Catholics only please (if there are any of you out there)...

[AustinDawg]

It has been well reported that the Pope is vocally OPPOSED to an impending war in Iraq. This article details the Pontiff's plans to dispatch an envoy to plead with GWB to find a peaceful solution.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L03538062

My question is this: Does the Pope's views on this matter influence your opinion in any way? That is, knowing now that the Pope is against it, are you now against it? Do you think that this will sway the views of other Catholics?

My assumptions are that, by and large and for the most part, Catholics are a fairly conservative constituency and their opinion on this will NOT be changed by the Pope's stance. That is, they will for the most part, be FOR this action. That being the case, can it be said that they put the interests of the nation before the interests of the church?

Please noone take these questions the wrong way, but I thought it would bring about an interesting discussion.

[aubunique]

Austin, you've had this up quite a many hours now without a reply.

I am not a Catholic. I am a Methodist.
However, you deserve a comment in response to a very good question.
Last night, I watched an interesting 3 a.m. special on the development of the birth control pill, which occurred back when I was at an age when it really helped make life tolerable! Let the sexual revolution return! In French, that is something like Laissez le bon temps roulez.

Catholics ignored the pill's birth-control purpose and used it to REGULATE their periods at that time in massive numbers.
I think that the Catholics I have known mostly go along with the Pope when it suits their actual needs. I think they are right now making their decisions, if such is what really happens, based on what they actually feel about the situation. The Pope is supposed to represent the church's interpretation of what OUGHT to be. He does that job well. In the real world, Catholics, like the rest of us, do what they believe they have to do. If the Pope said war was OK, he would lose all credibility as the representative of God on earth, or whatever his position is supposed to be for Catholics.
There is true RIGHT and there is practical right.
We need not pretend they are the same.

I suppose a lot of our discussion in the past few days has been about this subject. It may be important that we express support for our country if it goes to war. However, it is also important that we acknowledge that going to war is not a good thing, according to our religion or the ethics and philosophy of hundreds of years of western civilization. It is particularly unhealthy for the young men we send to fight FOR US!
It means death for many, most of whom we won't know. However, most of us will know a friend or relative of a person who dies in it, if it isn't resolved quickly. Go to visitation. See the body, if it is available. Think then whether a peaceful outcome would not have been better. Listen to the grief of the loved ones. Try to understand.
Don't blame the POPE for speaking as he believes Christ would have him speak.

[weunice]

"There is true RIGHT and there is practical right.
We need not pretend they are the same. "

Then why go with what is not "TRUE right?" You see, the problem I have with "practicality" is that it totally undermines the concept of faith. Take cohabitation for example. Most (22 out of 23 couples at my engaged encounter 3 years ago) people do it. It seems practical. I mean, after all, you don't want to marry someone you haven't "test driven" but that ISN'T GOD'S PLAN for how relationships develop. In this case, I think you are undermining God's plan for your relationship by "locigally" assuming that your way is better. Does that mean that relationships that start with folks living together will fail? No? Does that mean that they have less a chance of making it? .... Oddly, against what seems practical, statistics seem to show so. So the real question is, who understands the grand scheme of problems like overpopulation better, YOU or GOD?

Now look, I am NOT against the authorithy that GOD gave us. He clearly expects us to DO and he gave us brains for a reason, however HIS ways OFTEN defy our logic. We MUST put our trust in Him. He expects us to care for the earth, each other and whatnot. I am with you there ...

If you couldn't guess, I am not a fan of birth control and it would take me about 10 years to explain why ... I will leave it at that. I agree 100% with the Catholic Church on this, including its use of NFP as the only "good" method of birth control. If you want to start another thread I will GLADLY explain my viewpoint but I am not going to get dragged into a 5 day discussion on it. I realize I am in the VAST minority in this country about this. Also, I am NOT Catholic.

I have proposed this question to my brother-in-law ... the main thread question that is ... When I get a response, I will post it here. He is Catholic, conservative and WAY more intelligent than I am ...

[dawg80]

I am Catholic and read what the Pope has to say on a variety of issues. We get a monthly newspaper, by way of the Diocese (our Bishop), that reports on world events, as any paper, and also provides the church's official position on the issues.

The Pope takes the "pure" position on every issue. Unfortunately, most of us don't have the courage to follow his lead. Try as we might (all of us, Catholic and protestant, Jew and Muslim) to be something else, we are mere humans: flawed, prone to errors, prone to succumb to the petty wants and desires of our Earthly existence. Doesn't make it right, it only makes it so.

The Pope issues statements based on pure faith. That if we could TRULY let go, and let God enter our hearts and guide us, we would easily follow the church's edicts. But alas, we always have to hold something back "just in case." It is hard to relinquish control. We think we know better....or enough.

So, the Pope just keeps on doing the right thing, and we keep on picking and choosing (cafeteria style) what to follow completely, and what to amend for our own convenience. The Pope is right, we are wrong. And NO! this is not a case of the Pope inventing anything. It is based solely on the interpretation of Scripture.

Case in point: the pill, premarrital (extra-marrital) sex, etc.... the offical position of the Catholic Church is BOTH parties, man and woman, remain virgins until rightfully married, and then they have sex only with each other, when they are able to support kids, and they use natural methods to curtail reproduction. What stupid idiots they must be! That would work to solve so many problems, but alas, we are too selfish and self-centered to deny ourselves pleasure. But, bottom line is, the church is right. If everyone practiced that, the world's population would be smaller, better cared-for, and we wouldn't be murdering babies in abortion clinics.

War is not a good thing. How can anyone, but a madman, defend war as something noble and good? I liken it to a decision any of us may have to make, defending our families. If someone is breaking into your house, with you and your family at home, you better assume they mean harm! If stealing a TV was their aim, they could wait until we had gone to the movies, or a Tech game, and do that. If they are coming in, while we are home, I have to assume they know that! The 5th Commandment is clear, "Thou shalt not kill." There is no attached list of amendments offering exceptions to that rule. Faced with that situation, as a government is faced with defending its people, a tough call has to be made. For me, may God have mercy on the intruder, because I won't. I could not stand by and allow harm to come to my family. But, my actions, while understandable to most, is still not right. I would take that "wrong" onto my soul, because as a husband and parent, part of me says to defend the loved ones, no matter the cost. May God forgive me, my transgressions.

If I followed the pure teachings of the Catholic Church, as expressed by the Pope, I would meet that intruder, not with a .44-magnum, but with the Bible in hand and plead with him to change his ways. And if he murdered us all, well, then we should have the faith to believe we would all be in Paradise.

Like I said, it ain't always easy.

[american]

I hope Popes of the past weren't taking "pure" positions when they decided to mount the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades.

[NTXDawg]

Dawg80, I will have to respectfully disagree with much of what you said.

So, the Pope just keeps on doing the right thing, and we keep on picking and choosing (cafeteria style) what to follow completely, and what to amend for our own convenience. The Pope is right, we are wrong. And NO! this is not a case of the Pope inventing anything. It is based solely on the interpretation of Scripture.

As much as I think the Pope is a good, honorable, God fearing man. He is just that, a man. Prone to the same human errors that you and I are prone to make.

Case in point: the pill, premarrital (extra-marrital) sex, etc.... the offical position of the Catholic Church is BOTH parties, man and woman, remain virgins until rightfully married, and then they have sex only with each other, when they are able to support kids, and they use natural methods to curtail reproduction.

I am fully in agreement about pre/extramarital sex. But I challenge you to find me scripture that says anything about the rest of that stuff. If everyone practice "natural methods to curtail reproduction" the worlds population would definetely NOT be smaller.

War is not a good thing. How can anyone, but a madman, defend war as something noble and good?

Umm, So I guess when the Lord commanded the Isralites to utterly destroy every last man, woman and child of the people in the promised land, he was just being a "madman".

The 5th Commandment is clear, "Thou shalt not kill."

Actually, it is more acurately translated, "Thou shalt not murder." Justified "killing" is certainly commonplace in scripture.

[dawg80]

I can see from the previous two posts, that there are too many misconceptions, oh heck, tell it like it is, too much ignorance, to proceed with an intelligent discussion on this matter.

[NTXDawg]

I can see from the previous two posts, that there are too many misconceptions, oh heck, tell it like it is, too much ignorance, to proceed with an intelligent discussion on this matter.

Again, I will respectfully disagree,

I don't believe there is anything in my post that can be attributed to ignorance. I can cite scripture to back up each of my assertions. But since you claim that I am ignorant, by all means educate me. I'm a fast learner.

[american]

I think I've been called ignorant. I wonder if the name caller knows what ignorant means. For the record, I am well educated on religion in general and on Catholicism in particular. If the name caller thinks I'm too ignorant to contribute to this thread, then he/she is truly ignorant.

[AustinDawg]

This is precisely the reason I asked only Catholics to respond to this thread. I have seen exactly 3 posts which deal with the topic at hand directly and of those, ONE came from an admitted catholic (who I asked the question to directly).

I'm not saying that anyone here doesn't have a right to post on this thread, but I am disappointed that it got hijacked by people who it wasn't intended for. Guys, it was not my intention to rehash another protestant reformation here, nor was it my intention to subject one person of one belief having to ward off attacks from persons of another who outnumber him by quite a bit. I simply wanted to get a catholic's opinion on how he balances his views on the war with his trust in the Pope's authority. NEVER to call into question his trust, or belief.

If someone wants to start a discussion on how irrelevant they feel the Papacy to be, I respectfully request they start a new thread.

To those who confined their posts to the topic at hand, I thank you for your input.

[american]

Fair enough, Austin. I'll chalk 80's impudence up to his/her frustration at others not agreeing with some of his/her world views. I'll retire from this thread if you like, until I'm attacked again.

I am curious about what you and others think, however, about Richard Land (one of Southern Baptists' most powerful bureaucrats) urging the US into military action. It's interesting how influential men in different strands of the same faith can come up with such diametrically opposed stances on the same issue.

[weunice]

Here is a response from my CATHOLIC CONVERT brother-in-law. He was raised in the Church of Christ and eventually the Episcopal church (yeah, I know .. polar opposites) on a steady diet of C.S. Lewis and G.K. Chesterton.
>
> It has been well reported that the Pope is vocally OPPOSED to an
> impending
> war in Iraq. This article details the Pontiff's plans to dispatch an
> envoy
> to plead with GWB to find a peaceful solution.
>
> http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L03538062
> <http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L03538062>

This struck me:

> "Deterrence, dialogue and concern for the internal situation in Iraq,
> through a series of diplomatic, humanitarian and cultural initiatives,
> is certainly the longer road, but the more effective one for peace in
> the Middle East," said Vatican Foreign Minister, Cardinal Jean Louis
> Tauran, on Monday.

It particularly pains me to hear this sort of brainless blather from a
cardinal. "Dialogue" may perhaps be the longer road, but it has been
remarkably ineffective. We have dutifully trod the road twelve years,
and it has earned us only war. But peace is our aim: for this reason,
we must fight.

Evil does not respond well to diplomacy, humanitarianism, and "cultural
initiatives" (whatever those are). Evil responds much better to cruise
missiles. We have already seen that we deal with evil. We have given
this evil more time to repent than it deserves. The time has come to
deal with the evil by means of war; and may God protect and save us.

"An appeaser is a man who feeds a crocodile, hoping that it will eat
him last" - Winston Churchill.

We pray for healing, and having prayed, we call the doctor, who removes
the tumor with a knife. For God made the doctor too. Never cease to
pray; but do call the doctor!

"Let not many of you be teachers; for you know that those of us who are
teachers shall be judged more harshly" - St. Paul.

> My question is this: Does the Pope's views on this matter influence
> your
> opinion in any way?

The current Pope is a deeply good and holy man, by all accounts, and
his opinion on anything therefore carries much weight with me. However,
unless he pronounces this a doctrine of the church - which he will not
do - I am not obligated to agree with him.

Bill Clinton's opinion on anything also influences me, incidentally. If
I find myself in agreement with him, I examine the issue very closely
to see whether I am wrong.

> That is, knowing now that the Pope is against it, are you now against
> it?

Certainly not. This Holy Father's opinion carries much weight with me,
but it is only with Jesus Christ that I strive absolutely to align my
opinions*. It is only He that cannot be wrong**, for He is Truth
Himself. The Pope is merely His human emissary.

There are a number of possible reasons why the Pope may be in
opposition to this. Some of them are political. It may also be that he
is simply wrong. I suspect it is some combination of the two.

* I listen to different people on different matters - my boss, when it
comes to my work; my mom and dad, when it comes to life in general. I
would say that the two people whose opinions carry the single greatest
weight with me, overall, are my parents. Nevertheless, I disagree with
them on occasion. If I ever am in disagreement with Jesus, I pray that
He would show me, so that I can change my thinking and my ways
immediately - for which I pray He would give me His grace.

** Under certain circumstances, the Holy Church also cannot be wrong;
but this is only because Christ gave His Church authority to teach His
revelation. "The gates of Hell shall not overcome it." This power does
not devolve automatically to the individuals which compose the Church.

> Do you think that this will sway the views of other Catholics?

I think it may carry more weight in Europe than here in America, where
we are frequently taught to ignore authority unless it carries a large
gun; and if it carries a large gun, we are taught to taunt it until it
fires.

> My assumptions are that, by and large and for the most part, Catholics
> are a
> fairly conservative constituency and their opinion on this will NOT be
> changed by the Pope's stance.

I think Catholics _en masse_ are less conservative than we could wish;
but more to the point, American Catholics have experienced the
terrorism that Americans are now fighting in a way that the Pope, who
is Polish and lives at the Vatican, has not. The Pope has that in
common with other Europeans, who are much less in favor of the war than
we are.

> That is, they will for the most part, be FOR this action.

The great majority of Americans think the same, and they are quite
right.

> That being the case, can it be said that they put the interests of the
> nation before the interests of the church?

St. Thomas More, a hero of mine, said: "I am the King's good servant!
_But I am God's servant first._"

Catholics serve God, but they do not serve the Pope (unless they work
for him directly). The Pope is here to serve Catholics. There have been
a great many Popes. Some of them have performed this service well; some
have performed it appallingly badly. Pope John Paul II is, in the main,
doing a wonderful job. Nevertheless, should he be mistaken in this, it
will not have been his first time to be mistaken, and I dare say that
it will not be his last. The Pope must go to confession also; in fact,
he goes daily.

A Catholic's first obligation is to God, and by extension, to God's
Church. But his country comes soon after - Scripture makes this clear.
It is a question, then, of what the Church's interests are; and the
Church's purpose on earth is, among other things, to be Jesus Christ
present and living among us through the members of His Church. And the
business of the Church is to forgive sins and to save souls.

Now, it is clear, in this case, that we would be in grave moral error
if we did not rid Iraq of Saddam Hussein. It also seems clear that this
war will not jeopardize salvation, and I believe it may very well help
to spread the Gospel, indirectly; for the Gospel will not spread in the
Middle East until something has happened to Islam. (The United States,
very properly, has not made war on Islam, and I strongly believe that
we should never do so; but God may use the U. S., among other things,
to help bring down the wall of Islam at last - let it be soon, Lord,
let it be soon!)

This is a simplistic answer to a deep question, and it is not
satisfactory. The Church herself has had great difficulty answering it
- for a time, she involved herself heavily in civil governance; this is
now seen as error, but it is by no means clear that it really was.
Thankfully, in this particular situation, the correct way is clear.

> Please noone take these questions the wrong way, but I thought it would
> bring about an interesting discussion.

It is a _very_ interesting discussion. You might find the following
article relevant to it:

http://www.nationalreview.com/10mar0...ors031003b.asp

[weunice]

Also folks, please read what it says and LEAVE it at that. I am not going to moderate a discussion with my brother-in-law across email. This is his opinion and likely an opinion shared by many Catholics.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

It also seems clear that this
war will not jeopardize salvation, and I believe it may very well help
to spread the Gospel, indirectly; for the Gospel will not spread in the
Middle East until something has happened to Islam. (The United States,
very properly, has not made war on Islam, and I strongly believe that
we should never do so; but God may use the U. S., among other things,
to help bring down the wall of Islam at last - let it be soon, Lord,
let it be soon!)

AMEN!! I love this paragraph.

[AustinDawg]

Weunice, please thank your brother-in-law for his candid response. That is EXACTLY the type of discussion I wanted to have.

Again, thanks.