Comments for The Catholic Principle at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 31 out of 20 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Sun, 19 May 2013 17:27:06 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13748 Karl, my heart breaks for your situation. You have a tremendous cross to bear. There is the greatest shame incurred by your wife and her “lover”(it causes me pain to use that word with such an orc of an ordeal). I can’t imagine that anyone would sanction such hurtful, reckless and destructive behavior. The deliberate destruction of the family by feminism, big business, big government and public schools is a blow worse than death. I wish I had even an ounce of consoling or truthful advice. How many countless men have to endure something similar? And imagine the children at the hands of this diabolical tyranny. In all truth, anyone who behaves such as your wife, as described by you, has violated Christ’s 2 commandments in such a horrible way as to have excommunicated themselves from the Body of Christ and moral Truth. I will pray for your transformation in Christ through your suffering and that your wife is given the grace to convert from her treachery to repentant sorrow. - Achilles Fri, 05 Oct 2012 09:22:55 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13733 Of course, the bottom line is our choice. We are free to follow the teachings of the Church or to follow our whims. I am not saying that either of the last two Popes would make the choices that marital abandoners would make and have made. I am saying, and stand by it, that their practices are failures and are detrimental to marriage, to spouses and to their children. These two men are making more attractive a nearly certain path toward Hell, by choosing to not canonically sanction, in public, malicious marital abandoners. They are bringing the judgment of God upon their flock, through their failure to adequately address and correct these errors, in public in a clear and effective manner. There is no understanding "out there", to a huge extent among Catholics, BECAUSE of the failure of these two men and their fellow bishops and priests to govern the Catholic Church, wisely, regarding marriage. But, the bottom line is our choice. I am making my choice to be faithful to a vow my wife ignores. But, she has been encouraged, for more than 20 years, to remain with her adulterous lover because the Bishops choose to do nothing to bring her to repentance, nor have the Pope's, all of whom have been implored to do so, for decades. She and her lover are openly welcomed as a married couple and have been for decades. This is the direct fruit of the failed practices of the Catholic Church, which encourage its teaching to be openly mocked and to be ignored. These inactions are a tremendous scandal. - Karl Fri, 05 Oct 2012 01:00:21 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13732 Karl, who among us is not plagued by self-deceit? I know the betrayal of which you speak, but Aristotle might remind us all that our anger is only justified and righteous if we are angry at the right person, for the right reason and in the right amount. Who among us has a single motive? Are you so positive about your anger that you would speak so disrespectfully of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI? Are you so sure about your own motives as well as in complete possession of an understanding of these two great Popes that you dare to condemn them? Karl, I appreciate your passion and your candor. I too am disheartened and would be in despair were it not for the mercy of God and the grains of Faith He has gifted me. We are all of us sinners, but there is a lot more to the rampant narcissistic sexual immorality than must be laid at the feet of bishops and popes. Do we not answer for our own sins? Ought we not pray for those souls whose skulls we conjecture may be strewn on the path to hell? Condemnation is not our calling in this life. Please take a step back, look into the perfect law of liberty, pray for the grace to be a saint, and if you can find it in your heart, please pray for a poor sinner like me. Peace be with you, Achilles - Achilles Thu, 04 Oct 2012 20:23:33 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13731 I did not say Satan would win. He loses along with those bishops who continue, the vast majority of them I believe, to pave the road to Hell, as St. John Chrysostom said, with their skulls and who fail to act to bring maliciously abandoning spouses to repentance, rather than the current horror of giving them cover by welcoming them into the Church as they do the horrendous things they do. No, I speak with and from experience, knowing many who have seen the disgusting behavior of our priests and our bishops, first hand, in support of adultery and all the crimes it entails. I am much happier, ultimately, answering to God than to the recent Popes, whose misuse of mercy, has given haven to spouses who, more and more, behave like terrorists. I am convinced these men simply do not care or lack the courage to admit they do not really know what to do to help in wounded marriage. Yes, they may be on the continuum between not caring and not knowing but we who are faithful to our vows, as the Catholic Church coddles our spouses who are doing all they can to destroy us, in many, many cases, need help and have for decades of the decline in our culture. There is no excuse for the behavior of our bishops, when in specific cases, such as those intensely studied for the nullity process, the Church knows in detail the specifics of the depravity that is in its face. These men know what is going on but ignore our pleas. It is scandalous and makes the child abuse cases, trivial, number-wise. - Karl Thu, 04 Oct 2012 13:11:08 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13729 Karl, that is quite a bold and damning statement that must be undergirded by an immemse structure of understanding and vision. Are you sure you are not confusing fact for feeling? Individual free will and corruption with Catholic Dogma? Someone with wider vision even than you told me that "the gates of hell will not prevail against the Church". I don't think the Church is wrong about anything, but try to find one honest man in 3000 in the Church and you might be on to something. P.S. Ed, your comments are wayyyyy off the mark. - Achilles Thu, 04 Oct 2012 03:57:28 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13726 How, in the name of justice and truth, is a person SINCERE, who remains with their adulterous partner? If this was a sincere person he or she would cease the adulterous liason and do everything in their power to restore the valid marriage they are STILL CHOOSING to violate. The Catholic Church is DEAD WRONG in this approach and is responsible for countless destroyed marriages and lost faith and endless numbers of lost souls. - Karl Wed, 03 Oct 2012 13:04:01 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13709 I think you worry too much. The church moves slowly but still it moves! Even now it is moving back to a more faithful catechesis in America. I see increase in those Catholics who would get what you call the Catholic principle. I don't know if you can measure it yet in a poll but it is there. If you look too hard at this moment you will miss the birthing of the next. Take heart! - Captain DG Tue, 02 Oct 2012 13:29:00 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13706 I thank the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church for the progress it has made in the past several decades to reverse its triumphal declarations of exclusivity and embrace humility and ecumenical inclusion." Well, we can see how well that has worked, Ed. Where are the floods of converts? - Richard M Tue, 02 Oct 2012 07:16:21 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13703 @Ed: "I thank the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church for the progress it has made in the past several decades to reverse its triumphal declarations of exclusivity" >> You think the Church is reversing Her infallibly defined dogmas? Do you have any evidence that such infallible definitions are reversible? I can assure you that they are not. "and embrace humility and ecumenical inclusion." >> Humility, I suspect, means admitting that She has lied for millennia by declaring Herself to be the ark of salvation, outside of which no one at all can be saved? "Popes John Paul and Benedict have labored to move the faith of Catholicism back into the mainstream of God’s living waters" >> So the Catholic faith was outside of God's living waters before the last two Popes? "and declare a faith that can meet the needs of America’s people" >> The Faith as previously declared could not meet the needs of the American people? "and do that without leaving the truth of God’s Word, nor ignoring God’s will" >> How could She "leave" the truth, since you say that until recently She never had it? No Catholic could credit these notions. Actually, no rational person could. Either the Church has always been the Church, and always will be, or else She never was, or ever will be. Simple. - Rick DeLano Tue, 02 Oct 2012 05:48:51 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13701 Being well-educated, as Bostonians claim to be, means what? Does it mean that a person has an understanding of God, grace, love or faith? Does it mean he loves his fellow man? As to “denominational mentality”, I believe the author is talking about a dying breed of Christian that aligns itself with the prevailing social mores of our American society – the mainline Protestants, but certainly not the Evangelicals. The Evangelicals take the whole Trinity much more seriously than do the Catholics, and, as laypersons, are much more educated on matters of scripture. (There’s that word “educated” again.) This would mean that Evangelicals can sin, transgress, and fall away as well as any other Christian. Hilaire Belloc’s words describe all Christianity as far as I can see, and I see quite well the Christian saga. I thank the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church for the progress it has made in the past several decades to reverse its triumphal declarations of exclusivity and embrace humility and ecumenical inclusion. Popes John Paul and Benedict have labored to move the faith of Catholicism back into the mainstream of God’s living waters, and declare a faith that can meet the needs of America’s people, and do that without leaving the truth of God’s Word, nor ignoring God’s will. - Ed Tue, 02 Oct 2012 01:03:37 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13700 One should never presume to speculate what someone who has died MIGHT have done or thought, but C. S. Lewis did a pretty good job of overcoming the poisoning of his Northern Ireland upbringing. And, too, the C of E in his time, while in itself flawed as a Protestant institution, was not nearly as strange and irrelevant as it has become. - Mack Hall Mon, 01 Oct 2012 17:12:39 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13699 Mr. Royal: You had me until you quoted C.S. Lewis. Lewis was a great apologist for mere Christianity and a Church of England member. He would not have thought much of what you call "the Catholic Principal." Yes, I know you are only referencing him in a minor way, but it really is not helpful to quote someone in your argument, no matter how good an apologist he was, when he would not have accepted your main point. One of the problems Roman Catholic writers have when writing about the RCC is simply addressing their audience. Who are these Roman Catholics? There are at least three "good definitions" of being a Roman Catholic: 1) Sacramental & Canonical: a person is RCC if he/she was baptised in the RCC (and has not renounced it). 2) Professing: a person is RCC if he/she self-identifies as RCC. They may or may not attend Mass on a regular basis. 3) Discipleship: a person is RCC if he/she earnestly strives to live as the RCC teaches. Each of these are ways in which people talk about "being a Roman Catholic." The first is a sacramental and juridical reality. It is the broadest of all three "definitions". The second is how most Catholics think of "being a Roman Catholic." The last is the gist of the Belloc quote which appears in your post. Which of these three types of Catholics grasp "the Catholic Principle"? Thanks for a thought provoking post. - G.K. Thursday Mon, 01 Oct 2012 15:52:28 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13694 Susanna: Thank you for your comments. Remarrying without the benefit of an annulment and living as fornicators are mortally sinful but NATURAL, i.e., they are sins but not against nature. The aborting of an innocent child (in or ex utero) is MURDER and sodomy is UNNATURAL. The last sentence in the C.C.C. paragraph #2357 in describing homosexual acts states "Under no circumstances can they be approved." Both abortion and aberrosexual acts are INTRINSICALLY evil. That is the reason I inquired about the possibility 0f excommunication. - Manfred Mon, 01 Oct 2012 12:17:26 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13693 "Give me the right to life and religious liberty." Both parties deny the right to life to a subset of human beings. It's simply a matter of numbers, but the principle is the same for both parties. The American Catholic Church that is pined for by the polled Bostonians already has a template, or model, in another country, China - it's called the Chinese Patriotic Church. The headquarters and office staff for the American Patriotic Church have already been set up in the USCCB, and they have been working like a beehive to emulate their sister fake-church in china. What I'd like to know is who are the underground clergy to work with. - Sue Mon, 01 Oct 2012 11:40:13 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13690 Article - excellent and timely. The accompanying comments: by and large mere sophistry! - Tom Hennigh Mon, 01 Oct 2012 10:33:38 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13688 Thank you, Mr. Royal, but in what context to you determine that Evelyn Waugh is a reactionary? In his immutable loyalty to the Faith or in his immutable loyalty to his Queen? Is a refusal to "evolve" (in the Dear Leader sense) reactionary? As Chesterton (I believe) once said, if something is true or real at ten in the morning, how can it be false at two in the afternoon? Just the same, if a truth is a truth in the 19th century, how can it not be true in the 21st? - Mack Hall Mon, 01 Oct 2012 10:13:26 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13687 A comment on a comment--of Richard Baker. In reading the comment on 'religious liberty' in the penultimate paragraph of Royal's article, I associated it with his comment in the 4th from last paragraph. The Church needs religious liberty to teach, practice and promote its message in the public square. But within Catholicism, religious liberty has a different connotation: a right with an obligation in conscience to accept the truth that the Church teaches. That acceptance cannot be forced, only proposed. But its knowing rejection brings consequences. - senex Mon, 01 Oct 2012 09:47:15 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13686 OUTSTANDING ARTICLE. I AM ALWAYS STRUCK BY THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE GOING TO COMMUNION AND THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO VOTE PRO-LIFE. I AM ALSO WAITING FOR A SERMON ABOUT WHAT MAKES A CATHOLIC AND WHAT ONE SHOULD BELIEVE IF YOU CLAIM TO BE "CATHOLIC"... JUST WONDERING... - john o'neill Mon, 01 Oct 2012 09:27:51 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13685 An "American Catholic" church is a contradiction in terms, but not one without precedent. One need but look to the utter irrelevance of "mainstream" Anglicanism for a clue of where such a schism would lead. - Mike Mon, 01 Oct 2012 09:13:59 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/the-catholic-principle.html#comment-13684 Seriously Manfred, we are to take your word for it over John Paul II and Benedict XVI becuase those two men have led us into error? Becuase you have a wider Catholic vision than they do? Becuase you are a better philosopher than they were? becuase you are more Catholic than the Pope? This doesn't trouble you? - Achilles Mon, 01 Oct 2012 08:49:40 +0100