Comments on: The Catholic Moral Imperative

By: nativity

nativity — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 09:37:43 +0000

DECREE ON ECUMENISM
UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO

INTRODUCTION

1. The restoration of unity among all Christians is one of the principal concerns of the Second Vatican Council. Christ the Lord founded one Church and one Church only. However, many Christian communions present themselves to men as the true inheritors of Jesus Christ; all indeed profess to be followers of the Lord but differ in mind and go their different ways, as if Christ Himself were divided.(1) Such division openly contradicts the will of Christ, scandalizes the world, and damages the holy cause of preaching the Gospel to every creature.

By: jackster

jackster — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 02:43:46 +0000

Beautiful analogy.

By: Cooky642

Cooky642 — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 03:11:24 +0000

dennisofraleigh, you are quite right, of course, that we need REAL moral leadership, and we’re not getting it from the vast majority of our bishops.

However, if you look closely at history (and I’ve read enough of your posts over the years to know that you do), you’ll find that, almost without exception, the moral revivals of history have come from the ground up. Jesus Himself faced the same predicament: he could have been born a Pharisee or a Sadducee and “laid down the law” (almost literally). Instead, He came–alone–out of the most backwater place in Israel and taught those who knew they didn’t have the “right requirements” to be leaders.

My point should be obvious: I believe that God has commissioned the laity to ignite a moral revolution in our day. For whatever reason–and speculation is only that–the Hierarchy is either unable or unwilling to institute the disciplines necessary to accomplish the renewal. That means that either we sit here and watch the world go to hell around us, or we do what has to be done. I vote that we roll up our sleeves and show the bishops how it’s done.

By: RandyGritter

RandyGritter — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:57:43 +0000

It is interesting how the drinking and driving ads have never been labeled as intolerant. Part of the reason I suspect is because people can see the danger drinking and driving poses to others. Now immoral sexual behaviour is hardly without victims. People get hurt all the time. Still the illusion that it is a victimless crime is pretty strong. People once said that about drinking and driving. Most now know that is not true.

Maybe we need ads where we show children whose families were destroyed by sexual sin. Maybe show teens who committed suicide because someone abused their feelings to get some sexual pleasure. Maybe show people with anoxeria tell how the pornographic culture destroy their self esteem. There are plenty of casualties but they are not as graphic as bodies being removed from a car wreck. With sexual sin most of the time you can just say it was the other person’s own dumb fault for expecting more from you. It is a hard case to make with car accidents.

By: dennisofraleigh

dennisofraleigh — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 13:37:30 +0000

How about starting with more Catholic Bishops (shephards of the flock, chief teachers of the Church, etc.) being “willing to look foolish for the sake of the Gospel?” What we get more often, instead, are timid, one-bullet Deputy Barney Fifes who would rather duck behind their desks at the approach of a Catholic “pro-choice” politician than call that peron to account by name for their scandalous very un-Catholic voting conduct on the floor of the House or Senate. It makes it doubly hard for us layfolk to take on these rascals when their Bishops demonstrate no great willingness to do what is right and take the worst offenders (they know who they are) “back behind the woodshed” (as they say down in these parts).