Jump to content

Catholic Bishops vote to deny Biden and liberals communion


Orale
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Mole said:

This kind of misses the point of my post, but:

1. there are reasonable biblical arguments that support the pro-choice position

2. there's also the question of whether or not staking out a "biblical" position on any moral issue is wise or relevant today.

Despite this, the idea that there isn't a valid biblical case to support something approximating the pro-life position is simply not true. Someone can reject the case on biblical or other grounds, but it's there and pretty reasonable provided you start with the premises that most religious pro-lifers start with (and that premise isn't simply "hurr-durr I hate women").

And of course my point was that any Christian stance on abortion is necessarily a case based on the application biblical principals rather than explicit commands, such as treatment of the poor and immigrants. It's disappointing, but not surprising, that religious pro-lifers have latched on to an issue that has some biblical nuance and rejected the other issues that are much clearer.

Again, we’ve been through this before. Read your Bible, sinner. Open it up to Numbers 5:11-31 then tell us how that’s pro-life.

Nobody gets their values from the Bible. They interpret the Bible in a way that tells them what they already believe is supported by scripture. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, UpperWestside said:

The US finally gets a 2nd Catholic president and they then do everything they can to ex-communicate him from the church. Empathy and compassion is not a strong suit of this branch of Christianity. When I used to occasionally stop by for a service at St. Patrick’s Cathedral before the pandemic there was a minister there named Donald Haggerty. He was the one person on their ministerial staff that made it a point to remind everyone of homosexuality being a sin and how Catholics are set apart from other Christians. He seemed like a guy who was a very tortured soul that probably did not have any friends in that building gay.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Can one be pro life and value guns more than people?

If we remove all context, the NRA life verse shows Jesus as pro-weapon and indifferent as to whether or not people were appropriately dressed; as Luke 22:36 says: He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Again, we’ve been through this before. Read your Bible, sinner. Open it up to Numbers 5:11-31 then tell us how that’s pro-life.

Nobody gets their values from the Bible. They interpret the Bible in a way that tells them what they already believe is supported by scripture. 

Is this a bit that you're doing and I'm missing it or do you not understand that I'm agreeing with you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mole said:

Is this a bit that you're doing and I'm missing it or do you not understand that I'm agreeing with you?

When you said it could be argued that the Bible is pro-life you were definitely not agreeing with me. Or was that a bit? Maybe a winking emoticon would’ve helped. Because anyone who claims to be pro-life can’t cite the Bible as justification.

Not for opposing equal rights for the LGBTQ community, either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Royalfan5 said:

I was pretty shocked when I found out that most of the time Catholic communion was just a wafer. Being ELCA Lutheran we make with the wine every time, and allow anyone who wants communion to take it

I’m ELCA too. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Aint' no Nazi like a Catholic Nazi...Seriously, I know a few. Many have moved on to the Evangelicals but not enough, and somehow there is some theology in there I never learned to justify shit like Opus Dei. I guess it all comes back to governance of the pussy. If you support abortion, or have one, you are fit to kill. 

You’d probably be surprised by the number of Baptists who convert to Catholicism. Cynics call them Calvinist Catholics. I think they find an exhaustive list of prohibitions appeal to these converts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Mole said:

2. there's also the question of whether or not staking out a "biblical" position on any moral issue is wise or relevant today.

 

I certainly agree with this, but I might modify it to "'biblical' political or policy position."  I think one's religion can and should affect a personal morality, and some of that may be informed by the study of scripture.

But, while Christians are urged to spread their faith, they're not urged to foist their beliefs on others and certainly not by the machinations of a worldly government.

It does become a bit difficult to separate one's personal morality from one's political positions, particularly as an actual government official.  

I don't think there's anything in legitimate Christian doctrine that requires a Christian government official to spread the Gospel via governmental action.  Or to loudly demand that the government attempt to recreate some sort of Christian or "biblically correct" society on earth.

I suspect that the ultimate legitimate expression of Christianity would be to stay the hell out of government altogether.  Your time is better spent serving your fellow man directly, without the worldly accoutrement of government and political power.  That's vanity.  It's sin.

 

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Again, we’ve been through this before. Read your Bible, sinner. Open it up to Numbers 5:11-31 then tell us how that’s pro-life.

Nobody gets their values from the Bible. They interpret the Bible in a way that tells them what they already believe is supported by scripture. 

I don’t know many who have professed faith for a good period of time who don’t understand that the Bible is what is says and what it means. Oftentimes, they find what they believe to be in tension with what the Bible says and means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Satchel said:

I don’t know many who have professed faith for a good period of time who don’t understand that the Bible is what is says and what it means. Oftentimes, they find what they believe to be in tension with what the Bible says and means.

The Bible says lots of things, often in contradiction with itself. It doesn’t know what it means. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Mole said:

and that premise isn't simply "hurr-durr I hate women"

Huh. I always assumed the need was driven by insecurity, not hatred. The need to have control over the lives of women, I mean. And I recognize you are not speaking from such a position.

Edited by Willfully Horn
Claro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

The Bible says lots of things, often in contradiction with itself. It doesn’t know what it means. 

I’m aware of that. The Bible can’t claim to know what it means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

So my question is: can vegetarians take communion?

Yeah, and home come vegans won't eat honey because it's the product of animal labor...but they'll eat fruit which is the product of animal labor?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

What's FASCINATING (he says sarcastically) is how the polling of "religious adherents" almost perfectly tracks the political divide, without any regard for the actual theology of the adherents.  The Catholics are as divided as our society as a whole.  Seems like the Baptists are, too.  I know the Presbyterians have been.  And the Methodists are dealing with it....and on and on.

In other words, most all "people of faith" choose what they want to believe and do politically with ZERO guidance from their faith at all.  They follow their politics, not their faith -- they just claim that their faith happens to match their politics, after they've decided what their politics are.

Which I get.  It's really hard to actually dig into matters of faith and realize "holy shit.....if I'm gonna take this faith stuff seriously, it's really hard, and most of it is some version of 'don't be a selfish dick,' and I'm not willing to do that." 

I posted it in the other thread, but I wouldn't hold my breath for these same bishops to make similar statements about leaders who take hardline anti-immigrant stances......

.....ahem.

image.thumb.jpeg.baaa0bb69f68d22deded65a063fcae9a.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

As far as I’m concerned, every “Christian” on earth can go fuck themselves.

Christianity and Islam are both (equally) curses on the planet.

Seriously, if you’re a “believer”?  Go fuck yourself.

That's pretty harsh man.

You ready to throw Gurdeep under the wheel too?

Religion has been good and bad. Try not to piss on all of us at once.

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

That's pretty harsh man.

You ready to throw Gurdeep under the wheel too?

Religion has been good and bad. Try not to piss on all of us at once.

 

It’s not that harsh.  It will be the downfall of this country.  Anyone who causes that, by action or inaction, can go fuck themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I certainly agree with this, but I might modify it to "'biblical' political or policy position."  I think one's religion can and should affect a personal morality, and some of that may be informed by the study of scripture.
But, while Christians are urged to spread their faith, they're not urged to foist their beliefs on others and certainly not by the machinations of a worldly government.
It does become a bit difficult to separate one's personal morality from one's political positions, particularly as an actual government official.  
I don't think there's anything in legitimate Christian doctrine that requires a Christian government official to spread the Gospel via governmental action.  Or to loudly demand that the government attempt to recreate some sort of Christian or "biblically correct" society on earth.
I suspect that the ultimate legitimate expression of Christianity would be to stay the hell out of government altogether.  Your time is better spent serving your fellow man directly, without the worldly accoutrement of government and political power.  That's vanity.  It's sin.
 

Just had a late night chat with a cousin, who’s a pretty serious Christian, and definitely more conservative than I, and he had a great observation and explanation why he doesn’t think that his more socially conservative beliefs should be enforced by the government: “the way I see it, you can try to serve God, or you can try to BE God. And the second one is a pretty big sin, so I think we should stick with trying to serve God.”

I thought it was an iterating perspective. Don’t agree with it entirely, as the devil can be in the details, but still thought provoking.
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I’m concerned, every “Christian” on earth can go fuck themselves.
Christianity and Islam are both (equally) curses on the planet.
Seriously, if you’re a “believer”?  Go fuck yourself.

Let’s agree to disagree.

The issue, IMO, is that most Christians nowadays, whether they are Catholic or Evalangical, or anything in between don’t actually follow the teachings of Christ, which is what they should be doing. He basically had two big rules…

Love everyone and treat them as you would be treated and don’t pass judgement on others.

I think he would be very, very, very disappointed with all the hateful things being done in his name.
  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, cactusflinthead said:

That's pretty harsh man.

You ready to throw Gurdeep under the wheel too?

Religion has been good and bad. Try not to piss on all of us at once.

 

 

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:


Let’s agree to disagree.

The issue, IMO, is that most Christians nowadays, whether they are Catholic or Evalangical, or anything in between don’t actually follow the teachings of Christ, which is what they should be doing. He basically had two big rules…

Love everyone and treat them as you would be treated and don’t pass judgement on others.

I think he would be very, very, very disappointed with all the hateful things being done in his name.

Yeah, I was drunk and a little harsh but I'm really sick of Christians shoving their fucking imaginary friend in all our lives.

It was bad enough w/ the Evangelicals, now we have the Catholics acting like dotard, too.

I'm tired, tired, tired of it. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Continental Op said:

The Catholic Church is a morally bankrupt organization and the world would be better off without it.

Anybody that still identifies with this group should consider killing themselves if they get the chance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I was drunk and a little harsh but I'm really sick of Christians shoving their fucking imaginary friend in all our lives.
It was bad enough w/ the Evangelicals, now we have the Catholics acting like dotard, too.
I'm tired, tired, tired of it. 
I understand. I also hate the attempt to legislate morality. Fuck that.
  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bunch of old fags that are insincere about their religion threaten to exclude some other old fart who is insincere about his religion. Why is this news? Who cares? I'm sure that Joe Biden cares bigly about the wine & wafer..

 

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

I understand. I also hate the attempt to legislate morality. Fuck that.

How does one create laws without 'legislating morality'? What do you think the law is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard a piece on NPR this morning explaining that this is not yet actually a vote to deny communion, or even comment on it.

It was a vote for the Bishops to make some sort of unified statement on the issue, which will occur in the future.  And apparently the mechanism by which they are doing it will essentially invite comment from the Pope.

We can all guess where this is headed, but it's not a done deal yet, and there's room for surprises.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard a piece on NPR this morning explaining that this is not yet actually a vote to deny communion, or even comment on it.
It was a vote for the Bishops to make some sort of unified statement on the issue, which will occur in the future.  And apparently the mechanism by which they are doing it will essentially invite comment from the Pope.
We can all guess where this is headed, but it's not a done deal yet, and there's room for surprises.
Anytime there's a contentious vote, someone is making a comment. It's the implication that counts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Js1 said:

You aren’t the arbiter of who is and isn’t sincere about their faith.  FOH

You think the catholic hierarchs who live in opulence and now engage in cheap political theater after how many years of not lifting a finger about so many other issues are sincere? Or the career politician, literally the worldliest & most dishonest type of man that there is? Lmao do not clutch your pearls for these degenerate fossils, please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

As far as I’m concerned, every “Christian” on earth can go fuck themselves.

Christianity and Islam are both (equally) curses on the planet.

Seriously, if you’re a “believer”?  Go fuck yourself.

lol

this guy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...