Scribes, Pharisees, Hypocrites
#1
Scribes, Pharisees, Hypocrites
By Tom Fleming

Catholic leaders in the United States are outraged by the Obama administration's decision to require all health plans and hospitals, regardless of church affiliation, to provide contraceptive services.  Sister Carol Keehan, president of the Catholic Healthcare Association, has gone on the attack: "It's not about preventing women from buying anything themselves, but telling the church what it has to buy, and the potential for that to go further,"
I'd like to be more sympathetic to Sister Carol, but she was among the most vocal and adamant supporters of Obamacare.  She is credited with gaining Catholic support for the plan even in the teeth of the bishops' opposition, and to run to the left of the American bishops is quite a feat.  If she is so naive as not to understand the anti-Christian mindset of Barack Obama and his advisers, she should not be holding a position of responsibility.
In her own defense, Sister Carol (like other leftist Catholics who went gaga over Obama) would probably point out that the Department of Health and Human Services might have exempted religiously affiliated hospitals from the requirement.  After all, the President has always claimed to be some kind of Christian, though what the United Church of Christ has to do with Christianity is a hard question to answer. 
Recently, Obama has been prefacing his advocacy of Marxist economic policices with the phrase, "As a Christian..."  Shouldn't Christians be able to get some kind of injunction against this sort of thing?  At the very least, the Consumer Protection watchdogs should cite him for violating truth in labelling statutes.  The same complaint, naturally, could be lodged against many, perhaps a majority of Catholic bishops.
For over a generation, the Catholic Church in the United States has been dominated by secular-minded leftists, who use their clerical collars and habits as camouflage for promoting a leftist agenda that has little or nothing to do with historic Christianity.  Like Obama, they cite Scriptural moral injunctions aimed at individuals as justification for governmental policies that usurp the moral duties of men and women to practice charity, but that only makes their actions more perverse. 
Socialism not only robs us of our human dignity, but it diminishes Christian charity.  Too many American Christians, confronted with a beggar in the street or an unfortunate neighbor, now say, "I gave at the office" or "That's what I pay taxes for."  Are there no prisons, are there no workhouses? asked Mr. Scrooge.  Today it is, Are there no foodstamps?  Is there no welfare?
If Catholic leaders were sufficiently self-conscious to know what they are doing, I should call them liars.  Unfortunately, Catholic education today is programmed to turn out brain-dead Marxists.  But even if they are too obtuse to lie, leftists nuns and priests are certainly heretics and blasphemers in turning Catholic social teaching upside down to promote political parties and leaders that are manifestly anti-Christian.
For decades, Catholic social agencies have collaborated with state and federal social programs that have destroyed the moral responsibility of the poor and impoverished working and middle class families.  The only positive results are the thousands of government make-work jobs held by college graduates who pretend to provide services to the people whose lives the government has ruined. 
If you want proof, go visit a government housing project in any major city.  Just don't ask for police protection--which you will certainly need--because they cops dare not enter the projects.  In  Chicago, when they want to make a weapons sweep, they announce their plans in the media so that the gangbangers can stash their guns somewhere else. Otherwise, the police would be facing a conflict on a level of violence somewhere between the gunfight at the OK Corral and the D-Day. 
Neoconservatives like to describe the violence and moral anarchy of the poor as the "unintended consequences" of well-intended social policies.  That is another lie.  Whatever else Marxist social planners had in mind, it was to inculcate moral subservience into the clients of the welfare state.  In communist countries, the mechanism was the party-state which turned over all property rights and power over to a tiny cadre of party leaders.  In the "democratic" West, it has meant the empowerment of a bureaucratic elite that presumes to form our minds, school our children, and destroy traditional institutions and morality.  All of this has been done with the connivance, approval, and active cooperation of mainstream Christian churches.
Catholic bishops and social workers have been taking Caesar's money and working hand in glove with Caesar's legions for decades, but now they are whinging about rendering unto Caesar.  I'd like to think that Sister Carol would begin to wise up, but I know better.  The Catholic leadership in America is incorrigibly stupid and radically opposed to everything the Church has taught for two millenia. 
All that faithful Catholics can do is to pray and wait for the current generation of bishops and bureacrats to die of their excesses.  Most of the younger priests I run into are terribly educated, but they are sincere and hardworking.  Their vocation was not produced by a desire to avoid the draft or live a life of ease.  The Church has survived the corrupt and degenerate clergy of the pornocracy (10th and 11th centuries) and the Renaissance, and it will survive the current lot.  As a Catholic I am required to treat their offices with respect and to kiss the ring of a bishop I may despise as a man. 
What I refuse to do is to pretend to show any sympathy for the Obama-loving Marxists who have spent their careers selling out the Faith and now claim they were bamboozled for the umpteenth time by the leaders of the anti-Christian Democratic Party. If they want to establish any credibility, they can begin by excommunicating Nancy Pelosi. But why would they do that?  Pelosi and the late Ted Kennedy represent the mainstream of the Catholic Church in America.
Original Link http://fleming.dailymail.co.uk/2012/02/s...rites.html
Reply
#2
If the majority of young priests he runs into are "terribly educated" what does that say about the future?  I mean, everyone knows Catholic seminaries aren't exactly known for being in the vanguard of educational excellence, especially those of the trad variety, but so what if they are "sincere and hard working?"  Sincere and hard working idiots?  Is that what we need in the priesthood?

Yeah, but he's right about the lefties and their fellow travelers in the Democrat party.  You lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.
Reply
#3
(02-03-2012, 08:10 PM)DrBombay Wrote: If the majority of young priests he runs into are "terribly educated" what does that say about the future?  I mean, everyone knows Catholic seminaries aren't exactly known for being in the vanguard of educational excellence, especially those of the trad variety, but so what if they are "sincere and hard working?"  Sincere and hard working idiots?  Is that what we need in the priesthood?

Yeah, but he's right about the lefties and their fellow travelers in the Democrat party.  You lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

Woke up and realized you were you again, eh. Is there no depth you will plump to insult priests?
Reply
#4
(02-03-2012, 08:10 PM)DrBombay Wrote: If the majority of young priests he runs into are "terribly educated" what does that say about the future?  I mean, everyone knows Catholic seminaries aren't exactly known for being in the vanguard of educational excellence, especially those of the trad variety, but so what if they are "sincere and hard working?"  Sincere and hard working idiots?  Is that what we need in the priesthood?

Yeah, but he's right about the lefties and their fellow travelers in the Democrat party.  You lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

Dr. Fleming holds his doctorate in the classics, so my guess is that his definition of education is more in line with classical education, not the watered down education that exists today in most universities. The traditional seminaries are probably more in line with Dr. Fleming's idea of what an education should be, especially compared with your run of the mill modern seminary.
Reply
#5
(02-04-2012, 03:52 PM)MeanGene Wrote:
(02-03-2012, 08:10 PM)DrBombay Wrote: If the majority of young priests he runs into are "terribly educated" what does that say about the future?  I mean, everyone knows Catholic seminaries aren't exactly known for being in the vanguard of educational excellence, especially those of the trad variety, but so what if they are "sincere and hard working?"  Sincere and hard working idiots?  Is that what we need in the priesthood?

Yeah, but he's right about the lefties and their fellow travelers in the Democrat party.  You lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

Dr. Fleming holds his doctorate in the classics, so my guess is that his definition of education is more in line with classical education, not the watered down education that exists today in most universities. The traditional seminaries are probably more in line with Dr. Fleming's idea of what an education should be, especially compared with your run of the mill modern seminary.

My understanding is that  the formation of traditional priests is in the Scholastic.
Reply
#6
(02-04-2012, 12:53 PM)Heinrich Wrote:
(02-03-2012, 08:10 PM)DrBombay Wrote: If the majority of young priests he runs into are "terribly educated" what does that say about the future?  I mean, everyone knows Catholic seminaries aren't exactly known for being in the vanguard of educational excellence, especially those of the trad variety, but so what if they are "sincere and hard working?"  Sincere and hard working idiots?  Is that what we need in the priesthood?

Yeah, but he's right about the lefties and their fellow travelers in the Democrat party.  You lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

Woke up and realized you were you again, eh. Is there no depth you will plump to insult priests?

Take it up with the author of the article.  I'm not the one that said priests are "terribly educated."  And I've never plumped any depths, thank you very much. 
Reply
#7
I agree with that 100% in fact I find this whole thing ironic and somewhat amusing. For Years the USCCB has been the unofficial wing of the Democratic party and now they have a President fresh from the jungle that is actually putting his money where his mouth is on the socialist crap and the Bishops now look like complete idiots. Like Dr Bombay said. If you lay down with dogs your gonna get fleas. Also you reap what you sow.
Reply
#8
Also most all Novus Ordo Catholics support Obongo. He got 61% of the "Catholic" vote. Back in 08' I had to go to an NO Parish and I kid you not at least 2/3 of the cars in the parking lot had Obama bumper stickers. Now everybody is all upset that Obama is doing this. Sweet Irony. Its like when the Vatican made the Concordat with Nazi Germany then Hitler turned around and spit in their faces.
Reply
#9
(02-04-2012, 05:42 PM)Heinrich Wrote:
(02-04-2012, 03:52 PM)MeanGene Wrote:
(02-03-2012, 08:10 PM)DrBombay Wrote: If the majority of young priests he runs into are "terribly educated" what does that say about the future?  I mean, everyone knows Catholic seminaries aren't exactly known for being in the vanguard of educational excellence, especially those of the trad variety, but so what if they are "sincere and hard working?"  Sincere and hard working idiots?  Is that what we need in the priesthood?

Yeah, but he's right about the lefties and their fellow travelers in the Democrat party.  You lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

Dr. Fleming holds his doctorate in the classics, so my guess is that his definition of education is more in line with classical education, not the watered down education that exists today in most universities. The traditional seminaries are probably more in line with Dr. Fleming's idea of what an education should be, especially compared with your run of the mill modern seminary.

My understanding is that  the formation of traditional priests is in the Scholastic.

Which I am sure Dr. Fleming would approve of if he were asked.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)