A Mixture of Religion and Politics

I find it heartening to see religious people of different denominations in this country lay down sectarian sniping to make common cause on important social and moral issues.  

Mike Potemra plumbs a little-explored area of the Scott Brown phenomenon:  His ecumenism.  Brown is a Protestant but enjoys hearty Catholic support.  They don't agree on every issue, but he doesn't pander and they don't stomp their feed insisting that he toe the line.  Refreshing.

Embedded in his interesting and short article, I  found this gem that reminds us that we are in no danger of a theocratic takeover:

As my friend Paul Mankowski, S.J., once remarked, the Catholic Church’s moral agenda would be much advanced if every Catholic in Congress was replaced with a Mormon or a Muslim. (First Things - Joseph Bottums)

Catholic Politicians can't even get it right on Social Programs

What about individual almsgiving and acts of personal charity—concepts that greatly predate the existence of the modern welfare state? Indeed, the seven corporal works of mercy, which are included in the Catechism, are directed toward individuals, not governments.

We’re not saying that there shouldn’t be any government programs, but, at the same time, we recognize that the Church is open to different means on how to achieve important goals for alleviating human suffering.

As Doctor Tom Coburn, Republican Senator from Oklahoma has observed, "spending other people's money is not compassionate."

A Kennedy Lectures The Pope on Catholicism

Has any single family done more to damage the cause of Catholicism in America than the Kennedy clan?

Let's see... Bobby and JFK, married men, taking turns with Marilyn Monroe. Fat Teddy killing a woman. He couldn't help it, he was drunk at the time, and he was too busy saving his political career to save her life. Then there was that inbred retard nephew (Kennedy Scion, I think the press called him) who killed a girl by bashing her brains in with a golf club...

Now comes Kathleen Kennedy Townsend to carry on the family tradition. This time, it's just words, no sleazy sex or lurid murders. She must be one of the classier ones.

Townsend stupidly declares in Newsweak magazine:

"Barack Obama represents American Catholics better than The Pope does."

This statement itself is nonsense, since Catholics do not believe The Pope represents them. They believe he represents Christ here on earth. As such, he is the guardian of what Jesus passed on to the disciples, charged with the duty of faithfully teaching those under his care.

She goes on to excoriate the church for stubbornly refusing to cave in to popular opinion on women priests and gay marriage. Obama is soooo much more enlightened!

Here's my favorite excerpt from her article. Talk about a tangled up ball of illogic:

Yet polls bear out that American Catholics do not want to be told by the Vatican how to think. Despite the rhetoric of love and truth, the Vatican shows disdain (if not disgust) toward gays. But 54 percent of American Catholics find gay relationships to be morally acceptable, according to a 2009 Gallup poll.

Why be Catholic (or any religion) when you disagree with the basic tenets? Are they crazy? You "don't want to be told what to think" by The Vatican? Then stop listening! This is America! You won't have your toenails pulled out by Torquemada for denying the faith.

Even more ridiculous is her proposition that religious leaders should rewrite church doctrine and basic moral beliefs based on public opinion. This is just new-age self-worship.

The Catholic Church believes it is carrying out the true teachings of Christ as passed down through the ages from The Lord Himself, through Peter and his successors to the present-day leaders. They believe themselves to be the faithful guardians of this deposit of faith.

This is a grave duty, and anyone so charged who attempted to modify God's law would surely burn in hell. Bishops on such an existentially important mission will not be swayed by random new-age blather from left-wing kooks in the US.

Can we stop referring to the Kennedy's as "American Royalty?" They're looking more like court jesters.

MRC - Matthew Balan
NewsWeak -Another Kennedy Blatherskate

Christian Abortions

Boston Catholic Hospital System Yields to Pro-Abortion FOCA Before it Happens

This is why I'm against religion-government entanglements. A religion cannot survive a government liaison with its integrity intact.

Remember that news story last year about the botched abortion where the baby survived and was callously left to die? It happened at Christ Hospital in Chicago, which is affiliated with the United Church of Christ. Killing babies in the name of Christ... The sick and the dying inside must be all that keeps God from striking that place down. Jesus turned over the tables in the temple for less than that.

WWJD? He sure as hell wouldn't put his name on a building where practitioners kill babies.

Why is an organization that professes to be Christian allowing this barbaric practice on its premises? Probably has something to do with federal funding. That's how it happens, folks. The government pushes its snout into a private-sector function, brings generous gifts, and Bingo! You're hooked, bent over, and Uncle Sam is letting you know who's boss. Can you imagine a hospital running nowadays without government funding? Don't call it socialism; this is more of a fascist technique.

Back to the headline. From LifeNews.com:

Boston,MA (LifeNews.com) -- Abortion advocates have yet to re-introduce the radical Freedom of Choice Act in this Congressional session, but the effects of the pro-abortion bill are already taking hold. That's because one Catholic hospital in Boston has agreed to go back on its pro-life policies in a merger that ultimately promotes abortion.

FOCA is a dangerous bill that, in its last form, would overturn hundreds of pro-life state laws and could be used to force medical centers to do abortions.

The nation's Catholic bishops have warned that one of the dangerous effects of FOCA is that it could result in shutting down Catholic hospitals that do not want to allow abortions on site.

A St. Louis-based company, Caritas has joined in a bid to provide government-subsidized health insurance in Massachusetts. Caritas Christi, is joining with Centene Corporation in a bid for the government contract that would include coverage for abortion.

Cardian Sean O'Malley, The Archdiocese of Boston's Bishop, has stated categorically that Catholic Hospitals will never engage in such abhorrent practices, and the agreement is not final. The diocese is investigating ways to improve health services without compromising church teachings. It's a complex world.

Catholic-sponsored abortion. That's change, and in the Obama Era, I can almost believe it.

http://www.lifenews.com/state3907.html
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=N2NmMGNkMTdkZWJkZWRkMjRkNjY5NjllNzZlYjkyNmY=&w=MA==
http://www.thebostonpilot.com/article.asp?ID=10132

Pope Pelosi

Nancy Pelosi, who understands Catholic teaching better than the Pope, assured Tom Brokaw this weekend that her pro-abortion beliefs in no way conflict with her religion. She's wrong. The Catholic position? Abortion a sin.

Pelosi, the Kennedys, Biden, and every other pro-abotion Catholic politicians oppose their church. And don't give me that "I'm not pro-abortion, I'm pro-choice" argument. You're either for it or you're against it!

Pro-abortion Catholic politicians are arrogance personified. And not for opposing their church, but for the weasel way they do it. If you're going to oppose your church's tenets, fine. This isn't the dark ages. But at least defend your position on it merits. Don't try to twist a 2000 year old belief held by billions of people.

The Pope, at 80 years old and with decades of theological study under his belt is wrong. Those great religious thinkers Pope Pelosi and Monsignor Kennedy are right. Oh, also, every printed word going back to early Christian writing of the second century? They're all wrong too. Pope Pelosi said so.

And they dare call President Bush arrogant?

Hot Air has a short, meticulously researched post on the issue. Please go read it if you want to see just how wrong Madam Speaker is on this issue.