Wednesday, 15 August 2012
Cardinal Dolan's Reply to Critics
6 comments:
-
Henry Edwards said...
-
Three, the teaching of the Church, so radiant in the Second Vatican Council, is that the posture of the Church towards culture, society, and government is that of engagement and dialogue."
This clinches it for me. If something requires for its justification an appeal to Vatican II's recommendation of "dialogue", then clearly it's a bad idea. -
15 August 2012 19:57
- Konstantin said...
-
You're absolutely right.
-
15 August 2012 20:14
-
Clinton R. said...
-
It's all about Vatican II, as noted by His Eminence. The modernists and heretics have turned the Church Militant into the church milquetoast. Our clergy by and large fail to stand up for anything except leftist policies. Shame, shame, shame.
-
15 August 2012 20:23
- Supertradmum said...
-
Konstantin, nice to see you back.
-
15 August 2012 20:23
- Supertradmum said...
-
Henry Edwards. sad, sad day
-
15 August 2012 20:23
- Joe Potillor said...
-
Here's what I've written on my own blog in response to His Eminence
Your Eminence: Thank you sincerely for this explanation of your actions....That said, I still disagree with the action at hand, and here's why:
1. Obama has proven time and time again to be an enemy of the Church...
We've tried to converse with him, dialogue so to speak. He has done nothing but insult our intelligence (paraphasing your words) and lie to us about trying to seek common ground. He has no intention on seeking common ground with us at all. I don't really think he has any respect for the Church at all, or what respect he does have is for a warped image of the Church. And while Jesus did eat with sinners, he certainly corrected them, and he certainly was not a pasifist, even questioning why the guards were doing things to him during the via Crucis. The heart of Obama is hardened towards matters of the Church, and the process of engagement has failed. I think it's time to try a new approach.
2. Good intentions have bad consequences...
While I certainly admire the fact you want to be civil with the president, this is a good thing and certainly should be practiced by all of us when engaging the culture, the perception will be that this talk about Religious Freedom, HHS Mandate, etc, was just a political facade and really it was just cover while in reality, you support the president and his goals towards the Church. I know that this is not the intent of the invite of Obama, but this is how we the faithful will see it. The Gospel of Good Intentions has been tried and really hasn't worked too well so far.
3. There are major differences between the Holy Father meeting the President, and this dinner.
The Holy Father as head of Vatican-City state, meets with the heads of state often. The Holy Father also gave a fraternal correction to Obama, giving him Caritas et veritate, and a copy of Humane Vitae as well. That is to say the Holy Father wasn't civil, he taught the Truth of the Faith, while Obama hasn't listened to Him, He presented the Truth in charity and clarity. He also met with Nancy Pelosi and didn't give her an opportunity for a photo. He did not make it appear as if he was supporting her position. Whether you like it or not, the reality wil be that you are by default supporting Obama by him being there.
7/2. Seeing as if the dinner isn't a reward...I agree...
I agree with you that the dinner is not a reward and shouldn't be seen in that light (it wil be anyway). An invitation was not extended to Bill Clinton because of his moral stance on abortion. By an earlier Cardinal Archbishop of New York. Seeing as the dinner has declined invitations to people before, perhaps now is a good time to try again.
I will of course pray for you, Your Eminence as well as for our Bishops in this fight. I know this was not an easy decision to make, and while I do disagree with it, and understand your reasoning...It just seems to be a repetitive cycle of things that we have tried and have failed. There comes a time where all of us (I include myself) need to stand up for what is right, regardless of whether it hurts peoples feelings or doesn't seem "nice." The Gospel of nice and good intentions has been tried before, the definition of insanity is trying the same thing over again, and expecting different results.
Our Lady Queen of martyrs: Pray for us. -
18 August 2012 00:05