The Church's real enemies

[Craftygrl06]

So i'm currently reading this book called "Good Catholic Girls." The tagline is "An inspiring story about the women who are fight for the church they love." It's completely sickening.
Basically the author is ranting about the poor treatment of women in the church. "we can't even be priests; whine whine whine." It is truely unfortunate that she cannot see the things that church teaching and GOD'S teaching does for women; ie perserving our dignity, lifting us up as the root of the continuation of life, and urging men to respect us as intelectual equals.

It catagorizes chapter by chapter the things she sees as injustices against women (and other minorities).
1. women not being able to enter the priesthood.
2. Abortion
3. Homosexuality
4. Contraceptives
*there's a few more but these where the ones that were grossly incorrect in their explaination.

IT's full of erroneous theology and colored information. Even more disturbing is the fact that there are so many religous people who seem to be backing these feminist ideas. One of the sisters actually said this about the church taking sides on political issues: "The church should guide us in faith, but trust the lay people to work out the details."

The author also touch on the issue that apparently you can be pro-choice and anti-abortion. This is what the founder of CFFC explains. She says that while she is against abortion she belives people should have a choice as to whether or not they want to have an abortion and the Church should never condem anyone that has had one. By this logic if i wanted to shoot my dog I should be allowed to..it's my right; I highly doubt PETA would see it that way. If i marched down the street in front of their building with a sign saying "I shot my dog" I'm certian the friendly norfolk cops would come escourt me elsewhere.

In the chapter about homosexuality again she uses the term condem; which i think is harsh. I used to be southern baptist, I've seen condemnation; i've heard all about fire and brimstone. Never have i ever heard any of the priests i know or orthodox catholics using that word when refering to women who have had abortions or homosexuals. ONLY FROM THESE LIBERALS when they disparage tthe church for not being more "accepting."

On contraception of course the CFFC paints the church to be heartless when they deal with women in Africa with AIDS. "The bishops should support condoms; for the sake of the people; to prevent the spread of this terrible disease." There is no doubt that AIDS is terrible but we are dealing with a much larger epidemic: the increase of causal sex with more than one partner. I understand that many of these African tribes have differing morals HOWEVER maybe we should start treating the problem rather than just the symptom. In the same breathe teh author declares that if the church would just support contraception than fewer babies would have to die from abortion. This idea is UNFOUNDED and completely false. I submit that if contraceptioon was made even more accessible and the last strong hold, the church, backed down that there would be MORE abbortions. For the past 20 years contraception has been refined and become the norm and i wonder what's happened to the rate of abbortions. Not to mention that many oral contraceptives are abortifacitants themselves.

There was a quote from sister jeanine garmick "the Church ideas should reflect the voice of the people." NO sister it should not. It never has and it never will. When Jesus was alive did he reflect the voice of his people, the Jews?? OF COURSE NOT! His message was unpopular and so is the Church's with many people. This is not a democracy.

thanks for listening to my rants, seriously guys if you need to feel a little anger in your life, pick up this book.

[God Conquers]

What ever happenned to those good ol' community book burnings/hodowns?

[Didacus]

[quote name='Craftygrl06' date='May 26 2005, 08:51 AM']When Jesus was alive did he reflect the voice of his people, the Jews?? OF COURSE NOT!  His message was unpopular and so is the Church's with many people.  This is not a democracy.

thanks for listening to my rants, seriously guys if you need to feel a little anger in your life, pick up this book.[/quote]

I already have my share of anger thank you, so I don't think I will read the book. Believe me, I know what you're talking about. It is so easy to twist the ideas of Catholicism, and those who accept that twisted view never gave the real view a chance.

THIS IS NOT A DEMOCRACY! I love that! It's true.

If Jesus had listened to the popular vote, he would have formed an army against Rome (wouldn't he? ).

I share your frustration, careful with anger though, keep it under control. Don't let it turn into rage or confuse you. Its easy to get carried away (something I admit being guilty of at times).


Fare thee well, and after finishing this book might I suggest happier readings for your next book?

[Didacus]

[quote name='God Conquers' date='May 26 2005, 09:03 AM']What ever happenned to those good ol' community book burnings/hodowns?[/quote]
Those went out of style in the second world war. Hitler ruined it for everyone.... grrrrr.

[kateri05]

yea really. thanks a LOT hitler! we should bring those back! what ever happend to the forbidden book list that the Church put out? does She still do that? or is it like everything else and just noone pays attention to it?

[Didacus]

[quote name='kateri05' date='May 26 2005, 03:50 PM']yea really.  thanks a LOT hitler!  we should bring those back!  what ever happend to the forbidden book list that the Church put out?  does She still do that? or is it like everything else and just noone pays attention to it?[/quote]
Actually everyone pays attention to it, except in general it befalls the gruesome 'telephone message' effect. The list leaves the Vatican as a 'forbiden list' and by the time it reaches North America we receive it as a 'must read' list.

The truth is the victim - again. What a twisted little word... :mischief:

Hey, I think I'm getting the hang of this smliey thing!

[MC Just]

if our church was a democracy, it would have fallen a long time ago.

[EcceNovaFacioOmni]

"The truth is not determined by a majority vote."
- Benedict XVI

[Qoheleth]

[quote]"The truth is not determined by a majority vote."
- Benedict XVI [/quote]

It's things like this that really let me put a lot of trust in the Holy Father.
During the conclave, I was worried that those cardinals who wanted to sell out to modernity might rule the day. I guess I took too seriously the optimism in my fairly liberal surroundings.

Just the other day, my (Catholic) school had a nun come and speak to us as part of a larger presentation. She denounced Church teaching left and right. The problem isn't just liberal academes outside the Church; it's inside too.

God willing, this will be reformed from the top.

[KizlarAgha]

Intelligent dissent, the worst enemy of any Church.

[guardsman]

No Catholic should buy that book. It just support their liberal ideas.

[jezic]

[quote name='Didacus' date='May 26 2005, 09:14 AM'] Those went out of style in the second world war. Hitler ruined it for everyone.... grrrrr. [/quote]
maybe we should bring them back then to give them a good name.

It is sad people can be so wrong about stuff.

[KizlarAgha]

I don't think burning books is the solution. Maybe publishing a new one would be more productive.

[Craftygrl06]

[quote]No Catholic should buy that book. It just support their liberal ideas.[/quote]

I agree. I actually didn't buy this book. It was left in my car by someone who got it from his dad, who recieved it from a friend who thought his ideas were too "traditional".

It is very sad that these people want to do what they want to do so badly that they will rationalize it any way possible.

[marboniface]

I have had to put up with all sorts of 'Catholics' whinging about the Church's Faith and teachings on morals: bishops, priests, nuns, brothers, seminarians, lay-people. It makes me glad that at least some other people out there don't care for it either.

I am all in favor of a good book-burning, starting with some trendy hymnals.

[toledo_jesus]

it's a really poorly written book...she uses the word 'enraged' or some variant every couple sentences. It really makes me wonder why, if Anger is a sin, people listen to these 'enraged' "sweater sisters" as I like to call them. It seems to me that their apoplectic ranting would be against the tone of their notion of what the Church should be.
Fie on them.

[dspen2005]

[QUOTE]
IT's full of erroneous theology and colored information. Even more disturbing is the fact that there are so many religous people who seem to be backing these feminist ideas. One of the sisters actually said this about the church taking sides on political issues: "The church should guide us in faith, but trust the lay people to work out the details"


[b]THe problem with this rationale is that the Church -- in its mystical sense is heaven on Earth and as such is perfect, free from error, is indefectibly holy. Man because of original sin, falls short of this standard. And so, Holy Mother Church is there to guide and help us in this world of relativism, syncretism, and deceit. If lay people could work out the details, would Christ had to have been "conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, crucified, died and buried"?[B]

[QUOTE]
The author also touch on the issue that apparently you can be pro-choice and anti-abortion. This is what the founder of CFFC explains. She says that while she is against abortion she belives people should have a choice as to whether or not they want to have an abortion and the Church should never condem anyone that has had one. By this logic if i wanted to shoot my dog I should be allowed to..it's my right; I highly doubt PETA would see it that way. If i marched down the street in front of their building with a sign saying "I shot my dog" I'm certian the friendly norfolk cops would come escourt me elsewhere.


[/b]uhm, can one be in the KKK and not be a bigot?[/B]

[/QUOTE]
In the chapter about homosexuality again she uses the term condem; which i think is harsh. I used to be southern baptist, I've seen condemnation; i've heard all about fire and brimstone. Never have i ever heard any of the priests i know or orthodox catholics using that word when refering to women who have had abortions or homosexuals. ONLY FROM THESE LIBERALS when they disparage tthe church for not being more "accepting."

[b]I dont see the condemnation either. Maybe, craftygrl can give us any examples from the book -- if any -- of the Church's condemnation of homosexuality. I doubt that there are any authentic examples b/c the Church does not condemn homosexuality [i]per se[/i] but declares, infallibly, that the homosexual acts are inherently disordered, violating Natural Law, ergo God's Law. This is not an outright condemnation, but a declaration made for the good of the souls of the faithful. Morality is there to prevent the lower inclinations of man from surfacing, or to guide man in leading a life pleasing to the sight of God.[B]

[QUOTE]
On contraception of course the CFFC paints the church to be heartless when they deal with women in Africa with AIDS. "The bishops should support condoms; for the sake of the people; to prevent the spread of this terrible disease." There is no doubt that AIDS is terrible but we are dealing with a much larger epidemic: the increase of causal sex with more than one partner. I understand that many of these African tribes have differing morals HOWEVER maybe we should start treating the problem rather than just the symptom. In the same breathe teh author declares that if the church would just support contraception than fewer babies would have to die from abortion. This idea is UNFOUNDED and completely false. I submit that if contraceptioon was made even more accessible and the last strong hold, the church, backed down that there would be MORE abbortions. For the past 20 years contraception has been refined and become the norm and i wonder what's happened to the rate of abbortions. Not to mention that many oral contraceptives are abortifacitants themselves.

[/b]In the late 90s, or even in as early as 2-3 years ago, when the pandemic of HIV/AIDS in Africa came to the international stage, many journalists and groups called upon the Holy Father, JOhn Paul II, to reevaluate the Church's stance on contraception in light of the AIDS crisis in Africa. These individuals, failing to realize that the Holy Father cannot alter/change Church doctrine, were sorely disappointed when he did not budge on the Church's stance. Immediately, though, the media pounced on him declaring that John Paul II was killing people and causing more to die from AIDS (paraphrasing here). The problem with these reporters is that they did not take into account the totality of the Holy Father's statement. Yes, he did retract/change the Church's position on contraception (well, because he can't); but he did say that moral clarity is required of the people in there sexual activity. He recognized and emphasized the dire need of responsible and healthy sexuality, w/in the context of monogamous marriage. What is even more intriguing is that Nigeria, I believe, (and do correct me if I am wrong) implemented an abstinence program, with the adamant support of the Catholic bishops there, and HIV/AIDS has dropped significantly as a result. so I would say, "TAKE THAT SISTER!"[/B]

[QUOTE]
There was a quote from sister jeanine garmick "the Church ideas should reflect the voice of the people." NO sister it should not. It never has and it never will. When Jesus was alive did he reflect the voice of his people, the Jews?? OF COURSE NOT! His message was unpopular and so is the Church's with many people. This is not a democracy.

[B]Sister is giving a serious misrepresentation of a famous quote, -- vox populi, vox Dei--this only holds true when the people, aka faithful, are in communion with God's Church. There is a concept of the infallibility of the faithful but it rests on the aforementioned caveat. the faithful must in full communion with the orthodox teaching of Holy Mother Church. Sister Garmick, has been silenced by the church, and so she is feeling a bit bitter, I would assume.[B]


***craftygrl06, when u are done give me the title again so I can see if the library has it..... i wouldn't mind reading it -- for a reaffirmation of what I don't want to see become of the Church.....****

Edited May 30, 2005 by dspen2005

[dspen2005]

ok, guys... i apologize for my last post.... i have yet to master the use of how to bold, quote certain passages and respond, etc... please pardon my ignorance.... mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa....

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='dspen2005' date='May 30 2005, 02:19 PM'] uhm, can one be in the KKK and not be a bigot?[/B]
[/quote]
only if you are trying to bring it down from the inside...

[Socrates]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='May 27 2005, 10:11 PM'] Intelligent dissent, the worst enemy of any Church. [/quote]
How is this dissent "intelligent"?

Are you anti-Catholic now?