User Profile: tradcatholicgirl

tradcatholicgirl

Member Since: June 08, 2012

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • July 4, 2015 at 6:39am

    phil,
    Literate adults should be able to read (critically) a lengthy editorial piece in just few minutes, without losing focus.

    Squid,
    If you read to the end, you would see that he did not “just complain.” He suggested a very real solution.

    Thanks again, Matt, for rising above the usual sub-standard effort of some of the Blaze writers and editors.

  • [18] July 4, 2015 at 6:24am

    Yes, Matt hit the nail on the head in the last five or six paragraphs:

    Work on the future by creating courage and fidelity to Christ in our families. Acknowledge that change in the destructive agendas will only come from daily focus on long-term cultural change via our children.

    Ephesians 6:12
    Put you on the armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the deceits of the devil. For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places. Therefore take unto you the armor of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and to stand in all things perfect. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of justice, And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace:

  • [-1] July 2, 2015 at 4:46pm

    Dear give,
    I don’t know how they will accomplish it. I am just stating that the next step of the very obvious agenda is to ensure that churches will not be allowed have a dissenting opinion and act upon it. Churches will not be allowed to argue that, based on biblical doctrine, they cannot marry two people of the same sex.
    Because homosexual marriage is the law of the entire land now, denying a couple anywhere will be argued.

    There are plenty of homosexual and heterosexual people who can think critically and hold regard for ALL people . . of course they know equality does not come from forcing religious institutions and churches to act against their conscience!

    It is those few radical activists — and all the non-critical thinkers (who follow like stupid sheep) who are the problem. It is a charade, and a travesty of the freedoms of religion and speech.

    And it will continue to be. Buckle up. . . “it is going to be a bumpy ride. . . “

  • July 2, 2015 at 6:24am

    irish,

    The extreme gay activists will take this to the highest court in the land, as they did with civil marriage, and as they are doing with wedding vendors.

    Even heterosexual couples do not have the “right” to force any pastor to marry them. But the mandating of churches will be considered “equality.”

    Responses (2) +
  • [1] July 2, 2015 at 6:17am

    It is sad that you did not simply seek out another parish where that was not the case.

    Sometimes a parish can take on the good or bad qualities of a long time pastor or certain powerful parishioners. I left my childhood parish for that reason. And I sought out a holy priest at a parish across town where orthodox views are honored.

    I met an administrator of a Catholic school who was all about money. He turned me off. My kids simply did not go there. And that guy is gone now anyway . . . replaced by someone who puts kids first, and faith first.

    Sometimes even a whole diocese can be liberal due to several bishops that were not so hot. But the biblical based doctrine of Catholicism has not changed.

  • [2] July 2, 2015 at 6:01am

    An observational study can be done to say anything you want it to say. So don’t get too worked up.

    Get mad that several generations of our kids have not been taught their essential history and civics!
    So they don’t understand their right to religious freedom . . or freedom of speech.

    That they are being indoctrinated by pop culture to not know the difference between bigotry and the practice of their own personal faith!

    Their own faith is being shown zero tolerance. And they are being taught to accept that. God help us!

  • [5] July 2, 2015 at 5:54am

    FACT: Our founding fathers set up a “democratic republic.”

    In this republic, STATE’S RIGHTS were given great priority! This was to protect the federal government from becoming tyrannical . . and taking away rights like religious freedom.

    Our founding fathers, remember, came from a country where religious freedom had been taken away and there was a “state religion” that all were mandated to join. It was the primary reason that English settlers chose to come here. They did not settle here first for commercial reasons. That came later.

    It is sad that this essential fact is not taught anymore.

  • [4] July 2, 2015 at 5:45am

    My thought exactly, pauwbrown!

    The defining line, according to the article, is AGE. The younger generations have had nothing but indoctrination about their faith beliefs being “intolerant.”

    I have been patiently explaining to my teen over and over the DIFFERENCE between bigotry and having your own faith beliefs.

    That a person can be a loving friend or family member to someone who is gay, but that does not mean that you have to give up belief in God’s Holy Word on men and women and what they were created for.

    It has been an uphill battle. . and my kids have had strong faith formation. It is hard to compete with the internet.

  • [25] July 1, 2015 at 6:32am

    George Orwell, in the novel 1984, writes about how the government changes the meaning of words to suit it’s tyrannical purposes.

    Words no longer have any meaning.

    But it doesn’t change the truth of that world . . where people have no real freedom . .. and the government keeps up the charade of a truly happy culture where all people get what they need and want.

    True “equality.” That is where we are headed.
    A world where freedom of speech and religion are not there, but the charade is carried out daily.

  • [2] July 1, 2015 at 6:06am

    This will affect life for millions of Christians. My pastor has already indicated that he can no longer sign marriage certificates or officiate a marriage as an agent of our state. He can perform the ceremony and make it a valid Catholic sacrament. But if he stays an agent of the state with ability to sign wedding certs, then he is under the jurisdiction of the state.

    And we know how the law works in that regard.
    Because he knows it won’t be long before he will be mandated to marry anyone under any circumstances in the holy name of “equality.”

  • [6] June 30, 2015 at 6:28am

    The problem is that gay activism will NOT stop at legalization of civil marriage.
    The next step is very obvious.

    Instead of gay couples having to shop around for a pastor and church whose theology is open to celebrating gay marriage, they will TARGET those Churches that are not. Then force the hand of the state courts and then the Supreme Court.

    This agenda is not about equality. It is not about love. I cannot force any church to marry me to a man. Due to my faith, many would not do so.

    But mark my words, gay activists will insist on that right themselves.

  • [3] June 30, 2015 at 6:16am

    Blink,
    The problem is that gay activism will NOT stop at legalization of civil marriage.
    The next step is very obvious.

    Instead of gay couples having to shop around for a pastor and church whose theology is open to celebrating gay marriage, they will TARGET those Churches that are not. Then force the hand of the state courts and then the Supreme Court.

    It is an agenda that is not really about equality and love.
    Oh Blinky, when will you wake up?

  • [1] June 29, 2015 at 3:21pm

    Sawdy,

    Father Jon said he knew most people in the parade would not have done such a thing. I think he went out of his way to say that in a public forum for a good reason. :- )

    I am sure arresting those men would have accomplished nothing but stirring more resentment and hate. Father Jon wanted to respond with love and he did. Let’s give thanks.

    Responses (2) +
  • [6] June 29, 2015 at 3:12pm

    reggie1,

    No doubt that spitting on a person can be defined as an assault in many cases!

    However, assaults do not require a response that is equally as sinful or angry or unforgiving. In this case, the spitting was an act of disrespect, not violence. Father Jon chose to turn the other cheek and to act with love rather than hate. It was an acknowledgement that God loves all of his created humans….ALL OF THEM.

    That does not mean that God loves their sinful lifestyle!

    Father Jon chose to use the incident to teach virtue, and to make sure that not all people in the parade were associate with that kind of behavior. If Father Jon can forgive, why can’t you?

  • [3] June 29, 2015 at 7:11am

    It is a response from a person who is working on the virtue of humility. When working on that virtue, you acknowledge daily that you are not a perfect Christian and you do or say things that offend God.

    Now, maybe the kind of faults a good priest works on are not something the average man would consider sinful! But he is acknowledging his “smallness” compared to the awesomeness of God.

    His humility allowed him to give a charitable response.

    Some virtues he displayed: Charity, Humility, Patience.

  • [21] June 29, 2015 at 7:01am

    Where in the story did you read that he was making excuses for homosexual lifestyles?

    He was simply acknowledging that not all people in the parade would be so rude as to spit on someone in the street. He was saying most would not.

    Christians are exhorted to love the sinner, but not the sin. Christ did it all the time. Read Mark, Matthew, Luke and John.

    Responses (3) +
  • [2] June 29, 2015 at 6:54am

    Hi Dogfish,

    Because I am steeped in Catholic theology I think I understand what he was doing.

    His response was typical of someone who is working on the virtue of “humility.” It reminds me of a story about Mother Theresa.

    One day Mother Teresa went to a local bakery to ask for bread for the starving children in the orphanage. The baker, outraged at people begging for bread from him, spat in her face and refused. Mother Teresa calmly took out her handkerchief, wiped the spit from her face and said to the baker, “Okay, that was for me. Now what about the bread for the orphans?”
    The baker, shamed by her response, gave her the bread she wanted.

  • [18] June 29, 2015 at 6:44am

    Reminds me of a story about Mother Theresa.

    One day Mother Teresa went to a local bakery to ask for bread for the starving children in the orphanage. The baker, outraged at people begging for bread from him, spat in her face and refused. Mother Teresa calmly took out her handkerchief, wiped the spit from her face and said to the baker, “Okay, that was for me. Now what about the bread for the orphans?”

    The baker, shamed by her response, gave her the bread she wanted.

    Responses (2) +
  • [27] June 29, 2015 at 6:39am

    UnderstandBothSides,

    What part do you think he was lying about?

    . . .That he understands the rude behavior of the two who spat on him would NOT be typical of most in the parade?

    . . .or that he was doing his job as a Christian leader by setting the example of forgiveness?

    Real Christian leaders love the sinner, but not the sin.

  • [97] June 29, 2015 at 6:25am

    Grt,

    He was behaving like a Christian. He strove to love the sinner without loving the sin! Just as Christ showed us how to do.
    He practiced the virtue of forgiveness
    And he didn’t brand an entire group of people by the rude behavior of a few.
    He definitely practiced the virtue of humility.

    But he did NOT call evil good. He did not endorse homosexual behavior.

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love