Political slant and being Catholic...

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Thomas' date='Jan 13 2005, 07:53 PM']




So basically I want to get your views? Is there any 'liberal' Catholics out there? Any Catholics who are willing to stand up and put their savior ahead of their country? Their faith ahead of their patriotism? I want to come back to the faith very much, but I don't want to be refered to as a 'Pro-Abortionist Liberal'. I challenge you here to respect others as Jesus respected the gentiles. Jesus came for EVERYONE, not just heterosexual, patriotic Americans. [Don't get me wrong, I have no hatred for Conservative Americans, or Bush even. I try very hard to love everyone and I see you all as equals. All I am asking is that you do likewise.]

Maybe I'm setting the wrong tone here. I do not dislike 'conservatives'. As Catholics, furthermore as people on this planet we're all brothers and sisters [Refer to Jesus of Nazareth for more on this teaching] so how can some be so supportive of NOT turning the other cheek? If Jesus were the president at 9/11 what do you think he would have done? Think about that. The war in Iraq especially wasn't even justified by international law, how would it be justified by the law of love?

So yeah, any other left-leaning Catholics in here who are sick of this? Or for the sake of equality, Conservative Catholics who are sick of the slander from the left? Why can't we put our religion before our political leanings. I am Catholic first, Democrat Second. So why should any of you see me as lower than you because of my political leanings? Because I'm open minded? It's that close-minded attitude of 'Catholics are to be Conservative or else Fraudulent'. This is an attitude I've seen a lot at Phatmass...and it is what turned me away from the faith half a year ago. Now I'm giving it a second shot. Please just respect me as your brother.

Remember, Jesus was a dissident.


-Tom [/quote]
Most phatmassers consider themselves Catholic first, then whatever nationality they are second.
Here the Church comes first.

Jesus was not a dissident, in fact He came to fulfill the law and was perfectly obedient to His Father.

[Thomas]

But wasn't he a dissident in that he rejected some of the aspects of Jewish tradition that were contrary to what God wanted?

If so, that's what I meant.

Edited January 14, 2005 by Thomas

[cmotherofpirl]

He rejected things that were added to the law by men that negated the heart of the law, but never anything to do with the Law itself.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='cathqat' date='Jan 13 2005, 04:46 PM'] I don't know anyone who believes it would be better for Hussein to be in power. But I know many people who believe the means used to remove him were immoral. A good end, no matter how good, would not justify bad means. So please do not try to divert from the question of whether the means were acceptable. [/quote]
The removal of Saddam Hussein from power was a moral good, but whether the means employed to remove him were justified is something that people can debate till they are blue in the face. Some hold that the means used were justified, some hold that they were not, but I doubt the debate on this issue will be resolved for many years. One thing is certain, the debate will not be settled on an internet forum.

God bless,
Todd

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Thomas' date='Jan 13 2005, 05:01 PM'] But wasn't he a dissident in that he rejected some of the aspects of Jewish tradition that were contrary to what God wanted?

If so, that's what I meant. [/quote]
Jesus is not a dissident, He is God and man. The reduction of Christ's message to a message of a political nature leads one into theological error.

God bless,
Todd

[Thomas]

[quote]Jesus is not a dissident, He is God and man.  The reduction of Christ's message to a message of a political nature leads one into theological error.

God bless,
Todd[/quote]

Gotcha!

[Socrates]

The fact is, phatmassers have quite a variety of political opinions, ranging from leftist socialists to feudalist monarchists!
Catholics on this site will of course disagree about which system/party/philosophy best represents the Catholic Faith.

I myself am a die-hard true blue American conservative, and will stand up for my principles.
I do beleive religion is more important than politics, and do not necesarrily think that politically "liberal" Catholics are not "real" Catholics, but I do beleive them severely mistaken, and will debate them when issues come up. This is what the debate table is for!

My biggest problem is when Catholics support pro-abortion politicians (this doesn't matter to me if they are Dem, Republican, whatever) and claim to be pro-life. Bush and the Republicans may not have done enough to fight abortion, but have certainly done more than liberal Democrats, who almost invariably do all they can to actively promote this evil!

Likewise, with homosexual issues. The Church has clearly condemned homosexuality, and therefore anyone who works to promote this unnatural vice and its acceptance in society goes against the Catholic Faith.

(Both these topics have been debated at length in other threads.

On another point, I think it is wrong for liberals to equate George W. Bush and Conservatism. I myself am rather ambivilent about Bush (though I still definitely prefer him to Kerry.) Many of Bush's policies are rather at odds with conservatism (which stands for small government and limitations of its power), and there are those who oppose the war in Iraq for conservative reasons.

Catholics can disagree on economic policies and wars, but as I see it, the Left has become increasingly a vehemently godless movement, promoting abortion, homosexuality, immorality, and anti-Christian policy at every turn. I can never, in good conscience, promote the Left's current agenda.

Edited January 14, 2005 by Socrates

[Guest Aluigi]

socialism was condemned by the Catholic Church but other than that...

everyone should just be distributist!

[Good Friday]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl']Most phatmassers consider themselves Catholic first, then whatever nationality they are second. 
Here the Church comes first.[/quote]
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: Tell another! Tell another!

[Good Friday]

Bumped for the mods. Merry Christmas!

[Good Friday]

Don't . . .

[crusader1234]

[quote name='Aluigi' date='Jan 13 2005, 10:08 PM'] socialism was condemned by the Catholic Church but other than that...

everyone should just be distributist! [/quote]
Socialism and Capitalism were [i]both[/i] condemned actually. I'd say Socialism is the lesser of the two evils because its fueled by honestly good intentions, whereas Capitalism is largely fueled by greed.

[hyperdulia again]

thank you crusader. Both tings grab bits and pieces of truth and twist them into a perversion.

[Guest Aluigi]

first i am a distributist

second, socialism has been condemned

third, capitalism has not been condemned

even Belloc admits capitalism can be held to by a faithful Catholic whereas socialism cannot

socialism is serfdom in disguise. you become just as dependent upon the government as serfs were to their lords. odd how most socialists think they're making progress. this stuff is not the government's domain.

capitalism is a moral neutral, it allows for either good or evil to take place in it.

distributism is the economic system that fosters good best. small government, local governments more in charge, all have the right to land if they will work for it, small businesses all around, actual ownership of property that no one can take away from you... not even property tax! no usury or anything, that's the way to go.

[hyperdulia again]

capitalism as it exists right now is a condemned heresy.

[hyperdulia again]

no amount of attempted justification will make it otherwise.

[Guest Aluigi]

i will not deny that capitalism as it is practiced by greedy capitalists now is evil

the system of capitalism, as in individuals are free to capitalize on their oppurtunities, is not evil, it is a moral neutral. it allows either good or evil to happen.

socialism is always wrong because it is contrary to Catholic Doctrine regarding private property. socialism is when the government oversteps its bounds. captitalism is when it just keeps its hands off.

the way i see it, distributism is further to the right. actually, i have this vision of a circle, if you go far enough left, i'm talking past socialism and past anarchism and past some other ungodliness, you might end up at distributism. i believe if you go right you'll find it faster though.

anyway, capitalism=moral neutral. socialism= wrong. distributism=let's convert the world to this. i already have a plan brewin.

[hyperdulia again]

Moral neutrality isn't a Catholic concept Al. Ideas either affirm basic good, or they affirm basic evil. For its emphasis on personal autonomy alone Capitalism is a moral evil. True enough, though, it is less evil than Socialism.

[Guest Aluigi]

I have to go to bed, but you should all read Hillaire Belloc. If you can't find anything good, PM me your email adress and I'll email you a copy of his essay The Faith and Industrial Capitalism. it affirms Catholics can support capitalism with fair practice, then condemns it from belloc's POV which is awesome, then condemns socialism from belloc and the Church's POV mentioning that it isn't within the realm of Catholic Teaching. he's where I got my serf metaphor! (I tink.. or did that just pop into my head? can't remember. anyway..)

g'night

[Guest Aluigi]

when something is not objectively either good or evil but in subjective cases can be used for either, it is a moral neutral. not sure where i picked up the terminology but i'm pretty sure it is a Catholic concept.