The Pope & The Pelosi: Face to Face
Fresh from her back-room authorship and successful passing of a piece of legislation that could fundamentally change the face of her nation, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi headed to Rome with a handful of other Democrat legislators. On the agenda: a bit of skiing, a bit of award schmoozing, and on Wednesday, some face time with Pope Benedict XVI.
That last bit is producing howls in some Catholic quarters. A papal audience does not go unnoticed, and some Catholics — mindful of Pelosi’s seemingly willful misunderstanding of church teachings on abortion, grave sin, and the reception of communion — want the pope to publicly chastise his recalcitrant daughter or, even better, excommunicate her until she renounces her positions. The inevitable pictures of pope and speaker together are also causing headaches; Pelosi and the press, goes the worry, will point to them as evidencing a triumph of the liberal zeitgeist over the Eternal church.
In truth, here is what will happen: The pope, as head of state, will meet with the speaker of the house of the United States — third in line to the Oval Office. There will be small talk, small gifts exchanged, and flashing light bulbs. As the last great man of the 20th century meets the most powerful woman of the 21st century, there will be no excommunications, no public scolding, and their shared religion will take a backseat to their official duties. Very likely Mrs. Pelosi will come bearing a private message from the new American president saying something to the effect that “change” had come to America and that Benedict’s chance of a welcome on the White House lawn had materially diminished, for now.
Now who would attack a mother of six and an alum of Trinity College, a Roman Catholic college for women for her faith? Anybody? Who out there is gonna step up and define what “real” religiosity is? Before you judge Pelosi, you should cast your eye upon the Pope for reinstating a bishop who is a holocaust denier?
Wow, quite a challenge. So much judging to do, so little time. Better hurry.
The point isn’t attacking her- it’s that she’s sounded like a fool talking about Catholicism when she seems to support breaking an important tenet of the Church- the sanctity of life, whether before or after birth.
Besides, she’s a buffoon who authored the biggest grab of money that doesn’t yet exist ever. She DESERVES some attacks for what she’s going to do to this country with the policies and spending priorities she has promulgated. What happened to the ‘most ethical Congress ever,’ hm?
Did you read the article?
Do you have any idea of what your talking about?
Do you do anything else but recite some pernicous internet meme?
From what you wrote the answer sadly must be a resounding NO.
Oh and “one of your own”
You forgot to smear The Holy Father as a “Nazi”.
That must be a favorite one among the circle you must travel.
I agree that asking the Holy Spirit to help this woman to chnge is the right course. She definitely needs to change.
I am a Missouri Synod Lutheran and am praying the Holy Spirit will use Pope Benedict to help change Pelosi’s heart and mind.
The Pope: leader of one of the most absurd religions in the world.
Pelosi: Just a politician. Photo op.
one of your own: yet again all we get out of you is intellectual dishonesty, ignorace arrogance and immroality.
Do not pretend that you give one fig about “people of faith”. What a hypocrite you are.
You have contempt for them. Your complaint here is just one more rhetorical dodge, one more lie out of that foul mouth of yours. It is really a form of blasphemy. May God forgive you.
You are one of the most ignorant, arrogant, immoral and intellectually dishonest trolls I have ever seen. You are completely detached from the real world and real people. You should be ashamed of yourself, but you are incapable of shame. This is how vile your character is. If you had any serious respect all for Christianity, you would examine your own morality. You would not like what you see, if you where honest with yourself.
Pelosi’s superficiality and hypocrisy in the practice of her faith clearly demonstrates just how morally depraved the Democrats truly are. If they think they can hustle God, imagine what they think they can do to the rest of us. She should be given a stern lecture and forbidden Communion.
Our futures are in the hands of creatures like Pelosi.
Bendedict–Head of State, official duties? Gimme a break! Nobody gives a rat’s ass about the Pope as Vatican City’s Head of State–least of all Nancy Pelosi. Head of Church–that’s what this is all about. If Benedict doesn’t publicly explain where The Pelosi gets off with her contumacious misrepresentations of Church teaching, he will have effectively ceded moral and teaching authority to her, while at the same time cutting off at the knees those American bishops who had taken up her challenge–at his urging! If the meeting goes as Ms. Scalia suggests, the Church needs someone to come forward and, in the spirit of the Pauline year, play Paul to Benedict’s Peter.
“If they think they can hustle God”
She’s not meeting God, she’s meeting a man. A man who makes mistakes just like she does. Has she misrepresented tenets of her church, yes. An internal church matter, I couldn’t care less. It has nothing to do with the world outside of the Roman church and should be dealt with privately. To me he misrepresents Christianity and I have the choice not to submit to what he says. I don’t answer to him and he doesn’t answer to me. And Mongoose, none of us answer to you. This meeting is not spiritual, it’s political. Two fallible human beings meeting for pure political reasons. Pray indeed.
Mongoose, what you just spewed is proof positive that you have absolutely no clue what Jesus Christ taught or stood for. Before you accuse others of hypocrisy and depravity you need to look at yourself. As you say “You would not like what you see, if you where honest with yourself.” Oh, and look up the definition of blasphemy.
Thank God! Benedict came through for faithful Catholics–and all those of good will to the cause of human dignity. I’ve put the link in the URL slot. Excerpts:
Benedict said all Catholics – especially legislators, jurists and political leaders – should work to create “a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development.”
The Vatican said it was not issuing a photo of the meeting – as it usually does when the pope meets world leaders – saying the encounter was private. The statement said the pope “briefly greeted” Pelosi and did not mention any other subject they may have discussed.
“See how these Christians love one another.”
I am very pleased that Pelosi did not get her photo-op. Obviously the Pope understood the power of that image as much as Pelosi did and didn’t let her have it. Good.
Mongoose “You are one of the most ignorant, arrogant, immoral and intellectually dishonest trolls I have ever seen. You are completely detached from the real world and real people. You should be ashamed of yourself, but you are incapable of shame. This is how vile your character is. If you had any serious respect all for Christianity, you would examine your own morality. You would not like what you see, if you where honest with yourself.
Pelosi’s superficiality and hypocrisy in the practice of her faith clearly demonstrates just how morally depraved the Democrats truly are. If they think they can hustle God, imagine what they think they can do to the rest of us. She should be given a stern lecture and forbidden Communion.”
I wonder if the language you use is what the Gospel calls us to do? I take it you really do not believe the Gospel’s call for a preferential option for the poor
“Has she misrepresented tenets of her church, yes. An internal church matter, I couldn’t care less. It has nothing to do with the world outside of the Roman church and should be dealt with privately.”
Except that her position and profile has allowed her to intentionally project her misrepresentation outside the church and present it to the world as normal church teachings. I’m not Catholic (may not even be the best Christian), so I have no theological dog in the fight. What I did see, however, is as the Anchoress described: a woman who is more beholden to her times and ego than her faith yet still wants to be a part of that which in many ways she has refuted in all but words. From my position outside, I see little substantial difference between her stance on abortion “as a Catholic” and the stance taken by a stereotypical pro-choice atheist, other than, perhaps, the word “personally opposed” and her attempt to achieve some convoluted religious backing for it.
“It is no easy thing to be pope.”
no, it’s not easy to be the head of the biggest renseignements office
I notice that Ms Pelosi is not veiled as she “should” in presence of the pope, well, I was in use to see women do so before
Wow, that didn’t take long for the hate to ooze, did it? You folks never disappoint.
Ah, the siren harmoniums of purity in thought. So fast we hold to the teachings of The Messiah. So selfless in our supplication to The Savior. So certain we are of The One’s redemptive power. So desperately we seek absolution through the infallability of God’s Vicar. Now about that holocaust thing . . . i can pint you to a website that offers DEFINITIVE PROOF that you can IN NO WAY DENY that the Holocaust was a myth. And if you don’t agree it just shows you are INCAPABLE OF RATIONALE THOUGHT because you are on a board with ADULTS and we see through your little OBAMA game.
Here’s what you need to know . . . cryin’ won’t help ya, prayin’ won’t do ya no good.
I think Moongoose said it best, “Pelosi’s superficiality and hypocrisy in the practice of her faith clearly demonstrates just how morally depraved the Democrats truly are.”
ah the sweet smell of
And to #4. Richard Wang (a fairly transparent bit of sophomoric entendre, congratulations) thanks for reminding me that the Pope was a Nazi Youth. Let’s knead that dough a minute . . . A Nazi Youth reinstates a Holocaust denier. . . A Nazi Youth reinstates a Holocaust denier. . . A Nazi Youth reinstates a Holocaust denier. Yes, I’m sure there is something there worth thinking about. I’ll ask my Aunty Christie. She, too, is a sophomore in the College of God. She knows all bout this stuff.
I think Moongoose said it best . . . “Pelosi’s superficiality and hypocrisy in the practice of her faith clearly demonstrates just how morally depraved the Democrats truly are.”
All I can say, Moongoose, is that if we Democrats are morally depraved, you got a lot more to worry about than you think.
you should just try reading the actual article before you argue what it’s about.
Typical Liberals,
I find it interesting how those that support the “right” of mothers to hire doctors to kill their infants use Biblical notions about ‘helping the poor’ to offset their tacit support of medical genocide.
A closer look at the facts shows that even their support for the poor is a sham. Charity is a PERSONAL responsibility. It is no more charitable to ‘give’ to the poor what you took in force from others than there is when the Chinese harvest organs from political prisoners in order to ‘save lives’.
This mindset of the Left has made them LESS charitable, not more.
“Although liberal families’ incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227)” -Arthur C. Brooks
Pelosi and her husband’s *listed joint assets are over $92 million. With that money she could do a considerable amount of good for the poor. However her own “charitable” contributions are to foundations that are primarily enjoyed by the wealthy (The San Francisco Museum of Modern Art and the San Francisco Symphony).
Contrast that with the Left’s most hated enemy: George W. Bush, who in 2005 had a taxable income of $618,694 and contributed $75,560 (well over the 10% that the Bible prescribes) to charitable organizations that included the American Red Cross (Hurricane 2005 Relief), the Salvation Army (Hurricane 2005 Relief), the Salvation Army (Pakistan Earthquake Relief), Martha’s Table, the Archdiocese of New Orleans Catholic Charities, the Mississippi Food Network, and the Federal Government’s Combined Federal Campaign.
Pelosi and other politicians of her ilk hijack and misrepresent Catholic teaching insofar as she can use it to grow the political power of the Left. I suspect the same of some of the posters here.
Just remember: If it weren’t for double standards, the Left would have no standards at all~
Buzzkill3r:
I gues Pope John Paul misrepresented the Catholic position too when he called for a preferential option for the poor. It is not just Charity that is called for in the Gospel, but justice too
This skank can’t talk to anyone without lying; What’s the penance for lying to the Pope? He probably keeps his toes crossed when he gives her his blessing.
Right Far Right,
I’ve found that ‘Justice’ is defined by the Catholic Left as:
“An activist movement that finds in the Gospel a call to free people from political, social, and material oppression.”
Sounds good, right?.. Unfortunately that is actually the definition of ‘Liberation Theology’ which has been condemned by both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI.
Liberation Theology (or “Justice” if you prefer) seeks to liberate people from poverty as opposed to sin.
The left prefers to overlook the fact that Christ came, not to free Israel from the political oppression of the Romans (as Judas wanted), nor to eliminate poverty (“Blessed are the poor”), But rather to free us from the slavery of sin and to reconcile us all to the Father that we may one day share in his triumph.
To elevate to primacy the Left’s ideal of economic “Justice” in the face of the gravest injustice of our time (abortion) is beyond reproach. Christ himself spoke of this mentality when he said: “Why do you see the speck in your brother’s eye but fail to notice the beam in your own eye?”
On a side note, the Holy See has stated that the Pope spent the whole 15 minute conversation talking with Pelosi about the right to life and the need to defend the unborn.
Right Far Right says:
“I gues Pope John Paul misrepresented the Catholic position too when he called for a preferential option for the poor. It is not just Charity that is called for in the Gospel, but justice too.”
Please link reference to Pope John Paul II’s “preferential option for the poor”.
=M=
Benedict should have also upbraided her for putting that islamic veil on in Damascus to please the chinless one. Kissing the knob of the dictator one of the vassal states of the islamic republic of Iran wasn’t one of more Catholic things she’s done.
Macgawd: There are many places to read what he wrote about the gospel’s call. You might also read Matthew 25
Skip to content. | Skip to navigation
Site Map Accessibility Contact Search Site
only in current section Advanced Search… SectionsHome Courses About OCW Help Feedback
Course Contents
Catholic Social Teaching Home
About the Professor
Syllabus
Calendar
Readings
Lecture Notes
Personal toolsLog in Register
You are here: Home → Theology → Catholic Social Teaching → Unit VI: The Social Vision of John Paul II
Info Unit VI: The Social Vision of John Paul II
Document Actions
— filed under: Catholic Social Teaching, Maura Ryan, Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, Pope John Paul II, Preferential Option for the Poor, Lecture Notes, Solidarity
Lecture Notes for Unit VI: The Social Vision of John Paul II
OVERVIEW
In this unit we consider one of the key social encyclicals of Pope John Paul II (1978-2004). Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (1988) is a reflection on the 20th anniversary of Populorum Progressio. Also included in the assigned readings for this week is an essay treating ethical aspects in humanitarian aid. It raises interesting and important questions about how wealthy nations should take up the challenge of addressing the emergency or on-going needs of impoverished nations, a challenge that arises forcefully in Sollicitudo Rei Socialis.
Sollicitudo Rei Socialis takes up themes that by now are familiar:
the dignity of the human person as the foundation for society and the norm for justice in social institutions;
integral development as the religious and moral response to global poverty;
the universal destination of the earth’s goods.
the right to meaningful employment.
In this encyclical, we see development of Catholic social teaching on several fronts:
an extension from national cooperation through international to transnational;
continued emphasis on underdevelopment, but now with additional concern for “overdevelopment”;
strengthening of the language of a “social mortgage” on private property;
concern for the ecological consequences of economic development.
In this unit, we will concentrate on two issues: 1) The challenge of solidarity and, 2) The preferential option for the poor.
The challenge of solidarity
Sollicitudo Rei Socialis identifies “attitudes of sin” as the fundamental moral obstacle to international development (#38). What is needed, the pope argues, is solidarity: “men and women in various parts of the world feel[ing] personally affected by the injustices and violations of human rights committed in distant countries . ..”(#38). Solidarity is not “a feeling of vague compassion or shallow distress at the misfortunes of so many people, both near and far. On the contrary, it is a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good; that is to say to the good of all and of each individual, because we are all really responsible for all (#39). “Solidarity” helps us to see the “other” –whether a person, people or nation– not just as some kind of instrument, with a work capacity and physical strength to be exploited at low cost and then discarded when no longer useful, but as our “neighbor,” a “helper” to be made a sharer, on par with ourselves, in the banquet of life to which all are equally invited by God (#39). Solidarity requires a willingness to share on the part of the influential; an active claiming of rights on the part of the weaker. Sollicitudo Rei Socialis reflects the prevailing geo-political grid of the time: a divide, principally of ideology, on East-West lines.
Preferential option for the poor
Sollicitudo Rei Socialis underscores the necessity of judging social and economic systems from the standpoint of the most marginalized. The option for the poor is an extension of the Christian virtue of charity, a manifestation of a concrete love of neighbor. The growing numbers of people existing in extreme poverty around the world must be a priority in all development plans. Addressing poverty must include forms of “social poverty,” the deprivation of rights to the full development of intellectual and religious freedom, as well as strictly “material” or “economic” poverty (in David Hollenbach’s terms, our obligations to the poor include liberty and bread). Reading the signs of the times reveals a growing housing crisis (#17); growing un- and under-employment (#18), and “crushing global debt, forcing debtor nations to export capital, aggravating underdevelopment” (#19). Global poverty is not just a “natural fact” but the product of systemic patterns and choices: “Side-by-side with the miseries of underdevelopment is inadmissible superdevelopment which involves consumerism and waste” (#28). For Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, the widespread occurrence of poverty and “underdevelopment” cannot be understood apart from the excesses of capitalism and competition between powerful nations for dominance – as such, it is a problem that will only be corrected through a moral revolution with systemic consequences.
There are various interpretations of “preferential option” in the documents of Catholic social teaching. Pope John Paul tends to interpret the principle conservatively, to mean roughly that decisions about the generation, use and distribution of goods must embrace the needs of the least well-off. Sollicitudo Rei Socialis argues for a “social mortgage” on private property—any individual’s right to acquire material goods is legitimately limited by the rights of others to the minimum conditions for a dignified human life—although SRS does not go so far as to suggest that the rich have an obligation to relinquish surplus goods. In the liberation theologies that have developed out of Latin America since the early 1970’s, “preferential option for the poor” is interpreted more radically, to mean that the needs of the poor have the single most urgent claim on the social conscience of the Church and the Christian and, in some cases, that the least well-off have the right and duty to claim an equitable share of the earth’s goods.
In “You Save My Life Today But For What Tomorrow,” Mary Anderson discusses some of the concrete problems involved in exercising solidarity with or option for the poor. Humanitarian aid efforts can create dangerous long-term dependencies (and thus are criticized along the same lines as US Welfare programs) and can exacerbate conflicts by merely better equipping warring parties. To be effective without falling into these traps, she argues, humanitarian aid must minimize inequalities between giver and receiver and both identify and build on local capacities.
Here are some questions for reflection:
The East-West ideological divide discussed in Sollicitudo Rei Socialis no longer is in force. If you were to write this encyclical today, what would you identify as the most significant moral and geopolitical obstacles to global solidarity?
How do you understand the “preferential option for the poor”? In your view, what does it require of those of us in positions of economic privilege? What are its limits?
Anderson’s article identifies some common problems in translating the rhetoric of solidarity/preferential option for the poor into action. Are her suggestions for overcoming those problems sound? Why or why not?
References
See Peter H. Henriot, Edward P. DeBerri and Michael J. Schultheis, Catholic Social Teaching: Our Best Kept Secret, (Washington, D.C.: Center of Concern, 1985), for a summary of Populorum Progressio and Sollicitudo Rei Socialis.
Copyright 2008, by the Contributing Authors. Cite/attribute Resource. Ryan, M. (2007, June 23). Unit VI: The Social Vision of John Paul II. Retrieved February 18, 2009, from Notre Dame OpenCourseWare Web site: http://ocw.nd.edu/theology/catholic-social-teaching/unit-vi-the-social-vision-of-john-paul-ii. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Reuse Course
Download this course
feedback :: site map :: accessibility :: terms of use :: privacy policy :: powered by eduCommons
Powered by Plone Valid XHTML Valid CSS Section 508 WCAG
for those of you who believe it’s a scandal for a Catholic politician to receive Communion and publicly support Abortion, click on the link below…..And remember you are supported by Canon Law in this matter. As a sidenote the San Francisco Archbishop met privately with Pelosi Feb 8th to discuss the Church’s position on Abortion……She no longer has ignorance as an excuse. My guess is the heat will start coming down on her on this issue, and soon, as well it should…..For those that disagree with this, my hope is the 50 million souls never given a voice in this debate will show compassion and pray for the illumination of your consciences before it is too late…..We have no right to judge people; we do, however, have every right to judge actions….God himself can judge both……We should all, regarldess of which side we’re on, beg for His mercy before it’s too late….
http://www.pewsitter.com/petition/
I could care less about petty little catholic right wingers and their hypocritical whining. Since, outside of sex and abortion, RCC policies are more liberal than conseravative like Iraq. when some Opus Dei clone brings the Church into the discussion, then why didn’t you listen to the Pope over Iraq.
This reminds me of some nasty witch like Laura Ingraham, she can’t wait to tell you every five minutes what a good little Catholic she is when it suits the topic at hand. But when it comes to Iraq or illegals, then she never mentions the Church.
Way to go Pope, put Pelosi in her place and ask her who is paying for your trip to Italy.
One wonders if His Holiness wasn’t flanked by the Vatican Varsity Exorcist Team when meeting sister Pelosi.
Hope it worked…
I kinda wish he’d slap her silly. Oops, too late.
I find it amazing that the Pope who lives in a castle made of gold would have the audacity to tell the rest of the world how bad abortion is. I’m not condoning abortion nor will I ever impose what I think is right on anyone else. The Pope lives in a castle made of gold while half the world is starving and without homes. What did the church do to help the Hatians when they were eating mud cakes cause they had no food? The catholic church also surpresses the rights of women. Yet they are the moral authority. People worship the Pope as if he were a god. The bible says believe in no man as a god, yet most religions have a man as thier center piece. I grew up a catholic yet find it hard to maintain any connection with a group of pedophiles dictating whats right and wrong. And lets not even get me going on Nazi Pelosi.
Pelosi claims that natural gas is cheaper and more efficient than fossil fuels, 500 million Americans A MONTH are losing their jobs. She’s a whackjob. I’m quite sure the Pope was less than impressed. nuf said
Rob,
The Vatican is a museum that houses great art for all the world to visit and view, a Church big enough for huge crowds of pilgrims (kind of like Rev Graham going into ball parks and stadiums?) and offices for managing many areas of both city-state and church. It was built over long centuries through gifts given to the Church with the intent that it be used always for the Church. Its an ancient family home, not simply real estate.
It is quite obnoxious that you would nastily equate the whole Clergy with pedophiles. And last I heard, those few who were guilty of molesting boys were the ones who refused to follow the ancient moral Teachings and Traditions upheld in Church teaching (in the Scriptures, you know, the Church that assembled it and kept it for you to use now?) The teachings you don’t think the Church has the right to dictate to anyone…..
Erm- which “rights” of women are suppressed? I haven’t been suppressed lately so I was just wondering which ones you meant. Maybe I’m missing something, but I’ve never been to a parish that makes me sit in back or behind a screen.
Yes the Catholics ‘worship’ the Pope much like Protestants ‘worship’ Billy Graham. Actually, we worship Jesus Christ as well you know and pretend not to. You are very intellectually dishonest if you had ‘grown up’ Catholic.
Maybe its time simply to ‘grow up’, do ya think?
Anyone who doesn’t think that it is Christlike to use harsh language when confronting the arrogant and the hypocritical needs to read the Gospel and read what Jesus called the Pharisees. He referred to them as “Whitewashed sepulchers,” “a brood of vipers,” “children of the Devil,” and “blind leaders of the blind,” among other charges of hypocrisy.
So Rob, where is the Pope supposed to live? He doesn’t OWN the Vatican. The Vatican belongs to all Catholics. There are Catholic missions that do go to Haiti and help the people there. I have supported such endevours. As a woman I don’t know what you’re talking about as far as “suppressing” our rights, no we don’t “worship” the Pope and nobody wants to “maintain any connections” with pedophile Priests.
Get over yourself….
Interesting how an article about Christianity automatically brings out the Left-wing, Christianity haters. Unlike other articles, half the posts here seem to be from them, of course.
8. Mongoose:
Your ramble shows you don’t know what Catholics are all about.
BTW, I’m not going to hell because I don’t believe in heaven or hell.
#37 BTW, I’m not going to hell because I don’t believe in heaven or hell.
====
I guess that’s as logical as believing you won’t get into a traffic accident because you’re a good driver.
#34 Myth Buster
Perhaps you should reread the Gospel and understand who the Pharisees were – the religious authorities of the day who imposed man made rules and legalistic nonsense designed to keep the people FROM God rather than bring them TO Him. He would do so again to day to many of the current denominations including the Roman church. Those who choose to submit to Rome are certainly free to do so but the rest of us are not required to and have no greater chance of facing damnation because of that.
#36 Marc, please check the comments again, the most aggressive and nasty ones are from those who cannot help but ooze hate towards Pelosi and liberals in general. Where there are some, myself included, who criticize the Roman church that is in no way expressing hate towards them or Christianity. Seems in the mind of many liberals and non-Christians are fair game but the second a negative word is written in the other direction the screeching begins. Grow up, you want to throw stones then be prepared to duck.
8. Mongoose: I can feel the love, Moongoose . . . that good Christian cooking smells so good coming from that apple pie sitting on the window sill. I’ll be in to get just as soon as I’m done bailin’ this here hay.
No I appreciate you suggesting that I “examine (my) own morality” but you see, I don’t have to because there are people like you out there willing to do it for me. and I just want to extend my hand in gratitude to you, Mr. Moongoose, for taking time out of your busy day to tend to my life eternal. And I’ll offer the thanks of Ms. Pelosi by proxy for your assessment of her faith . . . let’s see, what was it . . . “Pelosi’s superficiality and hypocrisy in the practice of her faith clearly demonstrates just how morally depraved the Democrats truly are.” Wow . . . Wowey wow wow . . . all I can add is the righteous words of Brother Tom Lehrer . . . perhaps you will find peace and communion in them . . . Ready? Uh one, anna two, anna three, anna four . . .
First you get down on your knees,
Fiddle with your rosaries,
Bow your head with great respect,
And genuflect, genuflect, genuflect!
Do whatever steps you want, if
You have cleared them with the Pontiff.
Everybody say his own
Kyrie eleison,
Doin’ the Vatican Rag.
Get in line in that processional,
Step into that small confessional,
There, the guy who’s got religion’ll
Tell you if your sin’s original.
If it is, try playin’ it safer,
Drink the wine and chew the wafer,
Two, four, six, eight,
Time to transubstantiate!
So get down upon your knees,
Fiddle with your rosaries,
Bow your head with great respect,
And genuflect, genuflect, genuflect!
Make a cross on your abdomen,
When in Rome do like a Roman,
Ave Maria,
Gee it’s good to see ya,
Gettin’ ecstatic an’
Sorta dramatic an’
Doin’ the Vatican Rag!
#40 one of your own:
That was pretty good…do you have any such doggerel about Jews?
Muslims?
Don’t be afraid to post ‘em here.
Be an equal opportunity offender, and
give EVERYONE a good Abrahamic belly-laugh!
You’re not AFRAID to….are ya?
It takes a very stupid person to judge all priests by the actions of 1% of them. That would be like judging the whole US Armed Forces by the actions of a few in Abu Ghraib.
#39 Dave – Your point is somewhat valid. The sword cuts both ways. My point, however, was about the sheer ratio of comments. The religion haters are all over this article, like stink on a monkey.
I find your equating of the contempt for Liberalism with the contempt for Divine religion very interesting. I couldn’t agree more. Liberalism is the religion of the irreligious. The two religions are anathema to one another, and the screeching begins.
There are more cases–a lot more–of sexual abuse of children in the public school system. But for some reason that isn’t nearly as newsworthy. Wonder why? Of course, the clergy doesn’t have as good a union as our esteemed educators.
Her wrinkles are gone.
38. Paul -Indiana:
“#37 BTW, I’m not going to hell because I don’t believe in heaven or hell.
====
I guess that’s as logical as believing you won’t get into a traffic accident because you’re a good driver.”
You got a point there, but ONLY if there was a heaven or hell.
I’ve been in heaven and I’ve been in hell: they all are right here on Earth.
rob wetmore @31 you are full of crap. You may have been baptised a Catholic but you obviously never picked up a cathecism or attended a religion class/Sunday school. How often did you attend Mass? I’d bet Christmas, weddings and funerals at the most.
“The catholic church also surpresses the rights of women” and “People worship the Pope as if he were a god.” – Dude, I really have to thank you. There’s no better way to start the weekend than with a good laugh.
RCC policies are more liberal than conseravative…
What nonsense. If you are an RC and you belive this, you either are not paying attention or have a misled pastor. You also have might brush up on what conservatism is, as you seem confused there. You need to read the writings of the current Pope. His criticism of modern Cultural Marxism–and it current form of Social Liberalism–could not be more pronounced.
Ring wing (oh, and “Dave the false Christian” too): I think you should find out what the Bible says about those who indulge in incredulity, falsehood, moral turpitude, hypocrisy or blasphemy. Read up on the fate of those who falsely pose as believers in order to lead other people into sin. Read up on the fate of false prophets and those who folow them( “Dave the false Christian”, you need to do this one in particular, check out moral turpitude in this context while you are at it, as you are mired in this sin).
Read up of the fruits of those who sin against the Holy Spirit.
Read up on what the Bible about mocking God.
Do it real soon.
But then you really do not believe in God at all do you? You most likely have never read the Bible cover to cover even once, have you? Not even from an historical interest.
You are just assuming some hypocritical rhetorical posture that in your superficiality, vanity, and arrogance you think is somehow suasive to Christians or shames Christian primness or social mores. But those understandings of Christians and their obligations which you hold are merely self-dealing and self-serving delusions.
How foolish you are to think that calling things by their real names is sinful, uncharitable or “Unchristian”. Quite the opposite is true. You understanding consists of little else but cartoonist notions of the spiritual or historical actually of Christianity, and most particularly the Roman Catholic Rite.
Christ was not a some effeminate, limp wrist, passive-aggressive, oily Liberal Democrat or Cultural Marxist with lying and hypocritical social manners and superficial airs:
From Matthew 10:
34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
36 And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.
37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.
39 He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.
As usual for you, you have everything backward, upside down and inside out. That is why you have the “beliefs” that you have, and how hideous they are. You manage to be both perverse and perverted.
It would be wise to figure out what Christain faith, practice and doctrine were actually about, rather that smugly mocking real Christians with a rhetoric springing from wholly errant notions of their faith, or the proper duties or comportment that arise from that faith. The Church is not a Kiwanis Club or some Liberal Democrat “Sensitivity Seminar”.
The Church bravely faces mankind’s true nature.
Typical Cultural Marxist, mired in his own misguided abstractions, mired in his sin.
Hey, “one of your own”!
I’m still waiting for some of your “Jewish” jokes and Muslim knee-slappers!
What’s up with that, funny man?
Why so silent,all of a sudden?
Make with the jokes!
Many times I’ve heard or read people who are for freedom of choice that there should be separation of church and state. I agree. That’s why I am staunchly against freedom of choice. I don’t feel myself or any taxpayer should have to pay for abortions. The government has no right spending my money on abortions.
Feb 21, 2009 – 7:22 am
Bilgepump . . . you refer to my #40 post . . . and I ask you, what was offensive about that post to Christians? What specifically do you object to? Hmm?
Until then, tell me what your religion is . . . fundamentalist Christian, perhaps? Mormon? (ooh, juicy), Lutheran? (Missouri Synod), Southern Baptist? Episcopalian (too gay?), Crouching Jew? Hidden Muslim? Moongoosian? Once you confirm, I’ll be happy to tell you my thoughts on that, funny man style.
#52. one of your own:
Don’t be chickensh*t.
Make with the gags, already.
This sudden balking of yours would lead me to believe that you’ve all of a sudden found your sensitivity to SOME peoples’ faith.
But only if they’ll get medieval on you for it.
There’s a lesson in that.
53, Bilgepump . . . so I’m right . . . there’s nothing offensive in my #40 post.
I asked you a simple question. You can’t answer it. Even my dog quits barking when he’s licking his wounds. See if you can rise to his level.
#54 one of your own:
“there’s nothing offensive in my #40 post.”
Who said anything about it being offensive?
I said, and you can check this, that it was “pretty good”, and invited you to post some more good stuff that just might offend Jews and Muslims, too.
You’re the one who has balked, chum.
My own faith…what do YOU care?
It’s nothing but a mirth-making opportunity for you anyway, isn’t it?
So, now quit equivocating and make with the funny!
Re-reading this a year later, this gel can write.