First up from the God Machine this week is a look at the efforts of some religious leaders to influence U.S. voters as Election Day draws closer. Of particular interest was this clip from Bishop Thomas John Paprocki, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Springfield, Illinois, who issued a remarkable warning on video this week: voting for Democratic candidates he disagrees with, Paprocki said, puts voters' salvation "in serious jeopardy."
As Brian Tashman explained:
In the Catholic Times, the official newspaper of the Springfield diocese, Bishop Thomas John Paprocki uses the manufactured controversy about mentioning “God” in the Democratic Platform to argue that the Democrats are hostile to faith, and went on to attack Democrats for endorsing gay rights and opposing the criminalization of abortion. He said those two planks demonstrate that the Democrats “explicitly endorse intrinsic evils,” while noting that he has “read the Republican Party Platform and there is nothing in it that supports or promotes an intrinsic evil or a serious sin.”
Paprocki concludes with a warning that while he is “not telling you which party or which candidates to vote for or against,” backing the Democratic Party may put your eternal salvation at risk: “a vote for a candidate who promotes actions or behaviors that are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful makes you morally complicit and places the eternal salvation of your own soul in serious jeopardy.”
It's worth noting that federal tax law prohibits tax-exempt religious institutions from intervening in campaigns for political office, which is no doubt why Paprocki said he isn't telling people how to vote. That said, warning Catholics -- many of whom support reproductive rights and marriage equality -- are putting their souls at risk if they vote in ways Paprocki doesn't like comes close to the legal line, if it doesn't cross it.
For what it's worth, threats like Paprocki's don't appear to be having much of an effect this year, as many Roman Catholic voters embrace a more progressive vision -- a Pew Research Center poll found President Obama leads Mitt Romney among Catholics, 54% to 39%. The margin is larger than Obama's advantage over John McCain four years ago.
Also from the God Machine this week:
* Last week, a scandal rocked a 17,000-member Oklahoma megachurch, where five employees reportedly waited two weeks to report the rape of a 13-year-old girl in a campus stairwell, allegedly by a church worker. This week, the story became even more serious as additional victims came forward (thanks to reader R.P for the tip).
* The American Family Association's Bryan Fischer thinks President Obama might be the Antichrist, but he's not positive. "It's too early to say," he told his radio audience this week.
* In Congress this week, Rep. Stephen Fincher (R-Tenn.) introduced a resolution intended to "reaffirm the importance of religion in the lives of United States citizens." Unfortunately, Fincher's measure, in apparent opposition to the separation of church and state, includes a series of inaccurate historical claims.
* And a piece of ancient papyrus that suggests Jesus had a wife was rejected this week as "a clumsy forgery" by the Vatican. The church's official newspaper ran an editorial this week calling the fragment "a fake." However, AnneMarie Luijendijk, associate professor of religion at Princeton University, said she concluded that the fragment, made famous by Harvard Professor Karen King, is an authentic, ancient text, written by a scribe in antiquity.
Leave a Comment:
the pew poll steve cites in the first item also says
Obama and Romney are essentially tied among white Catholics. In 2008 McCain beat Obama among white Catholics 52 - 47.
Obama also leads among Americans with no religious affiliation, 65 percent to 27 percent. Romney leads among Americans who attend worship services at least weekly, 51 percent to 42 percent.
and following up on catholic political involvement, npr reports that
Archbishop John Myers, of Newark, New Jersey wrote a letter to his flock saying "Those who support same-sex marriage are really removing themselves from fuller communion with the church. "
Over 400,000 Catholic families in Minnesota are being asked to contribute money to political ads on the gay marriage issue and the new Archbishop of San Francisco wants to deny communion to any Catholic who is in an active gay relationship.
The Archbishop of Baltimore co-hosted a fundraiser last night to fight gay marriage in Maryland. Bishops in Nebraska are encouraging priests to preach against Omaha's new law that bans discrimination against gay men and lesbians.
following on from that first item npr reported that
**Archbishop John Myers, of Newark, New Jersey wrote a pastoral letter to his million-person flock that said " Those who support same-sex marriage are really removing themselves from fuller communion with the church.
**Over 400,000 Catholic families in Minnesota are being asked to contribute money to political ads on this issue.
**The new Archbishop of San Francisco wants to deny communion to any Catholic who is in an active gay relationship.
**The Archbishop of Baltimore co-hosted a fundraiser this week to fight gay marriage in Maryland.
**Bishops in Nebraska are encouraging priests to preach against Omaha's new law that bans discrimination against gay men and lesbians.
http://www.npr.org/2012/09/27/161909566/catholic-bishops-ramp-up-same-sex-marriage-fight
apologies for the double post, the website is freaking out my computer
Well yes. My soul may 'be in jeopardy' but as I told my brother (good Catholic that he is) when the CC stops diddling kids and takes responsibility for THEIR actions, maybe I'll start listening to them again when they tell me what the teachings of Jesus are. Until then, I'll take my own communion with God.
Must be the topic - it's got me a little freaked out, too. :-D
It is time the Catholic Church and all Religious Entities Loose their tax exempt status.
I am writing a letter to the IRS complaining about the Church using their influence over their members to push their vote to a particular party.
They will deny someone who is gay Communion, yet give that same sacrament to pedophiles, thieves, people who commit acts of violence, people who are divorced, people who are racist and promote racism, or living together without the sanctity of marriage. Would God deny Communion to someone who is Gay - not the God I was taught to love.
Well Lorr, then I'm going to have to write the IRS about all the 501c3's like Mother Jones. Politics is all they do.
Hmmm. I wonder what the tax status of this blog is.
Thanks LOR, that's the real point of this post. We should not be required to fund these organizations by paying taxes that they should be paying.
No one is telling them what to say or not say.
No one is persecuting them for their religious beliefs, or religion in general.
A tax exemption is a privilege, and to get it, you have to qualify for it. If I falsely claim to have a home office and my claim is refused, no one is telling me how to use my household space, no one is persecuting me for working at home, I just don't qualify for the deduction. These religious organizations should be investigated, fairly and impartially, and if they don't qualify for the tax exemption, they should pay taxes like everybody else. They'll falsely claim victimhood (religious persecution), they'll claim they're entitled to exemption merely because they're religious (and Mitt won't say anything about them, of course), but if you don't meet the qualifications, you just don't, and should be treated like the rest of us.
All religions should be taxed. They live in mansions, drive Lincoln Town cars, ask for at least a 10% tithe, all the while diddling little boys and/or the wives of others.
Shooter write to whom ever you want about what ever you want. The Catholic Church and other Religious Entities have entered politics and are using their influence to impact how people vote.
What a load of crap from a charter member of the First Church of Jesus Christ, Homosexual Pedophile.
What was that about casting the first stone? Or the mote in the other person's eye and the log in your own?
He's just covering up for his own totally perverted cult.
Oy,,just Oy!
How would they know how their flocks vote? Is this why polling stations now break the masses up into rightie and leftie voting areas?
501c3's are allowed to discuss political issues and politics in general. They also can discuss pieces of legislation that they are in favor of (or opposed to) and why (as long as it's not the primary focus of the organization). 501c3's are not allowed to endorse candidates or lobby specific candidates over issues.
http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Charitable-Organizations/Exemption-Requirements---Section-501%28c%29%283%29-Organizations
http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Lobbying
http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Charitable-Organizations/The-Restriction-of-Political-Campaign-Intervention-by-Section-501%28c%29%283%29-Tax-Exempt-Organizations
Wow, its funny how lapdog Democrats will blindly follow and believe whatever sugarcoated garbage comes out of the mouth of the Obamas and their cronies, but if it pertains to anything biblical in nature, all you get from them is ire and disgust. As for the Republicans, they really need to open their eyes and start living up to their creeds and beliefs by calling things for what they really are, instead of pandering to the opposition. America is not only under external attack, but is also being internally dismantled by quite a few clowns holding political positions.
Okay guys, time for real talk. I'm an atheist, and philosophically speaking, I'd like all religions to fade into irrelevance. I think the world would be a better place without them.
That all said...Religious institutions should keep their tax exemption status. The fact of the matter is, a lot of impressionable tools attend various religious functions, and if they were told their god would have a hissy fit if they didn't vote for x, that would be a serious threat to democracy. I can understand not liking it (seems to me that the money that would've gone toward taxes instead gets spent on fancy cars for the Bishop), but tax exemption is a useful tool. It acts to strengthen the separation between church and state, and that's always a good thing.
Plus, you know they would launder the living crap out of all those donations. Romney would pay more taxes than the Catholic Church ever would. You would still be paying for these leeches' welfare, but you'd also have to deal with the influence they would have over the government. And rest assured, they would use it to suppress dissent, hold everyone back, and hang anyone that tried to change things. Modern theocracies never ever go well, ever, not even once, just don't try it for the love of pasta.
Wow, it's disgusting how many lapdog right wingers will blindly follow whatever bigoted filth comes out of the mouths of their politicians and pundits.
Time for the Catholic Church to loose its non-profit status.
Obvious that it has become a political organization.
It has been obvious for many years that the RCC is a political organization, but too many people in the US don't have the guts to openly acknowledge that.
" President Obama might be the Antichrist, but he's not positive. "It's too early to say,"
There's a test for that: Throw him in the pond, and if he floats- or, is the other way around? Prominent theologians disagree.
So if he... weighs the same as a duck ... -- We'll use our largest scales!
IIRC, Bill Clinton was the antichrist. I was on an evangelical Christian college campus during the '92 campaign, and that was prominently place in many dorm windows. I will say that it was not the college's position, and many of the faculty there were able to have a rational discussion on the merits. It was not a nut-house campus.
"evangelical Christian college" with signs in the windows that Clinton was the antichrist and it wasn't a nut house? You must have a strange definition of "nuts," i.e. "crazy."
I say he IS the
MessiahAnitchrist, and I should know - I've followed a few!Obama's been called too many names. They've dragged out the worse human in history, Hitler, to label him, now it's the worse thing in the heavens, the Antichrist, to label him. What power rests with the Democrats to rile the religious hornets to such a degree?
Wasn't it the Pharisees and Sadducees, those great religious leaders who denounced Jesus, and wasn't it the masses who picked a criminal, Barabbas, over Jesus to set free?
These men have learned nothing, their hearts aren't changed, and they prove that if any god exists, they command that god to remove salvation from any who votes incorrectly.
And good people will be afraid, their afterlife in danger will force them to vote putting their life today in danger...nice ugly circle the Catholics are in...
As a practicing Christian (meaning everyday I practice - trying to get it right), I am fed up with people like these that give organized religion a BAD NAME!!!
Regarding the piece of ancient papyrus.....I don't care!! Whether Jesus had a wife, makes no difference to me. The question about whether the actual fragment is "real" or not may be important to historians. It can be a "real" fragment, but the scribe could have gotten the story wrong. [Did they have a Fox News equivalent back then?]
I completely agree with you. I'm actually a Catholic and can't believe that these guys (the ones that are harassing the nuns that actually do the work of Christ) think that I'm going to listen to them. I think the IRS should pull their exempt status. I'm sick of it.
As for a Fox News back then....it was probably the church!
After thinking about it a bit...
The Catholic Church wants Jesus to NOT be married - supports the notion of celibacy.
But if Jesus was NOT married, maybe it was because he was gay. Wonder how that would go over. :)
But as a Christian, you should care... because if Jesus had a wife, much of what your faith - and the church - is founded on crumbles. It's an essential part of Jesus' character that he never be married and the reason many Christian denominations don't allow marriage for the priests is because they are following in Christ's footsteps in that regard. Determining Jesus had a wife... there are few things more disruptive to the faith (which is why the Vatican was so quick to deem it a forgery, of course).
That the Vatican thinks it has the legitimacy to take a stand on this is patently ridiculous. For one thing, these things can take years to study and certify. The scholars aren't saying it IS for certain, they're saying it looks like ... For another, who is the Vatican's ancient text scholar? For a third, they scoff at the scholars who say it might be but trust implicitly the scholars who say, without even studying the document it seems, that it cannot be?
Re: #3.3
You said "It's an essential part of Jesus' character that he never be married..."
I completely disagree.
The essential part of Jesus' character is reflected in His teachings - Love Thy Neighbor, the beatitudes, the parables, His sacrifice on the cross and rose from the dead and many others.
NONE of those things have ANYTHING to do with whether He was married.
I am not a Catholic and the requirement for priests to be celibate is just one of many, many reasons I am NOT.
As a practicing Christian you have yet to perfect the art of interpreting the scripture according to your personal prejudice. A professional Christian has no trouble pointing and accusing they see themselves as god's special envoy put here to be self righteous and vain.
I myself figure even an atheist is far better at practicing Christianity than these far right zealots. After all an atheist with morals has those morals because he knows right from wrong not because he seeks a reward or because he wants to ACT like a saint.
Religion is as always a way of controlling people and pushing an agenda. Religion has never really been about God or doing good.
Jesus was a jew and a rabbi accoding to the gospels. That means he almost certainly was married, since jews do not take unmarried rabbis seriously. There is only one known case of an unmarried rabbi in the ancient jewish traditions - and in this case it's always mentioned that he was a rabbi DISPITE not being married.
Jesus has been confronted with any kind of accusation. Not being married was not among them.
I agree. The thought that Jesus reached the age of 33 WITHOUT a wife has been a question for historians for 2000 years. When Jesus lived men married extremely early and there are many many questions what actually HAPPENED to the years between 12-33 of Jesus. The CATHOLIC CHURCH may want to cover it up but I'm not sure other Christian denominations want to.
I'm Catholic and I really don't care if Jesus was married or not. A priest once told me that the requirement to be celibate and single for priests is because they can then give their whole lives to the Church rather than just part of it. On the issue of the Church trying to tell people how to vote, etc., most Catholics are well beyond listening to the Church for anything except the teachings of Jesus anyway. No matter who we vote for, Jesus taught people to put God ahead of politics. Most social issues that the Church has taken a stand on in the last 50 years were not even around when Christ was on Earth. I'm happy to be Catholic and, just like most, a THINKING Catholic. And I'm proud of our American nuns, too!
it is not an essential part of jesus' character that he not be married. it is an essential part of jesus character that he followed god. actually, if he were married and gave all that up to follow god and ultimately die on the cross that would show the greater sacrifice because he would have given up all that was given to him in the world.
there was a time when priests could marry and have children so the notion that this comes from being christ like was always a little off. something happened in the history of the priesthood that made them decide it was better for priests not to marry and my guess is that it had nothing to do with being more like christ and instead had to deal with people being people and not putting god first but being political.
i don't expect more of a priest because he is not married. i expect more of him because he calls himself a priest.
I can't imagine how Jesus' marital status has any effect at all on the value or status of his teachings. But a married Jesus would knock all support out from under the Roman Catholic Church's insistence on a (nominally) celibate clergy. Hence the Church's knee-jerk "must be a forgery" reaction.
Married priests have been universally barred in the RCC only since 1074. Some say that the rule had more to do with requiring the the earthly possessions of priests to pass within the Church "family" (rather than passing to their legitimate children) than it did with clerical holiness.
Not even the most avid fans of priestly celibacy argue that the Twelve Apostles were all bachelors. If marriage was good enough for the Twelve Apostles...
In any case, would abandoning a wife and family to follow Jesus and preach his word really be a virtuous thing to do?
You miss the most important aspect of the story: it sheds more proof of Jesus' existence (outside of the Bible). The fact that he may have had a wife is secondary. And what if he did? All men of an age back then were either married or gay (not that there's anything wrong with that), so take your pick.
A priest once told me that the requirement to be celibate and single for priests is because they can then give their whole lives to the Church rather than just part of it.
Well no on that one . It was so the wealth accumulated would remain within the church and not be passed to the heirs of the priest, thus the concept of being married to the church.
For Pete's sake, we're try to run a business here.
If you want the answer you'll have to ask Glenn Beck. God speaks to him personally, yanno.
sick, I'm sorry you feel such bitterness toward the Catholic Church, maybe organized religion in general. You have a right to think what you think but spewing vitriol seems a waste of energy for anyone who really doesn't care and doesn't lend any credence to your arguments. The priest I spoke with was a good friend and truly one of the very finest human beings I've ever met. His explanation may have been because the reason for celibacy has evolved over time or because the reasons were always multi-faceted. Either way, it doesn't really matter. Being such a cynic without finding out more because you don't share a belief makes a person just as bad as those who generalize in the name of religion.
Even if the papyrus is not a "fake", there is no proof that it was written in Jesus' time. It could (and most likely was) written centuries after the church was already established.
On the the other hand, my journey towards atheism began 55 years ago when I read a book which asked the very questions addressed by Vokoban and Mega above. How could Jesus not have been married? If he was a rabbi (a teacher), he would had to have been married. Why would he not have been married? Paul, who was very anti-women, actually wrote Acts before any of the Gospels were written. It's not surprising that Jesus would be described as never married.
If I recall it was a couple centuries after the execution . I would like to point out that the idea of a woman being as close to Jesus as Mary was , is a particularly tricky issue with no women as priests etc . If it disturbs the Vatican you can be sure that it is for the idea that women will be needing equal Catholic representation , not whether the Vatican officials are mature enough to wait on evidence before inserting their feet in their mouth .
The bible also says to give away riches and to follow Jesus. funny how the Vatican and those astoundingly beautiful churches overlook such selective parts of that book and put such heavy emphasis on others.
Vatican, Bishops, give up all your riches, your fancy robes and titles, your egos, and follow Jesus, then perhaps your flocks will trust your word and follow you.
Boy, the comment system here is a bit weird. Dianne-663843, did you really mean to leave the same message about 3-5 times? I note several other comments appear repeatedly, too, so there is likely a glitch in the software.
As to the issues here:
1. I don't know why the Catholic hierarchy felt obliged to denounce that bit of papyrus. The scholars looking at it believe it was written after A.D. 300, so it is clearly ancient but not actually as old as the oldest known New Testament texts. It was Coptic, which was a splinter group suppressed early in the early Christian era, and they asserted many things otherwise rejected by the Church in Rome. There is almost no chance it's "fake," in that it almost certainly was from the time and place asserted, but it also should have almost no affect on Christian beliefs either. It proves nothing about Jesus, nothing at all.
2. As a non-believer (and a trained tax preparer), I concur with the comment above that while tax-exempt status for churches in the U.S. is occasionally abused, it's better than the alternative. Most churches -- right and left -- do conscientiously obey the tax code. Most do perform community services that fully qualify for non-profit, tax-exempt status. And so long as they are tax exempt, they are also restrained from meddling too much in politics. Which they generally shouldn't. Iran has, since 1979, been trying to merge democracy with theocracy, and we see what a horror show THAT is. Unleash U.S. churches to openly engage in political activity, and you'd see divisions emerge much worse than the polarization now afflicting our county.
3. Mother Jones does not violate its tax-exempt status any more than a large number of conservative non-profit publications and institutions do. Every time some pea-brained rightwinger starts whining about this in Congress, they're usually told by the GOP to shut up because they know that the 501(c)3 rules -- as broadly practiced -- help conservatives as much or more as they help liberal groups such as Mother Jones.
Well Mother Jones really isn't that leftwing of a magazine. The only reason why they are being targeted specifically is because they had the audacity to air several clips that featured Mitt Romney speaking to a crowd in an almost cartoonishly evil rich guy manner and the public did not react positively to what Romney had to say. Instead of trying to understand why the public reacted the way they did and understand exactly what policy ideas Romney was advocating for that the public do not want to see implement, the right wing is choosing it's tired tactic of attacking the messenger and saying well Mother Jones is just a hippie liberal rag and that's why they would report such an evil thing! It's a childish way of reacting to criticism that doesn't help the political conversation at all.
To your point about churches: I agree that by and large the majority of churches should not have their tax status removed, but there are some who I think have violated the terms of the tax exempt status and they should have their status temporarily suspended until they change their actions in accordance with the law. That's basically an enforcement issue, however, and not an issue with changing the law itself. I think the law is perfectly fine with how it's written, but I think some institutions are being given too much leeway.
and in other catholic news
the archbishop of los angeles writes editorial supporting california immigration bill
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-mahony-california-trust-act-20120928,0,6019973.story
------------
germany's top administrative court agreed with roman catholic bishops on wednesday that german believers who refuse to pay a special church tax could be shut out of catholic worship.
http://news.yahoo.com/german-court-backs-catholic-church-against-tax-opt-174732513.html
--------------
a suicide car bomber blew himself up outside a catholic church in northern nigeria last sunday
http://news.yahoo.com/suicide-bomber-targets-nigerian-church-several-dead-wounded-101440605.html
one more
AP
The pope’s once-trusted butler went on trial Saturday for allegedly stealing papal documents and passing them off to a journalist in the worst security breach of the Vatican’s recent history — a case that embarrassed the Vatican and may shed some light on the discreet, internal workings of the papal household.
In its first hearing in the case, the three-judge tribunal threw out some evidence gathered during the investigation of butler Paolo Gabriele, who is charged with aggravated theft. It also decided to separate Gabriele’s trial from that of his co-defendant, a computer expert charged with aiding and abetting the crime.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/vatican-opens-door-to-trial-of-popes-butler-accused-of-stealing-papal-documents-sort-of/2012/09/29/1aa0263e-09f3-11e2-9eea-333857f6a7bd_story.html
Mahoney's working double-time to make up for all the years he covered up the sex perverts he'd ordained. Most people in L.A. notice he became more "liberal" once the courts told him he had to give up the records.
Basically, voting liberal is worse than being a sexual deviant?
If you vote Democratic, you lose the chance for higher communion, if you are a sexual pervert, you get a different church and a whole fresh set of kids to ruin.
Speaking of churches getting all partisan, on October 7, there is apparently a thing called "Pulpit Freedom Sunday," where church leaders will intentionally defy IRS regulations about not being involved in partisan campaigns, essentially taunting the IRS: "What are you going to do about it?" Amy Sullivan has a good write-up at The New Republic. She points out something that Steve has being mentioning for years when the subject of tax-exempt churches getting involved in partisan politics comes up: No one is stifling the churches' freedom to spout whatever politics they like. The issue is with their tax-exempt status. If you want your church to become a GOP mouthpiece, then give up your tax-exempt status. It's that simple.
But apparently too simple for the leaders of "Pulpit Freedom Day."
and the repubs don't want to give up their illegal tax-exempt status either.
Yeah, just as these religious zealots want a shrunken government - one that provides little while allowing for private fornication, in whatever way, so long as no one gets caught, so too do they mix and match their perversions in public for the rest of us to incredulously take in!
Well, T. J. Paprocki, your religious functions should be limited to the ten commandments. I don't see in the ten commandments anywhere that my soul will be damned if I vote for a Demcrat in the world of men! I think the dear friar needs a leather jacket and the nickname Fonzi to pull such a cockamamie shark jump!
For all his education, seminary training, and assumed dedication to the cloth, T. J. is showing his fallibility greatly! -Kevo
Actually as someone claiming to be a Christian he should have to go by the two commandments that Jesus said trumped all others...Love God and your neighbor. Maybe I missed the voting commandment.
Smaller government is more chance to do whatever they want, no federal oversight on businesses, states, or organizations equates to kids without parents.
When these orgs drop their crime down to zero with the regs we have today: pollution, embezzling, cheating workers, cheating on taxes, then maybe smaller government is a good idea. They aren't doing that, we need oversight, and they are mad. Just look at all the cheating Wall Street's done in recent history, smaller government for them?
Oh for the love of pete Dianne ... knock it off! We get your point, we may even agree with your point but cutting and pasting it as a response to every single post is downright, effing annoying. STOP!!
Yeah, because Jesus was obviously a Republican.
If the Catholic Church wants to step into politics that's great, the country could certainly use the taxes we should be receiving from them for the honor.
Oh my God! Well THAT makes me feel real comfortable. The one person who is closest to, and best knows the man running for President of the United States, has concerns regarding his mental stability.
Good God people! This man will have his finger on the nuclear button. We MUST demand that this man be examined for psychological deficiencies by not less than three psychiatrists, and that he be required to submit a battery of psychological testing.
Mr. Romney concerned me before. Now, knowing that his wife of 43 years, who knows him best has raised question as to his mental fitness, Mr. Romney is clearly the scariest person to ever seek the office of President of the United States.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/28/mitt-romney-mental-well-being_n_1924622.html
I have been thinking for months that robme is showing signs of early dementia. It seems so obvious especially at his age.
Thank you for your post! I have been voicing my concerns to my family about Mitten's appearing to have dementia for a long time! Some of his speech patterns fit right in with patterns of Alzheimer's patients that I care for.
It sure is a scary thought.
George Romney was brainwashed by generals. Mitt Romney may be driven insane if he becomes president. How about just playing it safe and never, ever risk having a Romney in politics again? Their delicate mental equilibrium can't handle the stress.
Throw in no more Bushes, and we have a deal!
Get Enraged and Engaged:
Mooch the Vote 2012!
;-)
I think the Springfield diocese should have their tax exemption pulled. While the church feasts off the tax payers, this rogue goes off the rails claiming to speak for all Catholics. Shame on him. Who cares what this confused individual thinks? I mean, really! He doesn't understand our Constitution or what this country really stands for, does he? He's not a model for being an educated American, that's for sure. If he wants God in politics and in our government, that's great with me—under one condition—I get to pick which God. I certainly don't want his God. His God has made him ignorant and un-American.
Right. If Jesus felt there was something wrong with homosexuality He certainly would have said something since he lived under the Roman empire where homosexuality was predominate... but not a word. He took the time to condemn a fig tree but not homosexuality. I doubt this Bishop will do anything more than incite the GOP base.
That's what great about America...we all get to "pick which God" or have none...it's what our Constitution guarantees.
Jesus loved John best, and John laid his head on Jesus chest at the last supper. Perhaps Jesus should be excommunicated.
Dear Bishop Paprocki,
In the words of Saint Blovious of Scatalogia:
Caput tuum in ano est.
If you have forgotten your basic Latin, allow me to translate.
"You've got your head up your ass."
Sure, Catholic priests practice birth control. Every time they want to have sex, they just slide a young boy onto their penises and nobody gets pregnant.
Thank god I'm an atheist.
Thank god I'm an atheist? Really? You're joking, I hope.
He's being ironic.
[pun-fest retracted to protect readers]
This should be adequate grounds to immediately cancel the Catholic Church's taxe-exempt status!
Ok, Diane,
You've been warned about "cut and paste" posting so - into the bin with you!
I would think that the Catholic Church have enough problems to deal with....why are they sticking their nose in politics?? do they not believe in the bible passage at Mark 12:17 " Give to Caeser what belongs to Caeser, and give to God what belongs to God" which means to keep religion and politics separate!!....Dugh!!
OMG... and I do mean OH MY GOD. Unbelieveable to denounce one "party" as evil and sinful while the other somehow is more pure and Godly. Has this bishop been paying attention to the ads, the speeches and more importantly THE ACTIONS of these candidates. And what about the Catholic priests who.... he's in really no position to question us.
What would the Democrats do that has the Catholic Church so riled up? Birth control seems juuuuust a bit small for this over-the-top reaction.
"I don’t know how you feel, but I’m pretty sick of church people. You know what they ought to do with churches? Tax them! If holy people are so concerned with politics, government and public policy, let them pay the price of admission like everyone else. The Catholic Church alone could wipe out the national debt if all you did was tax their real estate." - George Carlin
I think he had it right. The church doesn't want government to bother them, so how about they stop bothering us with their dogma and doctrine?
Aren't we supposed to have separation of church and state? Oh, that's right, some in the GOP wanted a Constitutional amendment saying the USA is a Christian nation. Boy, I hope not....
The Catholics who take a bishop's view on politics seriously weren't going to vote for Obama anyway. I think this sort of nonsense helps Obama by motivating his base.
WHAT A KNOB!!!!!!.................(LC)
So it is ok with the church for the rich to get richer and for poor people to suffer for lack of healthcare, education and food!
The Catholic Church has sided with the rich ever since Emperor Constantine bought them. They didn't get all those fancy cathedrals financed by the peasants (though they conscripted the peasants to build them).
Honestly, I firmly believe that the nuns should be running the Catholic Church. They already do all of the work and seem to be way better informed as to how the Church's many hospitals and charities work. They also have the advantage of not being hampered by pride and ambition.
All humans are prone to corruption, it's the nature of the Beast...so to speak.
That is why their flocks should show their leadership the way to a better society, a better humanity, by exercising their right to vote...not exercising the Catholic leader's right vote.
Gays are not the enemy, having too many kids is not the answer.
I believe this priest any his like minded cohorts are socially retarded and mentally twisted individuals who will themselves be the downfall of religious practice and belief.
Bishop Paprocki, thank you for reminding me why I am no longer Catholic.
You certainly did well to point out beliefs that are "morally complicit", unfortunately you did it by example.
Why would anyone consider listening to the moral teachings of a Church that has and
protects pedophiles?
Amen
There isn't much evidence that anyone DOES listen to these guys. A minority of Catholics will agree with Bishop Paprika, but those folks were no doubt going to vote Republican anyway.
I doubt that this pronouncement will change a single mind - or a single vote.
I think that President Obama is setting his rules according to the Constitution and common sense. Politics have their place. Religion has its place. The two make strange bedfellows. When religion tries to exert its influence over the people, social freedoms are sacrificed. Obama recognizes this and honors the wisdom of the Founding Fathers in this respect.
Last millennium at inquisition camp, the catholic bishops would consider a catholic woman to be a witch if she outlived her husband, and then, if she had any property they would have her raped and tortured until she confessed (confessed during a break in the torture so they could claim she confessed of her free will) and that way the church could take all her property (a hundred bucks?)...
If the Roman Catholic Church of America wants to be a political party, let them and remove their tax exemption. I think Rome will have a lo-o-o-ong conversation with the bishops.