The Roman Catholic bishop of Rhode Island said Sunday that he asked Rep. Patrick Kennedy in a 2007 letter to stop receiving Communion, the central sacrament of the church, because of the congressman’s public stance on moral issues.
1. Comment by Steve G. (sgodwin)— November 22,2009 @ 8:27AM
Ratings:-23+19
[This comment has been removed]
2. Comment by Gerald W. (geraldew)— November 22,2009 @ 8:34AM
7. Comment by Jeff N. (nephew)— November 22,2009 @ 8:58AM
Ratings:-28+40
The Catholic Church is more and more an enemy of society. If they continue to spout and force their ancient conservative views in national politics, then the no taxing of churches needs to end, and end now. I personally think of them as a "fascists regeme" with their "our way is the only way' attitude. They are rapidly reaching cult status. Just like any other corporation, money is the only bottom line, and they grab it any way that they can.
9. Comment by JD D. (AZJD)— November 22,2009 @ 9:09AM
Ratings:-27+28
Within the story it is written.........
"...Kennedy accused Tobin of failing to abide by an agreement to stop discussing the congressman’s faith publicly."
It seems as tho Patrick Kennedy is going public with his comments and faith and the Catholic Church is responding to this Kennedy's remarks.
Furthermore, the Kennedy's always cry when it is against them, trying to make them look the better of all.
The Kennedy's are making this public, Patrick in particular. The Church is defending itself from a klan that believes they are better than everyone else and need to bow down to them.
In addition, the Kennedy's have grand problems with their memories and events of the past and get away with murder.
Patrick, pack your bags and go back home or whereever you reside and or go ask Princess Pelosi to fix everything for you.
The Muslim O'bama won't...or you can always convert!
11. Comment by John H. (4523)— November 22,2009 @ 10:15AM
Ratings:-20+22
6. Comment by Joe F. (goofyfern) — November 22,2009 @ 8:57AM
Ratings: -0 +3
The Middle Ages are back.
"Leave the church Pat and be free!" $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Patrick O'Kennedy can't leave the church and still get elected in R I., since he went there to take advantage of his family's Catholicism to get elected. His disingenuous comment about embracing diversity in the church is reprehensible. He chose to become a public figure and oppose one of the most consistent and widely supported positions of the Church.
Poor little Patty boy can dish it out but apparently, since he is a Kennedy he should be above reproach.
Perhaps he should go back to Massachusetts. OOPS, there is already an anointed one ready to take Teddy's place.
12. Comment by Angelo F. (angfil)— November 22,2009 @ 10:16AM
Ratings:-16+34
Organized religion. It's all about power and control.
If this Kennedy has been barred from receiving communion what about the pedophile priests? They should be drummed out of the church and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But no. They were just shuffled from church to church. What Kennedy did was nothing as compared to these "priests."
19. Comment by George C. (GeorgeCl)— November 22,2009 @ 10:38AM
Ratings:-28+21
About time. For too many years, the Catholic church has been infected by liberalism and freemasonry.
Just like the R party went downhill into liberalism and merged with the Ds, by listening to and trying to placate the leftists, so did the Catholic church tend to merge with the other liberal denominations.
The time is overdue to take a stand, good for this bishop.
21. Comment by Bruce L. (lostscot)— November 22,2009 @ 10:58AM
Ratings:-7+21
The freedom for the "right of association". Does that sound familiar??? Whether it be the Roman Catholic Church, LDS, or any other organization, religious or otherwise, if you don't like what they stand for DON'T JOIN. People have the right to associate with like minded people, as long as they don't trespass on the rights of others. People, who freely join an organization, refuse to abide by it's principles and then try to change them deserve contempt.
22. Comment by H W. (P Cairn)— November 22,2009 @ 11:07AM
Ratings:-21+21
Normally I am not into religion but in this case I have to say “hat off to the Catholic Church”. They are standing by their beliefs. More than I can say for Pat (Oh, I forgot, he is a KENNEDY!)
23. Comment by jeanne r. (xyz)— November 22,2009 @ 11:07AM
Ratings:-15+22
Cite the law all you want, in the end, there is no real division between church and state. The roman catholic church owns too much land and too much gold and they have been persecuting people since the beginning of time, hiding sexual deviants behind the cloth and breaking whatever moral law they wish to break. i am a happy ex catholic.
24. Comment by Maureen C. (chiefgoddess)— November 22,2009 @ 11:10AM
Ratings:-16+13
Gee, that priest is a good Christian, isn't he....it is about control - if you do not like the rules, go to where you are accepted for yourself - no matter your religion, etc...all of this enforced my decision, many years ago, to become a "non-believer"...organized religion is a racket - look at the history it has spawned - thieves, pedophiles, greedy people who believe everything they hear from those very religious leaders - many of them are good honest people, but just as many are not.
25. Comment by Herman O. (No party affiliation)— November 22,2009 @ 11:21AM
Ratings:-11+13
14. Comment by Edmund W. (edmundowin) — "Why is this being tolerated by other catholics?
Answer: if you can't understand the structure, symbolism and why the beliefs are the way they are, you probably ought to stay out of a conversation you clearly won't understand.
"SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE, REMEMBER? One more reason ....."
What does this have anything to do with anything? Where does it say in the Constitution that there is a separation?
27. Comment by Ned P. (5278)— November 22,2009 @ 11:24AM
Ratings:-11+8
As someone said who He seems to have really disliked monarchies and Catholicism if not Christianity in general..."Man shall not be free until the last general is strangled with the entrails of the last priest"
29. Comment by ann h. (ahoy)— November 22,2009 @ 11:32AM
Ratings:-10+12
#12 True,Pedophile priests are a "cult" hiding within the church. They are disgusting and vile and should have been banned from the church and not "shuffled" between other churches.
They do not represent the church! They became priests because they believed they could earn the trust of children, and lure them into their reprehensible acts. That is why they became priests, not because of their love for God, and people!!
But the Kennedys do not represent the church! And just because of their political standing, they, in their arrogance think they can change the Church! The Kennedy history is just as ugly. And they always seem to get away with it. They shuffle their evil deeds under the rug as well. I agree with separation of church and government to a point. But you can't call yourself a Catholic on Sunday and the rest of the week be someone else. The Kennedys are "wishy washy" Catholics. They do what they want when they want, they do what makes them popular. The Bishop at least has taken a strong stand even though it's not "popular".
31. Comment by ann h. (ahoy)— November 22,2009 @ 11:54AM
Ratings:-9+14
Pedophile priests should be, and have been EXCOMMUNICATED!
But if you take a defiant stand against church teachings, and show up on Sunday, and say "look at me, what a good Christian I am". Then don't bother.
32. Comment by Edmund W. (edmundowin)— November 22,2009 @ 11:56AM
Ratings:-11+12
Answer to #25:
Not everyone is Catholic. Kennedy's job is to represent the people, not the Catholic church. I don't believe in the Catholic dogma. If Kennedy was representing me, I would insist that he represent the PEOPLE - not the Catholic church. When the Catholic church prosecutes the pedophiles, then they can preach their belief system all they want.
Yes, there is supposed to be separation of church and state. Apparently you don't know that. No Bishop, or any other representative of any church has the RIGHT to dictate how they vote. If they want to do that, let them do it in the Vatican. Yeah - and maybe I know a little more about the Catholic church than you think I do. And until you know as much as I do, please keep your opinions about me and how much I know to yourself.
36. Comment by Jackie M. (latenightjam)— November 22,2009 @ 12:07PM
Ratings:-4+10
the Catholic church has been infected by ...... and freemasonry.
Last I checked, the Catholic church did not allow membership in masonry...
a declaration published in the official Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, ".... The faithful who enroll in masonic associations are in a state of grave sin and may not receive holy communion.... In an audience... the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II approved and ordered the publication of this declaration..."42 Thus, the present pope is on record opposing Masonic membership for Catholics.
37. Comment by Peter K. (Sweet Pete)— November 22,2009 @ 12:21PM
Ratings:-9+12
#3 Sissy -
"You can't just be Catholic when it's convenient"
The problem is you are elected to government to represent the people of your district and you should therefore be able to make decisions in government that conflict with the church and your own personal religious beliefs, if not, and as in this case, the church then has too much influence and power in government.
Our country is based on seperation of church and state and thats the best thing our founding fathers ever did was putting in the constitution "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
39. Comment by ann h. (ahoy)— November 22,2009 @ 12:26PM
Ratings:-7+6
#30 Pedophile priests should never administer communion(they are not priests, they are wolves in sheep clothing)....And Ted Kennedy should have been thrown out of any government office! But that didn't happen either did it? But he was at the communion rail too. Plenty of abomination on both sides of that rail.
But at least this Bishop is taking a stand ! It's about time that someone is not swayed by the Kennedy power and money.
40. Comment by Don M. (saffronbindy)— November 22,2009 @ 12:29PM
Ratings:-12+9
4. Comment by P W. (patflyaway) — writes:
"God says in the bible that abortion is murder."
Mind pointing out where in the Bible God says that, Pat? Would that be the part where God says a baby resulting from sex with someone not the woman's husband must be aborted? Or is it the place where God commands that women that have committed certain sins abort their babies and eat them? Or might it be the passages where God demands (twice) that men go into a neighboring town and kill all the pregnant women, and make sure the fetuses are dead?
You see, Pat, God actually said those things right in the Bible. They are difficult verses for Christians to deal with, because they are uncomfortable and hard to reconcile. In the Bible there are 12 places where God demands abortions. There is not a single place where He commands against it.
42. Comment by Herman O. (No party affiliation)— November 22,2009 @ 12:47PM
Ratings:-6+9
#32-Clearly avoids the question of where in the Constitution it states there is a separation of Church and state?
Kennedy is a joke and certainly a CINO. He is as much Catholic as Pelosi claims to be.
He could be both Catholic and represent his district, but if he is true to following the tenants of the church, but that would have required to break from the party. He is more beholden to the party and power than he is to the God he professes to believe in. He stated his position and now is taking his licks.
45. Comment by Debby B. (mysticmama)— November 22,2009 @ 1:03PM
Ratings:-9+6
I read 32 comments before anyone even mentioned that our representatives are elected Democratically to represent their specific constituents, not their own beliefs, or the tenets of their faith. That is the only real issue here. The church did not elect Kennedy, the voters did, and he should represent the voters accordingly. The churches derive their power and influence in this matter by preaching to their followers not to have abortions. It is not their place to control the choices of everyone else who may hold different beliefs.
46. Comment by H W. (P Cairn)— November 22,2009 @ 1:08PM
Ratings:-4+5
As 33 said “You can't serve two gods”.
When Kennedy took office his “god” became the people he represents, at least in theory. If he has to abandon his religion to be true to the people he represents, that is a decision he should have made before he ran for office. He either supports the people or gets his Communion. It sounds to me like he has to make a decision. Is it God or is it “god”. A true decision and one I am sure no politician will make.
47. Comment by Debby B. (mysticmama)— November 22,2009 @ 1:10PM
Ratings:-5+5
I meant to add to #45....
If he had an abortion (physically impossible, of course), then they could say he was not acting as a good Catholic should act. Voting for laws to support the people he was elected to represent, though, not the same.
48. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 1:20PM
Ratings:-11+5
3. Comment by Sissy S. (DsrtFox) — November 22,2009 @ 8:37AM
Ratings: -17 +24
You can't just be Catholic when it's convenient.
============
Tell it to all the children who have been molested by "good" catholic priests.
Many catholics practice birth control and are pro-life -meaning pro-abortion.
The catholic church is surely the post hypocritical institution on the planet.
Comedienne, Sarah Silverman (nice Jewish name) said the answer to world hunger came to her ...
Sell The Vatican
Feed The World
In a terribly sad way, it was rather funny. But, they wouldn't have to sell the vatican. Just make them pay the same property taxes that the real world has to pay.
That wealthy old man (theh pope) who has never had to work for a living, has never had to feed a family or pay the rent just sits in his big gold chair and makes life changing decisions and never gives a thought to the real consequences - like telling Africans not to use condoms.
His minions, like this bishop have their duties as well. Like moving pedophile priests from place to place so they don't get caught. I can imagine the bishop telling Patrick Kennedy he cannot take communion and a bit later telling a pedophile he's being moved to a whole new group of unsuspecting children.
Too bad the catholics don't care as much about children as they do about the unborn.
49. Comment by Evel K. (EvilMike)— November 22,2009 @ 1:28PM
Ratings:-5+15
This is the same Patrick Kennedy who has been in rehab a half dozen times, (the most recent in June) pleaded guilty to DUI and claims he suffers from bi-polar disorder.
Apparently the people of Rhode Island aren't real choosey.
51. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 1:39PM
Ratings:-8+5
43. Comment by Herman O. (No party affiliation) — November 22,2009 @ 12:48PM
Ratings: Thumbs Down Thumbs Up -1 +1
And the First Amendment allows me the freedom to state anything I want about any subject. Look it up.
====
Uh, no ... You have no first amendment right to "state anything I want about any subject" HERE, IN THIS forum.
Look it up.
Never mind, I'll save you the trouble.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances".
The government does not run this forum. Its the property of the ADS and they can tell any one of us to shut up and make it stick by deleting our membership.
52. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 1:44PM
Ratings:-12+6
49 At least Patrick Kennedy faced up to his problems and got help. Can't say that about the catholic church. They just hide their priests (and other sins) in new places.
53. Comment by Herman O. (No party affiliation)— November 22,2009 @ 2:05PM
Ratings:-5+6
#51-I do not need help with the First Amendment....this site does not own my thoughts and so long as I follow the rules, I am free to post WHATEVER I THINK.
The converse of that is censorship and surely the ADS would not stoop to that level.
55. Comment by Herman O. (No party affiliation)— November 22,2009 @ 2:11PM
Ratings:-6+8
#52-How would you know that "They just hide their priests (and other sins) in new places."?
I thought if you hid something, it was not visible to anyone? Please elaborate on where these priests are hidden so they can prosecuted. You claim to know they are hiding, so surely you know where.
56. Comment by Patrick O. (tiponeill)— November 22,2009 @ 2:24PM
Ratings:-5+6
I'm old enough to remember JFK promising that he would not take orders from the church and would put the Constitution and the country first.
At the time everyone applauded - how times have changed.
57. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 2:31PM
Ratings:-10+4
53 You are correct but that is not what you said in your earlier post, #43.
55 Read the news over the past many years. Read the history of the catholic church. Read the heartbreaking first hand reports. Talk to the survivors. Read the sites posted by the pedophile priests themselves.
While I don't believe everything I read in the news, I have enough personal experience (someone I am very close to) with the damage that catholic priests have done that I believe what I've read too.
If you're trying to say that the catholic church has stopped moving and hiding priests, I don't believe it. Throughout the ages, they always have and always will.
My opinion is never ever trust any organized cult/religion. In addition, if someone feels they must tell you they are a "good christian", watch your money and your back.
You are free to hold an opinion that disagrees and I will make no effort to try to change your mind. Nor will I demand that you prove your opinion is better or more correct than mine.
I will, however, expect the same courtesy from you.
58. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 2:32PM
Ratings:-7+2
NY's Cuomo no stranger to church-state friction
Associated Press - November 22, 2009 3:55 PM ET
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) - Former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo (KWOH-moh) says church leaders should be cautious about pressuring Catholic politicians over issues such as abortion because people might not vote for someone they think is guided by religion.
Cuomo's comments come as Rhode Island Rep. Patrick Kennedy spars with a bishop over his public stance on moral issues including abortion. Kennedy says Bishop Thomas Tobin has asked him not to receive communion.
In 1984, Cuomo delivered a speech at the University of Notre Dame saying Catholic lawmakers shouldn't be pressured by church leaders to work for anti-abortion legislation.
He tells The Associated Press that asking Catholic leaders to force their faith on everybody they represent would alienate people.
62. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 3:06PM
Ratings:-7+3
59 Take that a step further - Why would anyone want to belong to a club that does not accept and/or agree with one's beliefs?
I have several gay friends and have often wondered the same thing about their beliefs.
Although, I think the opinion up the board a ways is more to the point - the two should never come together. Its the catholic church that is demanding that one's politics agree with one's religious beliefs.
63. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 3:09PM
Ratings:-9+5
56. Comment by Patrick O. (tiponeill) — November 22,2009 @ 2:24PM
Ratings: -3 +1
I'm old enough to remember JFK promising that he would not take orders from the church and would put the Constitution and the country first.
At the time everyone applauded - how times have changed. JFK ===================
Me too. And remember the horrible and quite ridiculous (IMO) things that were said because he was catholic.
I've thought of those times when I've watched the baseless anti-Obama hysteria.
64. Comment by vincent m. (3942)— November 22,2009 @ 3:10PM
Ratings:-5+8
The church says abortion bad
Kennedy says abortion good
It is the church’s playground and you left wingers say they can't tell Kennedy to take a hike. Did you miss the First Amendment? The church is protected by all of it in this case, or do we apply the Bill of Rights selectively?
65. Comment by Lee M. (Leeam)— November 22,2009 @ 3:41PM
Ratings:-8+2
This is why the protestants broke away from the catholic church. I do not agree with Kennedy’s position about abortion but the catholic church does not have the right to let him worship God.
66. Comment by Bruno O. (one.bruno)— November 22,2009 @ 3:56PM
Ratings:-6+3
Rirst of all, this article is not specific enough - what has Kennedy specifically done?
Secondly, I do think that he cannot away a woman's right to choose in this country. However, he can vote to restrict federal funding for abortions and should as a Catholic.
However, #47 is correct. His first obligation is to represent the people of his state and if they do not support federal funding, he is representing them well.
67. Comment by Bruno O. (one.bruno)— November 22,2009 @ 3:59PM
Ratings:-6+1
The religious right, the Catholic Church and the Republican Party should have joined forces years ago to pass a constitutional amendment barring abortions. Why didn't they?
It's easy to obstruct and complain - it is a wedge issue that only divides this country.
Stop complaining and do the hard work involved or shut up.
68. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 4:14PM
Ratings:-10+5
64. Comment by vincent m.
"Kennedy says abortion good"
======
I doubt that any person, any where or at any time has said abortion is "good".
Its horrible beyond belief but its been around almost since the first woman got pregnant and it will be be here as long as women continue to get pregnant. Nothing will ever change that. No bishop withholding grape juice and a cracker, no murdered abortion doctors, no women crying themselves to sleep before and after having made that decision.
We're in the 21st century. That is a time and place the catholic church will never know. Our job, as compassionate and learned human beings is to accept every woman's right to decide her body's function and fate and, more than anything else, accept the inevitable and use our technology to make the death of the fetus absolutely painless.
Or, we can go the way of the catholic church and hand out coat hangars.
71. Comment by Felix C. (Maz)— November 22,2009 @ 4:43PM
Ratings:-7+1
15. Comment by John H. (4523)
Thank you for nothing .. my post did not differentiate on who said what first only that a discussion between the parties involved were personal and confidential.
72. Comment by john t. (butchmutt)— November 22,2009 @ 4:52PM
Ratings:-4+8
14. Comment by Edmund W. (edmundowin) — November 22,2009 @ 10:19AM
Ratings: -15 +19
Why is this being tolerated by other catholics? SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE, REMEMBER? One more reason .....
.........................................
False argument.
The Church, represented by the local Bishop is NOT telling this Catholic parishioner what to do politically, he is being told what not to do Sacramentally based on Church teaching. If being an abortion advocate is more important than worthily receiving the Eucharist, then that is this particular Catholics decision.
Personally I would prefer it if all the Bishops took the same action with all pro abortion Catholics, even if it meant that half the Church would be gone. There is ample room in the various Protestant Church denominations to accommodate these anti Catholic beliefs.
73. Comment by Joseph T. (truttman)— November 22,2009 @ 5:04PM
Ratings:-10+2
The Constitution is pretty clear about separation of church and state. If the Catholic wants to run a political machine, they will be served well to stick to Vatican City.
74. Comment by john t. (butchmutt)— November 22,2009 @ 5:08PM
Ratings:-5+7
37. Comment by Peter K. (Sweet Pete) — November 22,2009 @ 12:21PM
Ratings: -8 +7
#3 Sissy -
"You can't just be Catholic when it's convenient"
The problem is you are elected to government to represent the people of your district and you should therefore be able to make decisions in government that conflict with the church and your own personal religious beliefs, if not, and as in this case, the church then has too much influence and power in government.
Our country is based on seperation of church and state and thats the best thing our founding fathers ever did was putting in the constitution "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
...............................................
What you are saying is that a public official should be exempt from adhering to Church teaching and law on faith and morals simply because he or she chose to enter the political field.
The Church should not have to make exceptions for any career group, especially if others can point to the official, say he or she is Catholic and it must be acceptable Church teaching if he or she supports it.
If a person wants to enter into politics and they prefer secular thought to Catholic teaching which is and has been consistent for nearly 2000 as it regards faith and morals, that person need be honest and leave the Church in favor of secularism.
Christianity at it's core holds up selflessness as great virtue, Kennedy misses this point totally.
76. Comment by john t. (butchmutt)— November 22,2009 @ 5:42PM
Ratings:-4+5
"Its horrible beyond belief but its been around almost since the first woman got pregnant"
...........................
Where did you garner that information?
"and it will be be here as long as women continue to get pregnant. Nothing will ever change that."
.....................................
Purely conjecture on your part.
"No bishop withholding grape juice and a cracker"
.....................................
Your lack of knowledge and understanding of the Eucharist and your public ridicule of the same, probably lacks wisdom and for your own eternal well being, should be refrained from.
"We're in the 21st century. That is a time and place the catholic church will never know. Our job, as compassionate and learned human beings is to accept every woman's right to decide her body's function and fate and, more than anything else, accept the inevitable and use our technology to make the death of the fetus absolutely painless."
.............................................
Regardless of the century or the assumed aggregated "wisdom" of the modern thinker, the Catholic Church has the Truth regarding abortion;
it is the taking of an innocent life and to participate in this act can lead to eternal suffering.
I for one will not seek secular wisdom on matters of faith and morals, as they seem to change with whatever current thought deems acceptable.
The Catholic Church has never in it's nearly 2000 years of existence, considered abortion as anything other than grave sin that cuts a soul off from God's Grace. No Grace, no God, no eternal life with God; only eternal separation. Because the stakes are so high, the Church could never in good conscience support an act that it recognizes as evil.
"Or, we can go the way of the catholic church and hand out coat hangars."
................................................
Clever turn of a phrase but totally inaccurate and inappropriate.
77. Comment by Don M. (saffronbindy)— November 22,2009 @ 5:56PM
Ratings:-2+6
The First Amendment has been addressed here some, both freedom of religion and freedom of speech.
A bit of a history lesson, which you will not learn in public schools.
James Madison wrote the first amendment. It was harshly debated. The founders wanted a clear shot at the British, and required Madison to write three things into it. Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom to redress. All things which had been denied them under British rule.
Madison gave them a fine amendment, which they passed. But, according to his biographer, about 10 years later Madison felt he had made a mistake. He was engaged in a bitter battle with Pres. Hamilton over how war debts should be paid. Newspapers were attacking him. He thought the "free speech" part only applied in the US, not to foreign reporters, and could not be directed at US officials. In 1798 he made a speech before congress urging the 1st amendment be repealed. He lost, fairly badly.
Madison continued his war against Hamilton (contrary to popular opinion our founders didn't like each other much). Pres. Hamilton had passed a series of strict tariffs which strangely enough only financially benefited him (our government was corrupt even then). Madison realized he needed some newspapers on his side. Hamilton retaliated by passing the Alien and Sedition act which said a newspaper could not critize an elected official.
This made Madison mad, so he sued over it. Although not a lawyer Madison defended his case, and he won it.
If you want to understand our country you only need look at two men. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence (except for the preamble, which Madison probably wrote) and Madison who wrote the constitution. Just two men. Jefferson was the visionary one, Madison was the one who reduced it to words. We owe our country to them.
80. Comment by Herman O. (No party affiliation)— November 22,2009 @ 7:42PM
Ratings:-3+4
57. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote) — "If you're trying to say that the catholic church has stopped moving and hiding priests, I don't believe it. Throughout the ages, they always have and always will."
Don't really care what you think of the church. You obviously are not Catholic or live in Rhode Island.
So why do you even care about the story? Oh yeah, anything to rail against religion. Real tolerant of you.
81. Comment by Don M. (saffronbindy)— November 22,2009 @ 7:43PM
Ratings:-4+1
78. Comment by Heather M. (Heather M.) — writes:
"Would you please tell us which chapters of the bible contain the twelve verses that you claim demand abortion?"
One of those would be out of 2 Kings:
"You will set fire to their fortified places, kill their young men with the sword, dash their little children to the ground, and rip open their pregnant women."
In this verse God is arguing with Haezel what should happen to her enemy. God laid out his position, as He described above. Haezel argued against it. God won. The children had their heads dashed in, and the pregant women were killed.
The verse is out of 2 Kings 8 but doesn't matter much since God had put a plague and famine on the people anyway, so they were going away.
82. Comment by Herman O. (No party affiliation)— November 22,2009 @ 7:47PM
Ratings:-2+5
44. Comment by Peter K. (Sweet Pete) — Could not be more wrong.
"Herman, I think everyone knows it's in the first ammendment (sic) where it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion""
What religion is the government ESTABLISHING? As I recall, they were seeking to void the Church of England (established by the state). This country has no such thing. The separation clause (which does not exist) has zero to do with topic since the government is not establishing a religion.
Again, were does it say that there must be SEPARATION? It says ESTABLISHING, but zero about SEPARATION.
83. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 7:54PM
Ratings:-4+2
80 Herman -
I stated early on why the story is of interest to me - the hypocrisy of the catholic church in that (1)they supposedly care about the unborn but they don't much care about or protect children from the pedophiles in their midst and (2) that incredibly wealthy old men who never had to worry about feeding their children or keeping a roof over their heads would tell the poorest people in Africa not to use condoms. If the pope cared one whit for "his" African followers, he would have been throwing millions of condoms into the crowds of those poor ignorant people.
As for Patrick Kennedy, he'll survive but as mentioned above, why would anyone want to bow down to a church who does not care for their well being?
I've never said I feel anything close to tolerance to religion. Quite the contrary. I'm certain I stated that above but yes, you're right - I will always rail against cults/religion.
I also clearly said I would never try to get someone else to change their opinion about cults/religions - so, yes, I do tolerate differences of opinion.
And, I said I expect the same respect for my opinion from others.
If you don't respect my opinion as I do yours, that's okay too.
84. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 8:01PM
Ratings:-4+2
"You can't just be Catholic when it's convenient"
Not sure who said this first but - well, Of course you can.
There are many catholics who use birth control, have had abortions, don't go to confession or communion (except those two holidays ... easter and xmas) and, in yon olden days, ate fish on Fridays.
I'm a ceramic/pottery artist and, at the request of a dear friend, did a mug as a gift for his mother which read Cafeteria Catholic because she didn't play by the rules but expected everyone else to.
85. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 8:21PM
Ratings:-2+1
Interesting -
In #83, I said I respected differences of opinion and expected that same respect in return but if you don't agree, that's okay too. Got me 2 thumbs down.
In 84, I said, "to each their own" and that got me two thumbs down.
But, john t. (butchmutt) says I'm the intolerant one.
86. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote)— November 22,2009 @ 8:31PM
Ratings:-1+1
Oh dear. A friend just sent this to me. Happy reading but what I see here is simply that catholics are just people, with all the same weaknesses as the rest of us. He sent me two more but if I post those too, next will be some of you roasting marshmallows at my feet. If the links don't work, can't help it.
================
· Pope Pius II (1458–1464) had at least two illegitimate children (one in Strasbourg and another one in Scotland ), born before he entered the clergy.10
· Pope Innocent VIII (1484–1492) had at least two illegitimate children, born before he entered the clergy.11 According to the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica, he "openly practised nepotism in favour of his children".12 Girolamo Savonarola chastised him for his worldly ambitions.13
· Pope Clement VII (1523–1534) had one illegitimate son before he took holy orders. Some sources identify him with Alessandro de' Medici, Duke of Florence but this identification has not been ascertained.14
· Pope Gregory XIII (1572–1585) had an illegitimate son before he took holy orders.
· Pope Julius II (1503–1513) had at least one illegitimate daughter, Felice della Rovere (born in 1483, twenty years before his election). Some sources indicate that he had two additional illegitimate daughters, who died in their childhood.16 Besides, some contemporary (possibly libellous) reports accused him of sodomy. According to the schismatic Council of Pisa in 1511, he was a "sodomite covered with shameful ulcers."17
· Pope Paul III (1534–1549) held off ordination18 in order to continue his promiscuous lifestyle, fathering four illegitimate children (three sons and one daughter) by his mistress Silvia Ruffini. He broke his relations with her ca. 1513. There is no evidence of sexual activity during his papacy.19 He made his illegitimate son Pier Luigi Farnese the first Duke of Parma.20[21]
· Pope Pius IV (1559–1565) had three illegitimate children before his election to the papacy.
* Pope Sergius III (904–911) was supposedly the father of Pope John XI by Marozia, according to Liutprand of Cremona in his Antapodosis23, as well as the Liber Pontificalis24. However it must be noted that this is disputed by another early source, the annalist Flodoard (c. 894-966), John XI was brother of Alberic II, the latter being the offspring of Marozia and her husband Alberic I. Hence John too may have been the son of Marozia and Alberic I. Bertrand Fauvarque underlines that the contemporary sources backing up this parenthood are dubious, Liutprand being "prone to exaggeration" while other mentions of this fatherhood appear in satires written by supporters of late Pope Formosus.25
* Pope John X (914–928) had romantic affairs with both Theodora and her daughter Marozia, according to Liutprand of Cremona in his Antapodosis26: "The first of the popes to be created by a woman and now destroyed by her daughter". (See also pornocracy)
* Pope John XII (955–963) (deposed by Conclave) was said to have turned the Basilica di San Giovanni in Laterano into a brothel and was accused of adultery, fornication, and incest (Source: Patrologia Latina).27 The monk chronicler Benedict of Soracte noted in his volume XXXVII that he "liked to have a collection of women". According to Liutprand of Cremona in his Antapodosis28, "they testified about his adultery, which they did not see with their own eyes, but nonetheless knew with certainty: he had fornicated with the widow of Rainier, with Stephana his father's concubine, with the widow Anna, and with his own niece, and he made the sacred palace into a whorehouse." According to The Oxford Dictionary of Popes, John XII was "a Christian Caligula whose crimes were rendered particularly horrific by the office he held".29He was killed by a jealous husband while in the act of committing adultery with the man's wife.30[31]32[33] (See also pornocracy)
* Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, again in 1045 and finally 1047–1048) was said to have conducted a very dissolute life during his papacy.34 Accused by Bishop Benno of Placenta of "many vile adulteries and murders."35[36] Pope Victor III referred in his third book of Dialogues to "his rapes, murders and other unspeakable acts. His life as a Pope so vile, so foul, so execrable, that I shudder to think of it."37 It prompted St. Peter Damian to write an extended treatise against sex in general, and homosexuality in particular. In his Liber Gomorrhianus, St. Peter Damian recorded that Benedict "feasted on immorality" and that he was "a demon from hell in the disguise of a priest", accusing Benedict IX of routine sodomy and bestiality and was said to have sponsored orgies.38 In May 1045, Benedict IX resigned his office to pursue marriage, selling his office for 1,500 pounds of gold to his godfather, the pious priest John Gratian, who named himself Pope Gregory VI.39
* Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503) had a notably long affair with Vannozza dei Cattanei before his papacy, by whom he had his famous illegitimate children Cesare and Lucrezia. A later mistress, Giulia Farnese, was the sister of Alessandro Farnese, who later became Pope Paul III. He fathered a total of at least seven, and possibly as many as ten illegitimate children.40 (See also Banquet of Chestnuts)
* Pope Paul II (1464–1471) was alleged to have died of a heart attack while in a sexual act with a page.41
* Pope Sixtus IV (1471–1484) was alleged to have awarded gifts and benefices to court favorites in return for sexual favors. Giovanni Sclafenato was created a cardinal by Sixtus IV for "ingenuousness, loyalty,...and his other gifts of soul and body",42 according to the papal epitaph on his tomb.43 Such claims were recorded by Stefano Infessura, in his Diarium urbis Romae.
* Pope Leo X (1513–1521) was alleged to have had a particular infatuation for Marc-Antonio Flaminio.44
* Pope Julius III (1550–1555) was alleged to have had a long affair with Innocenzo Ciocchi del Monte. The Venetian ambassador at that time reported that Innocenzo shared the pope's bedroom and bed.45 According to the The Oxford Dictionary of Popes, he was "naturally indolent, he devoted himself to pleasurable pursuits with occasional bouts of more serious activity
87. Comment by Heather M. (Heather M.)— November 22,2009 @ 8:40PM
Ratings:-0+0
81. Comment by Don M.
That verse does not command abortion.
2 Kings 7-13, Elisha the holy man is telling Hazeal what he will do after he (Hazeal) murders the king. This is a prediction, Elisha was shocked by it and didn't want to tell Hazeal about it, but finally does. Nowhere does it say that God orders him to do these things.
88. Comment by Heather M. (Heather M.)— November 22,2009 @ 8:55PM
Ratings:-0+0
The following is 2 kings 8 verses 7-15
And Elisha came to Damascus; and Benhadad the king of Syria was sick; and it was told him, saying, The man of God is come hither.
8 And the king said unto Hazael, Take a present in thine hand, and go, meet the man of God, and enquire of the LORD by him, saying, Shall I recover of this disease?
9 So Hazael went to meet him, and took a present with him, even of every good thing of Damascus, forty camels' burden, and came and stood before him, and said, Thy son Benhadad king of Syria hath sent me to thee, saying, Shall I recover of this disease?
10 And Elisha said unto him, Go, say unto him, Thou mayest certainly recover: howbeit the LORD hath shewed me that he shall surely die.
11 And he settled his countenance stedfastly, until he was ashamed: and the man of God wept.
12 And Hazael said, Why weepeth my lord? And he answered, Because I know the evil that thou wilt do unto the children of Israel: their strong holds wilt thou set on fire, and their young men wilt thou slay with the sword, and wilt dash their children, and rip up their women with child.
13 And Hazael said, But what, is thy servant a dog, that he should do this great thing? And Elisha answered, The LORD hath shewed me that thou shalt be king over Syria.
14 So he departed from Elisha, and came to his master; who said to him, What said Elisha to thee? And he answered, He told me that thou shouldest surely recover.
15 And it came to pass on the morrow, that he took a thick cloth, and dipped it in water, and spread it on his face, so that he died: and Hazael reigned in his stead.
89. Comment by T. G. (playgtr)— November 22,2009 @ 9:21PM
Ratings:-1+2
What about those abortions for girls raped by priests and paid for by the Catholic church hierarchy? Should the Bishops and priests who covered up priests molesting children still receive communion let alone give it to others? This is why I left the church. I'm no longer a believer so church law and opinion means nothing to me. I'm a good person and do a lot good things to help others. Communion hosts taste yucky anyway!
90. Comment by john t. (butchmutt)— November 22,2009 @ 9:23PM
Ratings:-2+0
85. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote) — November 22,2009 @ 8:21PM
Ratings: -2 +0
Interesting -
In #83, I said I respected differences of opinion and expected that same respect in return but if you don't agree, that's okay too. Got me 2 thumbs down.
In 84, I said, "to each their own" and that got me two thumbs down.
But, john t. (butchmutt) says I'm the intolerant one.
91. Comment by vincent m. (3942)— November 22,2009 @ 9:35PM
Ratings:-1+1
I did not see this till just now so I hope you are around to read it.
“We're in the 21st century. That is a time and place the catholic church will never know. Our job, as compassionate and learned human beings is to accept every woman's right to decide her body's function and fate and, more than anything else, accept the inevitable and use our technology to make the death of the fetus absolutely painless.”
The 21st Century has nothing to do with morals. Morals are timeless, that is why the 10 Commandments have stood the test of time. A woman does not have the right to decide her bodies function, but she does have the right to decide her fate. Rationalizing human beings try to combine the two but fail. The woman has the right to say NO, She has the right to use birth control. She does not have the right to cause “…make the death of the fetus…” YOUR WORDS. There is no way of knowing this is a painless procedure. That is pure speculation on your part.
Now for the inevitable, incest/rape argument; there are circumstances beyond the control of the woman, and the woman’s health, both physical and mental should be taken into account. But at a certain point the rights of the child must take precedence. Late term abortion is murder and by your own words the act of abortion is murder.
Take a moment to read this;
http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/68441827.html
A woman will have to live with the decision of having an abortion performed, and I have yet to meet one that has not been deeply changed by their decision to cause the death of their unborn child.
Edmund, please go back and read what you posted, particularly the “SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE” that is not in the Bill of Rights, what is in the Bill of Rights is that the Government can not establish a religion nor interfere with the free exercise there of. The Bishop can tell Pat Kennedy to take a hike for failing to follow the rules of the church. Pat Kennedy can not do both, he needs to make a choice; either leave politics and follow the doctrines of the church or leave the church and stay a politician.
94. Comment by john t. (butchmutt)— November 22,2009 @ 10:05PM
Ratings:-1+0
93. Comment by joel t. (harperman) — November 22,2009 @ 9:51PM
Ratings: -1 +0
Much ado about nothing.
A moronic family squabbling with a moronic church.
..........................................
Joel, quit holding back and trying to spare other's feelings.
We've added a feature to the comments pages - the ability to easily add paragraph breaks, boldface type and a few other typographical aids to your comments. Launch toolbar
Use single or double carriage returns to put line breaks or paragraph breaks in your comments.
At the same time, we removed the ability to put HTML coding into the comments. People were misusing that feature by pulling in cartoons, photos and other copyrighted materials from publications elsewhere. We won't allow you to use our pages to violate other publications' copyrights.
We've added a story to the site that includes a few tips to resolve common problems. You can use the comment thread attached to that story for practice and testing of the markup tools: Go to story | Go to the practice thread
General Instructions
Welcome to the story comments section of StarNet. Here are some helpful hints with you:
You must be logged in to comment or rate comments. Log in or create an account through our registration system.
All comments are subject to our guidelines (listed below) and our user agreement.
Comment Reporting
You can report other users' comments that are in violation of the StarNet User Guidelines. Users are limited to three (3) reports per day and are not allowed to report their own comments.
Any comment that has been reported will be moderated by StarNet. The comment will either be approved or rejected. Approval or rejection is based solely on the StarNet User Guidelines. Comments are only able to be reported once and are not viewable while awaiting moderation.
If you are a registered site user and are logged in, you can vote thumbs up or thumbs down on the comments.
The total votes of approval and disapproval on that comment will be updated when you vote — including your vote and any other votes that have been cast since your browser last loaded this page.
Votes by users who have been banned from commenting don't count in the totals.
User Guidelines
We welcome your comments on articles, editorials, columns, other topics on StarNet or any subjects important to you. Commentary submitted to StarNet (www.azstarnet.com) may be published or distributed in print, electronically or other forms. Opinions expressed in www.azstarnet.com's comments reflect the opinions of the author, and are not necessarily the opinions of the Star, StarNet, or its parent company. See terms of service for more information.
Our guidelines prohibit the solicitation of products or services, the impersonation of another site user, threatening or harassing postings and the use of vulgar, abusive, obscene or sexually oriented language, defamatory or illegal material. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. It's fine to criticize ideas, but ad hominem attacks are prohibited. Users who violate those standards may lose their privileges on azstarnet.com.
Don't violate other publications' copyrights.
Do we edit user comments? No. The writers are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. StarNet reserves the right to remove comments that violate our guidelines policy.
RI bishop asked Kennedy in 2007 to avoid Communion
The Roman Catholic bishop of Rhode Island said Sunday that he asked Rep. Patrick Kennedy in a 2007 letter to stop receiving Communion, the central sacrament of the church, because of the congressman’s public stance on moral issues.[This comment has been removed]
Thank God for secularism.
Report this comment
You can't just be Catholic when it's convenient.
Report this comment
God says in the bible that abortion is murder. The bishop is enforcing God's law. Go bishop.
Report this comment
Good!! Real tired of the false piety of the Kennedy family.
Report this comment
The Middle Ages are back.
Leave the church Pat and be free!
Report this comment
The Catholic Church is more and more an enemy of society. If they continue to spout and force their ancient conservative views in national politics, then the no taxing of churches needs to end, and end now. I personally think of them as a "fascists regeme" with their "our way is the only way' attitude. They are rapidly reaching cult status. Just like any other corporation, money is the only bottom line, and they grab it any way that they can.
Report this comment
Why is this being discussed in a public forum?
Discussions between clergy and an individual is supposed to be private and confidential. At least that has been my learning and understanding.
Report this comment
Within the story it is written.........
"...Kennedy accused Tobin of failing to abide by an agreement to stop discussing the congressman’s faith publicly."
It seems as tho Patrick Kennedy is going public with his comments and faith and the Catholic Church is responding to this Kennedy's remarks.
Furthermore, the Kennedy's always cry when it is against them, trying to make them look the better of all.
The Kennedy's are making this public, Patrick in particular. The Church is defending itself from a klan that believes they are better than everyone else and need to bow down to them.
In addition, the Kennedy's have grand problems with their memories and events of the past and get away with murder.
Patrick, pack your bags and go back home or whereever you reside and or go ask Princess Pelosi to fix everything for you.
The Muslim O'bama won't...or you can always convert!
Report this comment
TAX 'EM! All churches.
Report this comment
6. Comment by Joe F. (goofyfern) — November 22,2009 @ 8:57AM
Ratings: -0 +3
The Middle Ages are back.
"Leave the church Pat and be free!"
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Patrick O'Kennedy can't leave the church and still get elected in R I., since he went there to take advantage of his family's Catholicism to get elected. His disingenuous comment about embracing diversity in the church is reprehensible. He chose to become a public figure and oppose one of the most consistent and widely supported positions of the Church.
Poor little Patty boy can dish it out but apparently, since he is a Kennedy he should be above reproach.
Perhaps he should go back to Massachusetts. OOPS, there is already an anointed one ready to take Teddy's place.
Report this comment
Organized religion. It's all about power and control.
If this Kennedy has been barred from receiving communion what about the pedophile priests? They should be drummed out of the church and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But no. They were just shuffled from church to church. What Kennedy did was nothing as compared to these "priests."
Report this comment
Bout time the Church stood up to those Kennedy's who wear their religion like a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Report this comment
Why is this being tolerated by other catholics? SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE, REMEMBER? One more reason .....
Report this comment
8. Comment by Felix C. (Maz) — November 22,2009 @ 9:08AM
Ratings: -0 +2
"Why is this being discussed in a public forum?
Discussions between clergy and an individual is supposed to be private and confidential. At least that has been my learning and understanding."
*********************************************
Reread the article. It became public because Patrick made it Public.
Report this comment
Bravo Bishop!
Report this comment
What hath God wrought? Religious fanaticism, whether that of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc. belittles and belies real faith.
Report this comment
Bout time this cult's tax exemption gets lifted....
Report this comment
About time. For too many years, the Catholic church has been infected by liberalism and freemasonry.
Just like the R party went downhill into liberalism and merged with the Ds, by listening to and trying to placate the leftists, so did the Catholic church tend to merge with the other liberal denominations.
The time is overdue to take a stand, good for this bishop.
Report this comment
#18 Which cult, the Kennedys?
Report this comment
The freedom for the "right of association". Does that sound familiar??? Whether it be the Roman Catholic Church, LDS, or any other organization, religious or otherwise, if you don't like what they stand for DON'T JOIN. People have the right to associate with like minded people, as long as they don't trespass on the rights of others. People, who freely join an organization, refuse to abide by it's principles and then try to change them deserve contempt.
Report this comment
Normally I am not into religion but in this case I have to say “hat off to the Catholic Church”. They are standing by their beliefs. More than I can say for Pat (Oh, I forgot, he is a KENNEDY!)
Report this comment
Cite the law all you want, in the end, there is no real division between church and state. The roman catholic church owns too much land and too much gold and they have been persecuting people since the beginning of time, hiding sexual deviants behind the cloth and breaking whatever moral law they wish to break. i am a happy ex catholic.
Report this comment
Gee, that priest is a good Christian, isn't he....it is about control - if you do not like the rules, go to where you are accepted for yourself - no matter your religion, etc...all of this enforced my decision, many years ago, to become a "non-believer"...organized religion is a racket - look at the history it has spawned - thieves, pedophiles, greedy people who believe everything they hear from those very religious leaders - many of them are good honest people, but just as many are not.
Report this comment
14. Comment by Edmund W. (edmundowin) — "Why is this being tolerated by other catholics?
Answer: if you can't understand the structure, symbolism and why the beliefs are the way they are, you probably ought to stay out of a conversation you clearly won't understand.
"SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE, REMEMBER? One more reason ....."
What does this have anything to do with anything? Where does it say in the Constitution that there is a separation?
Report this comment
24. Comment by Maureen C. (chiefgoddess) — "Gee, that priest is a good Christian, isn't he.."
You mean by upholding the vows he took? Unlike Kennedy who is a CINO?
If more leaders had the fortitude to stick to their promises/beliefs/morals, this country would not be in as sad of shape that it is.
Report this comment
As someone said who He seems to have really disliked monarchies and Catholicism if not Christianity in general..."Man shall not be free until the last general is strangled with the entrails of the last priest"
Report this comment
10. Comment by susan d.
Sure...and lose the hispanic vote.
Report this comment
#12 True,Pedophile priests are a "cult" hiding within the church. They are disgusting and vile and should have been banned from the church and not "shuffled" between other churches.
They do not represent the church! They became priests because they believed they could earn the trust of children, and lure them into their reprehensible acts. That is why they became priests, not because of their love for God, and people!!
But the Kennedys do not represent the church! And just because of their political standing, they, in their arrogance think they can change the Church! The Kennedy history is just as ugly. And they always seem to get away with it. They shuffle their evil deeds under the rug as well. I agree with separation of church and government to a point. But you can't call yourself a Catholic on Sunday and the rest of the week be someone else. The Kennedys are "wishy washy" Catholics. They do what they want when they want, they do what makes them popular. The Bishop at least has taken a strong stand even though it's not "popular".
Report this comment
So it's ok for pedophile priests to give communion, but not ok for Kennedy to receive. Why not ban all imperfect people from communion?
Report this comment
Pedophile priests should be, and have been EXCOMMUNICATED!
But if you take a defiant stand against church teachings, and show up on Sunday, and say "look at me, what a good Christian I am". Then don't bother.
Report this comment
Answer to #25:
Not everyone is Catholic. Kennedy's job is to represent the people, not the Catholic church. I don't believe in the Catholic dogma. If Kennedy was representing me, I would insist that he represent the PEOPLE - not the Catholic church. When the Catholic church prosecutes the pedophiles, then they can preach their belief system all they want.
Yes, there is supposed to be separation of church and state. Apparently you don't know that. No Bishop, or any other representative of any church has the RIGHT to dictate how they vote. If they want to do that, let them do it in the Vatican. Yeah - and maybe I know a little more about the Catholic church than you think I do. And until you know as much as I do, please keep your opinions about me and how much I know to yourself.
Report this comment
.....You can't serve two gods.
Report this comment
32. Comment by Edmund W.
"Kennedy's job is to represent the people, not the Catholic church".
And the Bishop's job is to represent the Catholic Church, not the Kennedys.
Report this comment
Yes, I'm with those who support taxing all churches, mosques, temples, etc. I'm not anti-religion, just anti-organized religion.
Report this comment
Last I checked, the Catholic church did not allow membership in masonry...
Report this comment
#3 Sissy -
"You can't just be Catholic when it's convenient"
The problem is you are elected to government to represent the people of your district and you should therefore be able to make decisions in government that conflict with the church and your own personal religious beliefs, if not, and as in this case, the church then has too much influence and power in government.
Our country is based on seperation of church and state and thats the best thing our founding fathers ever did was putting in the constitution "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
Report this comment
36 Jackie - Links to this information you posted??????
Report this comment
#30 Pedophile priests should never administer communion(they are not priests, they are wolves in sheep clothing)....And Ted Kennedy should have been thrown out of any government office! But that didn't happen either did it? But he was at the communion rail too. Plenty of abomination on both sides of that rail.
But at least this Bishop is taking a stand ! It's about time that someone is not swayed by the Kennedy power and money.
Report this comment
4. Comment by P W. (patflyaway) — writes:
"God says in the bible that abortion is murder."
Mind pointing out where in the Bible God says that, Pat? Would that be the part where God says a baby resulting from sex with someone not the woman's husband must be aborted? Or is it the place where God commands that women that have committed certain sins abort their babies and eat them? Or might it be the passages where God demands (twice) that men go into a neighboring town and kill all the pregnant women, and make sure the fetuses are dead?
You see, Pat, God actually said those things right in the Bible. They are difficult verses for Christians to deal with, because they are uncomfortable and hard to reconcile. In the Bible there are 12 places where God demands abortions. There is not a single place where He commands against it.
Report this comment
40 - Excellent comment Big D! I love it when folks point out hypocricy!
Report this comment
#32-Clearly avoids the question of where in the Constitution it states there is a separation of Church and state?
Kennedy is a joke and certainly a CINO. He is as much Catholic as Pelosi claims to be.
He could be both Catholic and represent his district, but if he is true to following the tenants of the church, but that would have required to break from the party. He is more beholden to the party and power than he is to the God he professes to believe in. He stated his position and now is taking his licks.
Report this comment
Follow on for #32-
This loser runs to the media to whine. Very similar to posting here and then whining when someone questions it.
And the First Amendment allows me the freedom to state anything I want about any subject. Look it up.
Report this comment
42 Herman O - "#32-Clearly avoids the question of where in the Constitution it states there is a separation of Church and state?"
Herman, I think everyone knows it's in the first ammendment where it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
Report this comment
I read 32 comments before anyone even mentioned that our representatives are elected Democratically to represent their specific constituents, not their own beliefs, or the tenets of their faith. That is the only real issue here. The church did not elect Kennedy, the voters did, and he should represent the voters accordingly. The churches derive their power and influence in this matter by preaching to their followers not to have abortions. It is not their place to control the choices of everyone else who may hold different beliefs.
Report this comment
As 33 said “You can't serve two gods”.
When Kennedy took office his “god” became the people he represents, at least in theory. If he has to abandon his religion to be true to the people he represents, that is a decision he should have made before he ran for office. He either supports the people or gets his Communion. It sounds to me like he has to make a decision. Is it God or is it “god”. A true decision and one I am sure no politician will make.
Report this comment
I meant to add to #45....
If he had an abortion (physically impossible, of course), then they could say he was not acting as a good Catholic should act. Voting for laws to support the people he was elected to represent, though, not the same.
Report this comment
3. Comment by Sissy S. (DsrtFox) — November 22,2009 @ 8:37AM
Ratings: -17 +24
You can't just be Catholic when it's convenient.
============Tell it to all the children who have been molested by "good" catholic priests.
Many catholics practice birth control and are pro-life -meaning pro-abortion.
The catholic church is surely the post hypocritical institution on the planet.
Comedienne, Sarah Silverman (nice Jewish name) said the answer to world hunger came to her ...
Sell The Vatican
Feed The World
In a terribly sad way, it was rather funny. But, they wouldn't have to sell the vatican. Just make them pay the same property taxes that the real world has to pay.
That wealthy old man (theh pope) who has never had to work for a living, has never had to feed a family or pay the rent just sits in his big gold chair and makes life changing decisions and never gives a thought to the real consequences - like telling Africans not to use condoms.
His minions, like this bishop have their duties as well. Like moving pedophile priests from place to place so they don't get caught. I can imagine the bishop telling Patrick Kennedy he cannot take communion and a bit later telling a pedophile he's being moved to a whole new group of unsuspecting children.
Too bad the catholics don't care as much about children as they do about the unborn.
The hypocrisy is infuriating.
Report this comment
This is the same Patrick Kennedy who has been in rehab a half dozen times, (the most recent in June) pleaded guilty to DUI and claims he suffers from bi-polar disorder.
Apparently the people of Rhode Island aren't real choosey.
Report this comment
Kennedy:pro-choice
Catholic church:pro-life
SEPARATION CHURCH AND STATE
Kennedy made his choice. Bishop made his.
Report this comment
43. Comment by Herman O. (No party affiliation) — November 22,2009 @ 12:48PM
Ratings: Thumbs Down Thumbs Up -1 +1
And the First Amendment allows me the freedom to state anything I want about any subject. Look it up.
====
Uh, no ... You have no first amendment right to "state anything I want about any subject" HERE, IN THIS forum.
Look it up.
Never mind, I'll save you the trouble.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances".
The government does not run this forum. Its the property of the ADS and they can tell any one of us to shut up and make it stick by deleting our membership.
Report this comment
49 At least Patrick Kennedy faced up to his problems and got help. Can't say that about the catholic church. They just hide their priests (and other sins) in new places.
Report this comment
#51-I do not need help with the First Amendment....this site does not own my thoughts and so long as I follow the rules, I am free to post WHATEVER I THINK.
The converse of that is censorship and surely the ADS would not stoop to that level.
Report this comment
#49-Neither are the people of Tucson....
Re: Grijalva and Giffords.
Report this comment
#52-How would you know that "They just hide their priests (and other sins) in new places."?
I thought if you hid something, it was not visible to anyone? Please elaborate on where these priests are hidden so they can prosecuted. You claim to know they are hiding, so surely you know where.
Report this comment
I'm old enough to remember JFK promising that he would not take orders from the church and would put the Constitution and the country first.
At the time everyone applauded - how times have changed.
Report this comment
53 You are correct but that is not what you said in your earlier post, #43.
55 Read the news over the past many years. Read the history of the catholic church. Read the heartbreaking first hand reports. Talk to the survivors. Read the sites posted by the pedophile priests themselves.
While I don't believe everything I read in the news, I have enough personal experience (someone I am very close to) with the damage that catholic priests have done that I believe what I've read too.
If you're trying to say that the catholic church has stopped moving and hiding priests, I don't believe it. Throughout the ages, they always have and always will.
My opinion is never ever trust any organized cult/religion. In addition, if someone feels they must tell you they are a "good christian", watch your money and your back.
You are free to hold an opinion that disagrees and I will make no effort to try to change your mind. Nor will I demand that you prove your opinion is better or more correct than mine.
I will, however, expect the same courtesy from you.
Report this comment
NY's Cuomo no stranger to church-state friction
Associated Press - November 22, 2009 3:55 PM ET
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) - Former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo (KWOH-moh) says church leaders should be cautious about pressuring Catholic politicians over issues such as abortion because people might not vote for someone they think is guided by religion.
Cuomo's comments come as Rhode Island Rep. Patrick Kennedy spars with a bishop over his public stance on moral issues including abortion. Kennedy says Bishop Thomas Tobin has asked him not to receive communion.
In 1984, Cuomo delivered a speech at the University of Notre Dame saying Catholic lawmakers shouldn't be pressured by church leaders to work for anti-abortion legislation.
He tells The Associated Press that asking Catholic leaders to force their faith on everybody they represent would alienate people.
http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=11554073
Report this comment
It's pretty simple. You don't want to follow our rules, you can't be in our club. Kennedy has to make a choice; he can't have it both ways.
Report this comment
Vatican = God's law
United States of America = U.S. Constitution
The Pope: not a U.S. citizen. (quit trying to make him one)
Report this comment
Pedophilia Catholic Church - loss: $1/2 billion
Anti-abortion/same-sex marriage Catholic Church - income: $1/2 billion
Report this comment
59 Take that a step further - Why would anyone want to belong to a club that does not accept and/or agree with one's beliefs?
I have several gay friends and have often wondered the same thing about their beliefs.
Although, I think the opinion up the board a ways is more to the point - the two should never come together. Its the catholic church that is demanding that one's politics agree with one's religious beliefs.
Report this comment
56. Comment by Patrick O. (tiponeill) — November 22,2009 @ 2:24PM
Ratings: -3 +1
I'm old enough to remember JFK promising that he would not take orders from the church and would put the Constitution and the country first.
At the time everyone applauded - how times have changed.
JFK ===================
Me too. And remember the horrible and quite ridiculous (IMO) things that were said because he was catholic.
I've thought of those times when I've watched the baseless anti-Obama hysteria.
Report this comment
The church says abortion bad
Kennedy says abortion good
It is the church’s playground and you left wingers say they can't tell Kennedy to take a hike. Did you miss the First Amendment? The church is protected by all of it in this case, or do we apply the Bill of Rights selectively?
Too funny.
Report this comment
This is why the protestants broke away from the catholic church. I do not agree with Kennedy’s position about abortion but the catholic church does not have the right to let him worship God.
Report this comment
Rirst of all, this article is not specific enough - what has Kennedy specifically done?
Secondly, I do think that he cannot away a woman's right to choose in this country. However, he can vote to restrict federal funding for abortions and should as a Catholic.
However, #47 is correct. His first obligation is to represent the people of his state and if they do not support federal funding, he is representing them well.
Report this comment
The religious right, the Catholic Church and the Republican Party should have joined forces years ago to pass a constitutional amendment barring abortions. Why didn't they?
It's easy to obstruct and complain - it is a wedge issue that only divides this country.
Stop complaining and do the hard work involved or shut up.
Report this comment
64. Comment by vincent m.
"Kennedy says abortion good"
======
I doubt that any person, any where or at any time has said abortion is "good".
Its horrible beyond belief but its been around almost since the first woman got pregnant and it will be be here as long as women continue to get pregnant. Nothing will ever change that. No bishop withholding grape juice and a cracker, no murdered abortion doctors, no women crying themselves to sleep before and after having made that decision.
We're in the 21st century. That is a time and place the catholic church will never know. Our job, as compassionate and learned human beings is to accept every woman's right to decide her body's function and fate and, more than anything else, accept the inevitable and use our technology to make the death of the fetus absolutely painless.
Or, we can go the way of the catholic church and hand out coat hangars.
JMO
Report this comment
2. Comment by Gerald W. (geraldew) — November 22,2009 @ 8:34AM
Ratings: -23 +17
Thank God for secularism.
................................................
Actually, Satan would be the appropriate entity in this instance.
JT
Report this comment
6. Comment by Joe F. (goofyfern) — November 22,2009 @ 8:57AM
Ratings: -23 +34
The Middle Ages are back.
Leave the church Pat and be free!
...........................................
He already did, he just doesn't know it, yet.
JT
Report this comment
15. Comment by John H. (4523)
Thank you for nothing .. my post did not differentiate on who said what first only that a discussion between the parties involved were personal and confidential.
Now go fly a kite
Report this comment
14. Comment by Edmund W. (edmundowin) — November 22,2009 @ 10:19AM
Ratings: -15 +19
Why is this being tolerated by other catholics? SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE, REMEMBER? One more reason .....
.........................................
False argument.
The Church, represented by the local Bishop is NOT telling this Catholic parishioner what to do politically, he is being told what not to do Sacramentally based on Church teaching. If being an abortion advocate is more important than worthily receiving the Eucharist, then that is this particular Catholics decision.
Personally I would prefer it if all the Bishops took the same action with all pro abortion Catholics, even if it meant that half the Church would be gone. There is ample room in the various Protestant Church denominations to accommodate these anti Catholic beliefs.
JT
Report this comment
The Constitution is pretty clear about separation of church and state. If the Catholic wants to run a political machine, they will be served well to stick to Vatican City.
Report this comment
37. Comment by Peter K. (Sweet Pete) — November 22,2009 @ 12:21PM
Ratings: -8 +7
#3 Sissy -
"You can't just be Catholic when it's convenient"
The problem is you are elected to government to represent the people of your district and you should therefore be able to make decisions in government that conflict with the church and your own personal religious beliefs, if not, and as in this case, the church then has too much influence and power in government.
Our country is based on seperation of church and state and thats the best thing our founding fathers ever did was putting in the constitution "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
...............................................
What you are saying is that a public official should be exempt from adhering to Church teaching and law on faith and morals simply because he or she chose to enter the political field.
The Church should not have to make exceptions for any career group, especially if others can point to the official, say he or she is Catholic and it must be acceptable Church teaching if he or she supports it.
If a person wants to enter into politics and they prefer secular thought to Catholic teaching which is and has been consistent for nearly 2000 as it regards faith and morals, that person need be honest and leave the Church in favor of secularism.
Christianity at it's core holds up selflessness as great virtue, Kennedy misses this point totally.
JT
Report this comment
68. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote) — November 22,2009 @ 4:14PM
Ratings: -5 +2
64. Comment by vincent m.
"Kennedy says abortion good"
==
I doubt that any person, any where or at any time has said abortion is "good".
.................................
What about a pimp whose property messes up the money thing by getting pregnant or the pervert male relative that impregnates a child?
JT
Report this comment
"Its horrible beyond belief but its been around almost since the first woman got pregnant"
...........................
Where did you garner that information?
"and it will be be here as long as women continue to get pregnant. Nothing will ever change that."
.....................................
Purely conjecture on your part.
"No bishop withholding grape juice and a cracker"
.....................................
Your lack of knowledge and understanding of the Eucharist and your public ridicule of the same, probably lacks wisdom and for your own eternal well being, should be refrained from.
"We're in the 21st century. That is a time and place the catholic church will never know. Our job, as compassionate and learned human beings is to accept every woman's right to decide her body's function and fate and, more than anything else, accept the inevitable and use our technology to make the death of the fetus absolutely painless."
.............................................
Regardless of the century or the assumed aggregated "wisdom" of the modern thinker, the Catholic Church has the Truth regarding abortion;
it is the taking of an innocent life and to participate in this act can lead to eternal suffering.
I for one will not seek secular wisdom on matters of faith and morals, as they seem to change with whatever current thought deems acceptable.
The Catholic Church has never in it's nearly 2000 years of existence, considered abortion as anything other than grave sin that cuts a soul off from God's Grace. No Grace, no God, no eternal life with God; only eternal separation. Because the stakes are so high, the Church could never in good conscience support an act that it recognizes as evil.
"Or, we can go the way of the catholic church and hand out coat hangars."
................................................
Clever turn of a phrase but totally inaccurate and inappropriate.
JT
Report this comment
The First Amendment has been addressed here some, both freedom of religion and freedom of speech.
A bit of a history lesson, which you will not learn in public schools.
James Madison wrote the first amendment. It was harshly debated. The founders wanted a clear shot at the British, and required Madison to write three things into it. Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom to redress. All things which had been denied them under British rule.
Madison gave them a fine amendment, which they passed. But, according to his biographer, about 10 years later Madison felt he had made a mistake. He was engaged in a bitter battle with Pres. Hamilton over how war debts should be paid. Newspapers were attacking him. He thought the "free speech" part only applied in the US, not to foreign reporters, and could not be directed at US officials. In 1798 he made a speech before congress urging the 1st amendment be repealed. He lost, fairly badly.
Madison continued his war against Hamilton (contrary to popular opinion our founders didn't like each other much). Pres. Hamilton had passed a series of strict tariffs which strangely enough only financially benefited him (our government was corrupt even then). Madison realized he needed some newspapers on his side. Hamilton retaliated by passing the Alien and Sedition act which said a newspaper could not critize an elected official.
This made Madison mad, so he sued over it. Although not a lawyer Madison defended his case, and he won it.
If you want to understand our country you only need look at two men. Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence (except for the preamble, which Madison probably wrote) and Madison who wrote the constitution. Just two men. Jefferson was the visionary one, Madison was the one who reduced it to words. We owe our country to them.
Report this comment
40. Comment by Don M. (saffronbindy)
Would you please tell us which chapters of the bible contain the twelve verses that you claim demand abortion?
Report this comment
76
Thanks ever so much for your concern but I can take care of my "eternal well being" without your assistance.
Report this comment
57. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote) — "If you're trying to say that the catholic church has stopped moving and hiding priests, I don't believe it. Throughout the ages, they always have and always will."
Don't really care what you think of the church. You obviously are not Catholic or live in Rhode Island.
So why do you even care about the story? Oh yeah, anything to rail against religion. Real tolerant of you.
Report this comment
78. Comment by Heather M. (Heather M.) — writes:
"Would you please tell us which chapters of the bible contain the twelve verses that you claim demand abortion?"
One of those would be out of 2 Kings:
"You will set fire to their fortified places, kill their young men with the sword, dash their little children to the ground, and rip open their pregnant women."
In this verse God is arguing with Haezel what should happen to her enemy. God laid out his position, as He described above. Haezel argued against it. God won. The children had their heads dashed in, and the pregant women were killed.
The verse is out of 2 Kings 8 but doesn't matter much since God had put a plague and famine on the people anyway, so they were going away.
Report this comment
44. Comment by Peter K. (Sweet Pete) — Could not be more wrong.
"Herman, I think everyone knows it's in the first ammendment (sic) where it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion""
What religion is the government ESTABLISHING? As I recall, they were seeking to void the Church of England (established by the state). This country has no such thing. The separation clause (which does not exist) has zero to do with topic since the government is not establishing a religion.
Again, were does it say that there must be SEPARATION? It says ESTABLISHING, but zero about SEPARATION.
Report this comment
80 Herman -
I stated early on why the story is of interest to me - the hypocrisy of the catholic church in that (1)they supposedly care about the unborn but they don't much care about or protect children from the pedophiles in their midst and (2) that incredibly wealthy old men who never had to worry about feeding their children or keeping a roof over their heads would tell the poorest people in Africa not to use condoms. If the pope cared one whit for "his" African followers, he would have been throwing millions of condoms into the crowds of those poor ignorant people.
As for Patrick Kennedy, he'll survive but as mentioned above, why would anyone want to bow down to a church who does not care for their well being?
I've never said I feel anything close to tolerance to religion. Quite the contrary. I'm certain I stated that above but yes, you're right - I will always rail against cults/religion.
I also clearly said I would never try to get someone else to change their opinion about cults/religions - so, yes, I do tolerate differences of opinion.
And, I said I expect the same respect for my opinion from others.
If you don't respect my opinion as I do yours, that's okay too.
Report this comment
"You can't just be Catholic when it's convenient"
Not sure who said this first but - well, Of course you can.
There are many catholics who use birth control, have had abortions, don't go to confession or communion (except those two holidays ... easter and xmas) and, in yon olden days, ate fish on Fridays.
I'm a ceramic/pottery artist and, at the request of a dear friend, did a mug as a gift for his mother which read Cafeteria Catholic because she didn't play by the rules but expected everyone else to.
I say, to each their own.
Report this comment
Interesting -
In #83, I said I respected differences of opinion and expected that same respect in return but if you don't agree, that's okay too. Got me 2 thumbs down.
In 84, I said, "to each their own" and that got me two thumbs down.
But, john t. (butchmutt) says I'm the intolerant one.
That's religion for you.
Report this comment
Oh dear. A friend just sent this to me. Happy reading but what I see here is simply that catholics are just people, with all the same weaknesses as the rest of us. He sent me two more but if I post those too, next will be some of you roasting marshmallows at my feet. If the links don't work, can't help it.
================· Pope Pius II (1458–1464) had at least two illegitimate children (one in Strasbourg and another one in Scotland ), born before he entered the clergy.10
· Pope Innocent VIII (1484–1492) had at least two illegitimate children, born before he entered the clergy.11 According to the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica, he "openly practised nepotism in favour of his children".12 Girolamo Savonarola chastised him for his worldly ambitions.13
· Pope Clement VII (1523–1534) had one illegitimate son before he took holy orders. Some sources identify him with Alessandro de' Medici, Duke of Florence but this identification has not been ascertained.14
· Pope Gregory XIII (1572–1585) had an illegitimate son before he took holy orders.
· Pope Julius II (1503–1513) had at least one illegitimate daughter, Felice della Rovere (born in 1483, twenty years before his election). Some sources indicate that he had two additional illegitimate daughters, who died in their childhood.16 Besides, some contemporary (possibly libellous) reports accused him of sodomy. According to the schismatic Council of Pisa in 1511, he was a "sodomite covered with shameful ulcers."17
· Pope Paul III (1534–1549) held off ordination18 in order to continue his promiscuous lifestyle, fathering four illegitimate children (three sons and one daughter) by his mistress Silvia Ruffini. He broke his relations with her ca. 1513. There is no evidence of sexual activity during his papacy.19 He made his illegitimate son Pier Luigi Farnese the first Duke of Parma.20[21]
· Pope Pius IV (1559–1565) had three illegitimate children before his election to the papacy.
* Pope Sergius III (904–911) was supposedly the father of Pope John XI by Marozia, according to Liutprand of Cremona in his Antapodosis23, as well as the Liber Pontificalis24. However it must be noted that this is disputed by another early source, the annalist Flodoard (c. 894-966), John XI was brother of Alberic II, the latter being the offspring of Marozia and her husband Alberic I. Hence John too may have been the son of Marozia and Alberic I. Bertrand Fauvarque underlines that the contemporary sources backing up this parenthood are dubious, Liutprand being "prone to exaggeration" while other mentions of this fatherhood appear in satires written by supporters of late Pope Formosus.25
* Pope John X (914–928) had romantic affairs with both Theodora and her daughter Marozia, according to Liutprand of Cremona in his Antapodosis26: "The first of the popes to be created by a woman and now destroyed by her daughter". (See also pornocracy)
* Pope John XII (955–963) (deposed by Conclave) was said to have turned the Basilica di San Giovanni in Laterano into a brothel and was accused of adultery, fornication, and incest (Source: Patrologia Latina).27 The monk chronicler Benedict of Soracte noted in his volume XXXVII that he "liked to have a collection of women". According to Liutprand of Cremona in his Antapodosis28, "they testified about his adultery, which they did not see with their own eyes, but nonetheless knew with certainty: he had fornicated with the widow of Rainier, with Stephana his father's concubine, with the widow Anna, and with his own niece, and he made the sacred palace into a whorehouse." According to The Oxford Dictionary of Popes, John XII was "a Christian Caligula whose crimes were rendered particularly horrific by the office he held".29He was killed by a jealous husband while in the act of committing adultery with the man's wife.30[31]32[33] (See also pornocracy)
* Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, again in 1045 and finally 1047–1048) was said to have conducted a very dissolute life during his papacy.34 Accused by Bishop Benno of Placenta of "many vile adulteries and murders."35[36] Pope Victor III referred in his third book of Dialogues to "his rapes, murders and other unspeakable acts. His life as a Pope so vile, so foul, so execrable, that I shudder to think of it."37 It prompted St. Peter Damian to write an extended treatise against sex in general, and homosexuality in particular. In his Liber Gomorrhianus, St. Peter Damian recorded that Benedict "feasted on immorality" and that he was "a demon from hell in the disguise of a priest", accusing Benedict IX of routine sodomy and bestiality and was said to have sponsored orgies.38 In May 1045, Benedict IX resigned his office to pursue marriage, selling his office for 1,500 pounds of gold to his godfather, the pious priest John Gratian, who named himself Pope Gregory VI.39
* Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503) had a notably long affair with Vannozza dei Cattanei before his papacy, by whom he had his famous illegitimate children Cesare and Lucrezia. A later mistress, Giulia Farnese, was the sister of Alessandro Farnese, who later became Pope Paul III. He fathered a total of at least seven, and possibly as many as ten illegitimate children.40 (See also Banquet of Chestnuts)
* Pope Paul II (1464–1471) was alleged to have died of a heart attack while in a sexual act with a page.41
* Pope Sixtus IV (1471–1484) was alleged to have awarded gifts and benefices to court favorites in return for sexual favors. Giovanni Sclafenato was created a cardinal by Sixtus IV for "ingenuousness, loyalty,...and his other gifts of soul and body",42 according to the papal epitaph on his tomb.43 Such claims were recorded by Stefano Infessura, in his Diarium urbis Romae.
* Pope Leo X (1513–1521) was alleged to have had a particular infatuation for Marc-Antonio Flaminio.44
* Pope Julius III (1550–1555) was alleged to have had a long affair with Innocenzo Ciocchi del Monte. The Venetian ambassador at that time reported that Innocenzo shared the pope's bedroom and bed.45 According to the The Oxford Dictionary of Popes, he was "naturally indolent, he devoted himself to pleasurable pursuits with occasional bouts of more serious activity
http://www.allaboutreligion.org/roman-catholic-church-history-faq.htm
Report this comment
81. Comment by Don M.
That verse does not command abortion.
2 Kings 7-13, Elisha the holy man is telling Hazeal what he will do after he (Hazeal) murders the king. This is a prediction, Elisha was shocked by it and didn't want to tell Hazeal about it, but finally does. Nowhere does it say that God orders him to do these things.
Report this comment
The following is 2 kings 8 verses 7-15
And Elisha came to Damascus; and Benhadad the king of Syria was sick; and it was told him, saying, The man of God is come hither.
8 And the king said unto Hazael, Take a present in thine hand, and go, meet the man of God, and enquire of the LORD by him, saying, Shall I recover of this disease?
9 So Hazael went to meet him, and took a present with him, even of every good thing of Damascus, forty camels' burden, and came and stood before him, and said, Thy son Benhadad king of Syria hath sent me to thee, saying, Shall I recover of this disease?
10 And Elisha said unto him, Go, say unto him, Thou mayest certainly recover: howbeit the LORD hath shewed me that he shall surely die.
11 And he settled his countenance stedfastly, until he was ashamed: and the man of God wept.
12 And Hazael said, Why weepeth my lord? And he answered, Because I know the evil that thou wilt do unto the children of Israel: their strong holds wilt thou set on fire, and their young men wilt thou slay with the sword, and wilt dash their children, and rip up their women with child.
13 And Hazael said, But what, is thy servant a dog, that he should do this great thing? And Elisha answered, The LORD hath shewed me that thou shalt be king over Syria.
14 So he departed from Elisha, and came to his master; who said to him, What said Elisha to thee? And he answered, He told me that thou shouldest surely recover.
15 And it came to pass on the morrow, that he took a thick cloth, and dipped it in water, and spread it on his face, so that he died: and Hazael reigned in his stead.
Report this comment
What about those abortions for girls raped by priests and paid for by the Catholic church hierarchy? Should the Bishops and priests who covered up priests molesting children still receive communion let alone give it to others? This is why I left the church. I'm no longer a believer so church law and opinion means nothing to me. I'm a good person and do a lot good things to help others. Communion hosts taste yucky anyway!
Report this comment
85. Comment by Barb D. (BeCoyote) — November 22,2009 @ 8:21PM
Ratings: -2 +0
Interesting -
In #83, I said I respected differences of opinion and expected that same respect in return but if you don't agree, that's okay too. Got me 2 thumbs down.
In 84, I said, "to each their own" and that got me two thumbs down.
But, john t. (butchmutt) says I'm the intolerant one.
That's religion for you.
......................................
I did?
Report this comment
I did not see this till just now so I hope you are around to read it.
“We're in the 21st century. That is a time and place the catholic church will never know. Our job, as compassionate and learned human beings is to accept every woman's right to decide her body's function and fate and, more than anything else, accept the inevitable and use our technology to make the death of the fetus absolutely painless.”
The 21st Century has nothing to do with morals. Morals are timeless, that is why the 10 Commandments have stood the test of time. A woman does not have the right to decide her bodies function, but she does have the right to decide her fate. Rationalizing human beings try to combine the two but fail. The woman has the right to say NO, She has the right to use birth control. She does not have the right to cause “…make the death of the fetus…” YOUR WORDS. There is no way of knowing this is a painless procedure. That is pure speculation on your part.
Now for the inevitable, incest/rape argument; there are circumstances beyond the control of the woman, and the woman’s health, both physical and mental should be taken into account. But at a certain point the rights of the child must take precedence. Late term abortion is murder and by your own words the act of abortion is murder.
Take a moment to read this;
http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/68441827.html
A woman will have to live with the decision of having an abortion performed, and I have yet to meet one that has not been deeply changed by their decision to cause the death of their unborn child.
Edmund, please go back and read what you posted, particularly the “SEPARATION BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE” that is not in the Bill of Rights, what is in the Bill of Rights is that the Government can not establish a religion nor interfere with the free exercise there of. The Bishop can tell Pat Kennedy to take a hike for failing to follow the rules of the church. Pat Kennedy can not do both, he needs to make a choice; either leave politics and follow the doctrines of the church or leave the church and stay a politician.
Report this comment
So why did Kennedy make this public? Is he expecting pity? He knows the rules, it's about time the Church starts holding them accountable.
Report this comment
Much ado about nothing.
A moronic family squabbling with a moronic church.
Report this comment
93. Comment by joel t. (harperman) — November 22,2009 @ 9:51PM
Ratings: -1 +0
Much ado about nothing.
A moronic family squabbling with a moronic church.
..........................................
Joel, quit holding back and trying to spare other's feelings.
JT
Report this comment