. I apologize if I failed to answer something you sent. Your main point seems to be that the Church is rotten to the core, with at least hints at complicity in a grand conspiracy toward a New World Order. The term New World Order is popular in several variants of Marxism, popular with many current Democrat politicians and spokesmen, and even, believe it or not, with some Islamists. While I tend to reject grand, great conspiracy theories out-of-hand, I do recognize the general thought pattern involved here, and the sheep-like trend of many to favor this positive sounding term. However, let me make two points. First, the Church is not rotten to the core. Second, she is not deeply involved in any grand New World Order conspiracy. The fact that many Catholics, including even prelates, may be confused or wrong-headed or miss-guided on worldly matters of politics, or any other non-ecclesial issue, does not make the Church evil, nor does it make her any different than any other social group. Civil government and politics are subjects outside of the Depositum Fidei and thus not subject to infallible Church authority. (See the Papal Infallibility page.) The Church is called to engage culture, and she does that. She has every right to speak in public. The Church is very large, and contains many varied political opinions, as may be expected. Therefore, we may not expect to find every bishop and every pope well versed and in perfect agreement with all points in our particular Constitution, or any other nation’s constitution. Some of them will be Liberals and some of them will be Conservatives and some of them will be mushy, lukewarm, go-with-the-flow no-opinion neutrals. Just like the rest of us. For the most part, clerics will tend to be more tender hearted than most of us, and the thought of hunger or want in the world will push them more toward the “fairness” and “egalitarian” side of the argument, making them ripe for variants of Marxism. But – remember this – they are Churchmen; they govern ecclesial matters, not civil ones. They only offer opinions on matters of civil government. Their opinions are worthy of respectful consideration. I took issue with Benedict XVI in the Papal Global Economics page over his encyclical that seemed to me to be encouraging even more Obamunism than we have already experienced. I would have to say the same thing about the John XXIII encyclical mentioned in your reference link article. If you read it, farther down, after the favorable treatment of the “right” of health care, he speaks of the right to private property, which may be argued to be at the root of all other rights, short of the right to life itself. Thus, the encyclical contains two principles so contradictory as to be irreconcilable. Rights and Responsibilities come in paired sets. If someone has an automatic right to something, then someone else has a responsibility to satisfy that right. Thus, if I have an absolute right to health care, then some physician has an absolute responsibility to treat me, for free. His ability to provide health care is his property, earned and acquired by him, for him. But, if I have a right to it, then it is my property, regardless of how hard he worked and whatever else it may have cost him to acquire it. It is mine. There goes the right to private property. And if the state takes from someone simply to give to someone else, that is essentially the same thing. It is most certainly not charity. It is stealing. Good intentions do not change the nature of it; it is still stealing. But these are merely opinions expressed about worldly politics, by people who do not participate in the game, except as lowly citizens, voters and tax payers. On such topics, we all argue as equals. I have argued with professors, both lay and clerical, in Catholic teaching institutions about their “official” pro-sodomy and pro-priestess teaching, presented under the authority of an archbishop; see the various Cafeteria Catholic pages. When I know I am right, standing on Scripture and the Catechism, I will argue with anyone, short of the pope, even on matters of faith and morals. When the topic is bow hunting, or turkey calling, or NASCAR, or musky fishing, or how to change the plugs in my wife’s car, or American politics, I will argue as an equal or even a superior to any cleric. When the topic changes to faith and morals, I will tone it down considerably. And when a pope speaks as teacher on faith and morals, I will shut my mouth and listen. I may even take a knee. But that’s not what I saw in these particular encyclicals. I hope I’ve responded adequately; I always enjoy a reasoned argument with an anti-Catholic. What is your religion, and how does it compare to Catholicism? What is Cliff Kincaid’s religion, and how does it compare to Catholicism?
May the Lord bless and keep you; with kind regards, Vic
Date: Sun Nov 15 03:59:03 2009
Vic, How about the bishops just negotiating with Pelosi to get the pro-abortion language out of the health care bill just to get it passed in the House? The bishops are clearly in favor of this bill, which stands to nearly demolish the American economy and with it American liberty as we all recognize it. They love and push for the so called “human right” to universal health care.Thomas Date: Sun Nov 15 06:27:55 2009
Thomas: Right you are. However, the bishops are Americans too. They are (and they have every right to be) just as economically ignorant and just as politically stupid as any other Leftist silly utopian idealists. They are (probably) almost universally pro-union, too. They probably favor most Democrat Party ideals. Some of them probably favor the homosexual agenda. Some very few of them may be involved in political collusion with Marxocrats, just as some few of them may be involved in some form of scandalous activity. But until I see some real evidence, I do not believe they are all involved in any grand conspiracy toward any political New World Order. Nor do I yet believe the Church has failed in her mission. We have it on the very best authority that she will not fail, and that the very gates of hell will not prevail against her. Regards, Vic Date: Sun Nov 15 10:11:52 2009
Vic, It goes a whole lot deeper than that; look at how our bishops have misused our donations to CCHD for purely political purposes to support Obama and his whole agenda. Why should we donate to ACORN and similar groups? How can you say the whole church is not involved in this? Thomas Date: Sun Nov 15 12:11:44 2009
Thomas: Apparently this is still a hot topic. I just spoke briefly about it to our guest priest in the sacristy just before Mass this morning, and to another parishioner later. And yesterday, while demonstrating outside another Planned Parenthood book sale, we spoke about it with some fellow demonstrators. The American bishops – even a majority of American bishops – do not represent the whole of “The Church.” See what I wrote about their previous political actions in the 2008 Political Crisis page; there we saw that they even involved themselves in Saul Alinsky funded organizations, showing themselves to be either Marxists or dupes of Marxists. Again, these are just a pack of American bishops, and I have taken issue with American bishops in other areas too, as you can see in the various Cafeteria Catholic pages and several other pages. We no longer give to CCHD, and we do not intend to resume giving until we see hard evidence of a renouncing and turning from this Marxist direction. We suggest that you do the same, and write to your bishop to show your displeasure. Regards, Vic Please note the language and tone already established in this Website. This is not the place to stack up vulgar one-liners and crude rejoinders. While you may support, oppose or introduce any position or argument, your comments must meet our standards of logical rigor and of civil discourse. We will not participate in trading insults, and we will not tolerate participants trading insults with each other. Participants should not be thin-skinned or over sensitive to criticism, but should be prepared to defend their arguments when challenged. If you don’t really have a coherent argument or counter-argument of your own, sit down and don’t embarrass yourself. If you have something serious to contribute to the conversation, please keep it civil. We apologize to religious conservative thinkers for the need to even say these things.
|
