AmericanPapist Comments
Looks like a chess board--bishops take all!
You know, I wonder why the lefties continually plague us by post cartoons like this? Really, why are they doing this? Are they doing this to provoke hatred? This cartoon as far as I'm concerned is just simply over blown. I invite these bigots who did this cartoon to stop living in la-la land and get in touch with reality. May God remove the gunk and filth from their hearts.
Nick, "being liberal means never having to say you're sorry" to paraphrase a trite phrase from the 1970s. That's why I no longer purchase newspapers or Time or Newsweek. When that industry collapses the national mental health will improve. Tom
My complete response to this column is at this LINK.
Catholic Bashing
As the author of the "chill wind blows from Rome" commentary, I have addressed the implication that my blog was "anti-Catholic." It wasn't. Neither is Auth's cartoon, if you've the intellectual honesty to consider the evidence ...
Mr. Auth reminds me of Nikabrik! (at least how I imagined him)
BTW, Hart, would you be offended if Yarmukas were on their heads instead?
"Perhaps the most insulting formulation of all is the one which is not ever spoken, but only exists, by implication, deep within the recent Catholic formulation that abortion is an horrific sin:"
The catechism condemns abortion. ain't that spoken? And this opposed isn't recent-it's always been true.I don't know how that is insulting, mr. Hart.
"And that God prefers children to be seen as punishments, rather than blessings."
Oh, pro-abort think babies are a good thing! I guess they have a strange way of showing it: destorying that good thing.
meant to say: "and this oppostion isn't recent"
Gee, I'm not certain how much credence I can give to people who can't figure out A) What my name is (hint, Hart is the FIRST name) and B) try to make points about a religion they seem to know nothing about. ("Yarmulkes," not "Yarmukas" which are, I believe, headgear that Eskimos wear to hunt seals).
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kippah
With the internet, there is no excuse for not checking your facts.
As far as the church is concerned, this opposition is very recent: 1869 in terms of the Church is an eyeblink in time. From the fifth century until 1869, the Roe prescription was, in essence, Catholic dogma.
So, was the Church just WRONG for fourteen centuries? And, what changed in the Bible that MADE the church wrong?
Williams,
So I misspelled yarmulke. Ad hominem attacks discredit you.
As far as the church supposedly changeing her teaching, that is not the case. the church always taught that deliberately destroying innocent human life is ALWAYS WRONG. Her understanding of when the definition of human life was inforned by sometimes incorrect science. Here is the Church's INFALLIBLE teaching:
"Given such unanimity in the doctrinal and disciplinary tradition of the Church, Paul VI was able to declare that this tradition [regarding abortion] is unchanged and unchangeable. Therefore, by the authority which Christ conferred upon Peter and his Successors, in communion with the Bishops -- who on various occasions have condemned abortion and who in the aforementioned consultation, albeit dispersed throughout the world, have shown unanimous agreement concerning this doctrine -- I declare that direct abortion, that is, abortion willed as an end or as a means, always constitutes a grave moral disorder, since it is the deliberate killing of an innocent human being. This doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, is transmitted by the Church's Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. (Evangelium Vitae, § 62) "
Commenting by HaloScan
