Pfleger to Catholic Church in 1992 2002: “[H]ave the balls to fire me”
I updated the Obama preachers of hate compendium with the statement today from the Archdiocese of Chicago condemning Rev. Michael Pfleger’s latest race-baiting sermon at Trinity United Church of Christ.
But this one deserves a separate post. Pfleger has been taunting the Catholic Church leaders to cut him loose for years. And they haven’t had the guts to follow through. Jill Stanek’s been on the case for a long time:
Looks like Catholics against Pfleger will have to redouble their efforts.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Southern Appeal » Paging Cardinal George
- Michelle Malkin » Pfleger: “America is the greatest sin against God;” new “statement” to come?
- Michelle Malkin » Awwwww: Sniveling Michael Pfleger needs a wah-mbulance Update: Finally, a suspension…to “reflect”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Barack Obama
Pundit & Pundette
» Westboro haters have enough to go around for everyone
Pundit & Pundette
» Guess what? Hasan frequented strip clubLegal Insurrection
» Pelosi's Abortion Land Mine ExplodesRiehl World View
» Holder Cares About CAIRStop The ACLU
» Hasan Tried To Contact al Qaeda. Sounds Like A Jihadi To MeNewsBusters.org
» Matthews on Ft. Hood Suspect Warning Signal: 'That's Not a Crime to Call al Qaeda, Is It?'Ed Driscoll
» Go Flag Yourself, Mr. President!
Hey Pfleger, don’t you have the balls to quit?
Man oh Man oh Man. This Priest is a huge mess. They need to grow a backbone, and cut him loose.
this is beyond ridiculous! now how am i going to convince my twenty something sons to go back to mass?
so much for moral authority……….
I could barely read this since I’m white and I’m still crying and clinging to my guns… I need a hug…
Pfleger looks like he has severe mental problems and he cares nothing of spirit, only money and power.
What a disgrace…
libocrat – I think his voice that waffles between whispery and screeching kinda proves he is indeed lacking the boy parts you speak of.
If he has boy parts, I bet they’re angry… being attached to him…
A total embarrassment to me as a Catholic. Time for him to be removed permanently. Looks like the archbishop knows this guy is a loaded gun and won’t do anything about him.
I’m not a Catholic, but how does the Church put up with this? Is it as hard to ‘fire’ a priest as it is to ‘fire’ a worthless teacher in the teacher’s union?
L
T
Talk about entitlement.
Maybe you should take his recommendation and kudos Mrs.Malkin for that, it’s going to spread like wildfire.
As disgusting as this may sound, all he had to do was molest a young boy or 2, then he would have had what he wanted.
Then again he could’ve quit too. But I guess he doesn’t have the guts either.
And my wife wonders why I have a problem with the Catholic Church in particular and religion in general. He’s the most extreme version of the nut cases I’ve dealt with.
Oh Lord? Come quick, we need you!!!
Agreed.
Any priest unwilling or unable to fulfill the duties of his vocation (health problems and old age not withstanding, of course) should be defrocked and removed from the priesthood.
The thing you have to remember is, like any other group, Catholics have liberals, too.
Outrageous liberals. Pro-abortion. Pro-illegal immigration. People who claim to be Catholic but stand in direct opposition to what the Church teaches.
Needless to say, in certain circles – and according to liberals and the MSM – it is *these* CINOs who represent the Church and not folks like me, or priests who are faithful to the Church’s teachings.
Pfleger has pflagrantly pflaunted his Pfilth and his contempt for the Catholic Church long enough… Pfly away now little Pfleger you piece of Pflegm! and DLTDHYITAOTWO!
The article you reference say the quote came from 2002 NOT 1992. You may wan to change your title…
I hate to say this, but given how slow to act the Catholic Church was on the abuse scandal, doing nothing about Father Kookoo bananas yet isn’t that shocking.
The most sickening thing about this deranged priest is how the liberal media has already come up with an excuse for Phlegler. Alan Colmes, the NBC crowd and Frank Rich have already started the garbage about how McCain must apologize for Hagee. Of course, Hagee is not McCain’s pastor and never was. McCain never dedicated a book to Hagee or treated him as a father figure as Obama did with Wright. Nor did McCain ever direct earmarks to Hagee as Obama did with Phlegler. But the liberal media is determined to elect Obama and if they have to lie about McCain, then this is precisely what they will do.
Maybe if he was a confirmed pedophile…
Oh wait.
How does the Roman Catholic Church in Cicago keep its 501 c3 status?
Where
s the ACLU when we need it?!!!!!!!1
…..Chicago
Where’s…..
The Vanilla Ice of preachers.
Pfleger has pflagrantly pflaunted his Pfilth
Pfupferin pfuccapfapfh!
The Catholic Church as we all know is dealing with a lot of lack of moral issues where some of their priests are concerned. I would like to know when politics became the precedence for a “sermon” over God.
Now let’s all kiss the hand of the Pope. Though shall have no false gods… Oh sorry that was one of God’s commandments not the Pope’s…
God, please forgive them and have mercy on the USA.
It’s really difficult to fire a priest. First off, he’s only violated a question of discipline, and not of doctrine (so far as I know), so he can’t be tried for heresy, which would make things a lot simpler. He’s only violating a John Paul II directive against Priests getting too entangled in politics; this principle has been thoroughly upheld by Benedict in Deus Caritas Est. Fr. Pfleger is clearly in the wrong, but it isn’t clear that there are yet canon-legal grounds for defrocking him.
There are also practical reasons not to send him away from St. Sabina. As bad as he may be at that Church, he could do even more harm if he were excommunicated. The validity and liceity of the sacraments that he preforms is not impeded by his political activity; if he left and took Black Catholics with him, we would have another schismatic Church. The hierarchy has always been willing to tolerate a lot for the sake of unity; we already have enough right-wing schismatics, we want to avoid so much as possible left-wing schisms.
Moving him might not work either. If he were a religious (e.g., Franciscan), he’d have a provincial who could transfer him to the middle of nowhere, where he wouldn’t be able to access the press Because he’s secular clergy, he can’t be transferred outside of the Chicago Arch-diocese, unless another diocese wants him, which probably isn’t the case, which means he can’t be removed from the press. The best option would be if a diocese in Africa were willing to take him; this way, he could look good leaving and the diocese wouldn’t look bad getting rid of him. But, the hierarchy is in a really tough spot here.
#20
Good one, Potsandpans!
I wonder, though. Why is Pfleger, who claims to be a man of God, apparantly not worried about what God will think of his actions?
He should be more worried about God “firing” him than the Catholic Church doing it.
In essence, he is exactly the sort that the New Testament warns us about.
This isn’t the first time that Pfleger has been involved in something like this. Now is the time to go past a wrist slap and fire him. Everyone, please feel free to contact the Archdiocese of Chicago.
He probably brings in too much money from his brainwashed sheeple for the Church to get rid of him.
123me I agree full heartily. After all the Catholic church is the richest corporation in the world.
Disclaimer, bad poetry written by a no talent hack, ME.
It’s Barack Obama
Waitin’ for the bus to run over mama.
He talks about Hope, Change and Unity
But claims to not know a damn thing ’bout what’s happenin’ in his community
Then there’s wife Michelle
Trapped in her own personal hell.
Does Rev Wright
Think up this shit all night?
A Chicago Catholic Priest
Who’s quite the beast
San Fran Nan
Is thankin’ Iran
It’s a conflagration
Of people who hate this nation
Let’s keep in mind that this clown in no way represents the Catholic church. I wish they would defrock him. He’s an absolute disgrace. My father said St. Sabina’s used to be a nice parrish in the 30’s when he was a kid in Chicago at St. Raphael’s. Times sometimes change for the worse.
Wow. I almost didn’t believe this.
Wow. “The balls to fire me.” … He must be so proud. And here I thought that a man of God, the Rev Wright went too far when he used the name of God in vain “Nah nah nah, God damn America!” at the pulpit.
This is truly unbelievable.
Sorry jroberts, if the catholic church was actually operated by spiritual followers of Christ, he would have been dismissed years ago and so would every sexually perverse “priest”.
No organization of any faith that professes to believe in GOD could ever allow someone who is RACIST, BIGOTED or a RAPIST to “teach” others or represent the church. Anyone participating in representing the church must be held to the highest standards or be removed. The teaching s of the Bible far out way any internal church “rules” if it is truly a “church” (get my point?).
Would you want a child molester teaching people how to abstain from the temptation of SEX???? DUH!
He is a disgrace.
I wish they would remove him.
He kinda does represent the Catholic Church. Until at some point that his actions are not tolerated any longer, he represents the church every day because of who he is. A Revered in the Catholic Church.
Obams’s church, and those they let in it, make me sick.
I forgot, it is OK for them to hate.
Unfortunately as long as Pfleger is under the Chicago Archdiocese (or any other diocese he represents the catholic church. Just as every police officer represents their precinct, etc.
Perhaps we should encourage Pfleger, Wright and others to continue. Send copies of their sermons and screeds to everyone! Send two copies. Send copies of Michelle Hussein Obama’s speeches. Send Susan Sarandon.
And if riots do break out you’ll have DVDs to watch.
Feel the Love.
I couldn’t fathom why Pfeger and Wright, would air their views so publicly, knowing full well that it could harm their candidate in the general election. Then it hit me, many have said that it’s almost as if they wanted to derail Obama’s campaign. Well if it did affect how people vote, wouldn’t that fit perfectly into their narrative, that ‘whitey’ is still keeping the black man down. After all, if Obama did win the Presidency, it would be hard to blame ‘whitey’ for everything that ails them then. Just a thought.
I know of a pastor who had a 1 time encounter (affair) 6 years ago and it came out last year and the day the news broke his Synod asked for his resignation and it was rendered immediately.
There is an oath that our Priest, Reverends, and Pastors take upon being ordained and it does not just pertain to moral issues. We look to our spiritual leaders for God’s guidance and wisdom. When they cease to discern God’s will for the community as a whole they need to be removed.
I’m glad he’s a priest, that means no little Pflegers running around. What a king-sized ass.
And when liberal say something this asinine about oil companies or “windfall profits”, Republicans get up in arms.
That’s a joke.
This guy – I won’t call him a priest anymore – is being covered for by liberal CINOs, liberal bishops, and liberal media members who like him because he fits the template.
He’s full of crap.
As to 501(c)3 status, the only time it’s threatened is when someone in an organization does something that supports, reflects, or remotely resembles supporting a conservative or the GOP.
When liberals do it, it’s no big deal. Think of Code Pink.
flmom – even Reverends and Priests like their 15 minutes (and then some) of fame!
Exactly. If Obama, a black man, wins the presidency, then what does this say about the people as you say that shout this hate every sunday?
I wonder how much Obama’s church gets a week. Enough to spend a million dollars for a home for Rev Wright?
Even if he wasn’t a priest, I don’t think he’d be interested bringing children into the world. You have to like girls for that to happen.
Just a note to put the “corporation” comments into a better perspective…
Rome IS the richest country in the world because it IS the catholic church (to the best of my knowledge). Many “priests” in the US are actually foreign ambassadors of ROME and do not fall under the jurisdiction of our laws.
Thank you JaimeD!
I wonder if Obama thought that his connections to Pfleger would help him with the Catholic vote, or was Phleger just the crazy white guy hanging around Trinity’s attic?
Social Question: It’s no secret that many whites have historically been entertained by the whole “shuck and jive” (NY Attorney General Andrew Cuomo’s words, not mine) thing. From the minstrel show days to todays black comedy hours and sitcoms, whites have always shown up en mass to be entertained by “black culture.”
Are blacks as easily entertained when white people try to to the same thing…from Al Jolson’s day to today’s Hillary Clinton, Al Gore and Michael Pfleger black routines in the pulpit? The Trinity Church audience appeared to be entertained.
Vatican City is a sovereign nation, and Pleger is a representative of that country. His diplomatic status should be recinded.
As I recall several years ago he was demonstrating against a gun store and kind of sort of implied that the owner of the store should be “snuffed out,” or something to that effect. If talking about murder in such a cavalier manner doesn’t get the attention of his superiors in the Church it would be hard to imagine that this would.
Say, maybe the church can transfer him to a brand new church in the Amazon rainforest to preach to the new indigenous tribe they just found down there. I wonder what the natives would think of Father Pfleger??? (Of course it would be cruel and inhuman to expose folks in that tribe to the likes of this guy…)
He will never get fired; the Catholic Church is a main defender of illegal aliens; Catholic Bishops promote disloyal attitudes against American foreign policy, they do nothing significant about Catholic politicians who are pro-abortion, why would they discipline this guy. Fifty years ago, when the Church was in the forefront of the fight against Communism, this joker would never be able to get away with the stuff he does now.
Hahahaha! The ignorance here is really entertaining.
That photo of Pfleger reminds me of one I saw of Ted Bundy…
#47 – See Vanilla Ice. The answer is “no”.
I am wondering when that trinity church will check for all video cameras so this type of stuff doesn’t get out again? The video’s I have seen, seem to show alot of the congregation in agreement with the message given. Sad state of affairs!
L
The Catholic Church in America is not in sync with the Vatican. Which is why they will not remove Phleger.
Apologies up front for what will take up a lot of space, but I think the point to be made is very relevant.
Not long ago, the Catholic League criticized the Obama campaign, specifically noting that those Catholics that supported Obama were taking positions against Church doctrine in the areas of abortion and stem cell research, to name two.
Obama did not respond directly, but his Catholic advisors came out swinging. Phleger was one of the signatories to the response.
The letter itself received little publicity. And that is a shame. The content of the letter is stunning in its attempts to morally equivocate abortion with others wrongs, and its attempts to justify abortion through a tortured justification offsetting the wrongs of abortion with “good credits” that Obama has accumulated.
The point of publishing the letter in this thread is to provide a glimpse into Phleger’s support base and the mindset of the heirarchy of the Church in the US that justifies ignoring Church doctrine to strike a bargain with the devil for some perceived greater good.
The emphasis in the letter is mine.
It is the epitome of hypocrisy for these “good Catholics” to rail against abortion and the Republicans failure to stop it, while each one of them is an ardent pro choice proponent who has used their resources and influence to fight any efforts to outlaw abortion.
This is the mentality that creates the Phlegers of the world. And it is the mentality that explains how far the American Church has strayed from Rome.
Forgot to post the link to the letter:
http://www.catholicleague.org/images/upload/image_200805085328.pdf
I couldn’t agree more. The fact that the letter is signed by three Senators who not only support abortion, but have consistently and vehemently objected to SCOTUS candidates who may possibly overturn Roe v. Wade — and now have the unmitigated dishonesty to blame failure to end abortion on Republicans — is just flat out mind-boggling in its dishonesty.
I can remember when someone like Wrong and Flugger showing up in a campaign like this would sink the canidate; he would be toast. Barack Hussein Obama doesen’t seem to be hurt by them. In fact, when something like this surfaces, his support and bankroll goes up. Instead of hindering him, they seemed to be enhancing his canidancy.
Contrary to what some believe, I don’t think they’re trying to keep him out of the Whitehouse so they can keep blaming whitey for keeping the black race down.
I think it’s possible they saw how people were drawn to B. Hussein after the Wrong debacle and decided to see if another episode would do the same. Of course, I could be wrong, but that’s my opinion. After all, anything possible now days. Don’t be surprised to see one of them as Chaplin of the Whitehouse.
Jim M.
Thanks for the link, this is moral equivalence at it’s finest or worst, hard to tell which.
The thing that really struck me personally was the discussion of “the sanctity of sex”. They sanctify sex while dismissing the sanctity of life. Truly remarkable in its moral myopia.
Actually, he does. As long as they pay him to be a Catholic priest, he represents the Catholic church.
RE:#54-signatures:
Will you look at the number of PRO-DEATH -Roman C.- Congress members that are from the sanctuary state of CA!!!!
North Carolina- you’re looking better and better!
I don’t think Pfleger would last very long in the Diocese of Pittsburgh or the Archdiocese of Washington DC, thank God we have slightly more conservative Bishops driving the wagon…
By the way, I think Pfleger left the Church long ago. He’s no more a Catholic than Castro. In fact, I think he’s insane and should be cared for at some institution.
Stop tarring with the broad bush.
ENough Catholic Bashing.
Or do you want me to equate all Protestest wit hthe REVERN Jesse Jackson, Swaggert, and lately the guy who was caught in a gay sex scandal at a huge protestan church rihg int the heart of “Focus on the Family” terriroty?
I guess that means all you protestants go to churches run by closeted gays, bigots and race baiting hate mongerers.
FYI: There ARE Bishops who deny politicians eucharist due to their pro- abortion work, there ARE bishops who fire priests of pederasty, there ARE bishops who demand fidelity to God first and foremost.
But they never seem to be in the headlines.
You should be ashamed of yourselves for doing what liberals do – overly broad and BIGOTED talk about Catholics and Catholicism.
This means YOU cf, and others smearing the entire church due to the actions of a few radicals and weak handed Cardinals.
XBlade – so Swaggert Haggerd represent Fundamental Protestantism with the sex scandals, gay prostitutes, methamphetamine use?
No? Then STHU with your bigoted Catholic bashing.
Coloradan, this thread is nothing compared to when the Pope was in our country.
The clear trend in both the Catholic church and the protestant ones is they want to keep the coffers open even if that risks child molestation, or illegal immigrants…they can’t afford to throw out bad reverends and priests like they should…I wish it were better
He still might be God willing. We are hearing talk that these revelations are not hurting his numbers. What numbers? These are Democratic Activist-Left Wing- controlled caucusus that Obama took big. His primary elections tended to be smaller.
How it plays out in the general we won’t know until after the conventions. I can think of very few elections from 1968 on where the Democrats did not start out far ahead of the Republican only to see the gap narrow all summer & fall. Jimmie Carter started 1980 with a thirty point lead over Ronald Reagan.
Don’t give up the Ghost yet good people. The Magic Negro may implode yet. Of course with that big mouth of his Juan McCain might too.
Zorro,
Funny you should mention Pittsburgh. Yes, the “Burgh” and Philly do have more conservative Bishops. Pittsburgh, more so than Philly, is still a pretty conservative town in terms of values.
What I found interesting is the signatories to the letter. Note that you have signers openly noting their affiliations with colleges and Univertities:
Boston College
University of Toledo
Notre Dame
Georgetown
Loyola
Holy Cross
Xavier
Just about every major Catholic institution is represented there. But, there are two individuals on the list who don’t mention their affiliations: Nicholas Cafardi and Donald Guter. These gentlemen just happen to be the former Dean and current Dean, respectively, of Duquesne University School of Law in Pittsburgh. Another Catholic Institution.
One can only speculate why they chose to keep their affiliations with Duquesne off the list, while no one else had an issue with it. My guess is that either Duquesne informed them that they were not to disclose their involvement, or that they surmised it would not be wise to broadcast their liberal Catholic views in light of the conservative Catholic views of their hometown.
Having ties with Duquesne, I can tell you that I was most unplesantly surprised to dig up this information. And I am certain if the people of Pittsburgh and other Duquesne alumni were made aware of this, it generally would not be viewed in a positive light.
C’mon people…you’re missing the opportunity here. A man with this kind of revolutionary zeal needs a pulpit where he can bring some meaningful change…and since the catholic church is multi-national, I’m thinking Paraguay, Uruguay…you know, one of those places where he can really show some cojones of his own. I’d pay the plane fare!
Proxy pure and simple.
Here’s an Obama insider that up and ‘quits’ Obama’s campaign team about two weeks ago. Then he makes sure to get on TV retelling history about Hillary in New Hamshire’s primary. Or was it Vermont? And he makes it out to be 1) ALL ABOUT OBAMA. 2) ALL ABOUT HILL BEING A RACIST.
Excuse me, but Obama was not the most important challenger to Hillary at the time. Nor was he the only other candidate.
And because he’s ‘quit’ Obama’s campaign Obama has cover. So Obama does the BadMan act. Which is sure become a well practiced feature of every Obama campaign stop. Obama will get real good at rephrasing his proxy on the way to comdemning his proxy.
So O-man gets to have it two ways. And Proxy is now another famous guy, sure to be lionized everywhere lunkheads devolve.
Of course, you may want to learn his name, but I rather to call him by his type, Proxy, and leave it go at that.
This is Obama’s standard handiwork. Expect to see it and parallel constructions in all he does.
Jim, it is good to expose the leftist within the Church. In this case (your comment above with signatures) they have exposed themselves.
During the Iran Contra affair, a connection to the Maryknoll Nuns (of all groups) to the central American communist movement was exposed (wire taps, surveillance). Communism is evil no matter who introduces the idea, Danny Ortega or far left radical preachers from Obama’s Chicago. The light of day is the best disinfectant. Bishop David Zubik is a great person and will soon “re-focus” all those involved. The Church needs to preach the Gospel. Everything else will follow.
I think this Pfleger nut is about to exit the scene, stage left. If Francis Cardinal George, Archbishop of Chicago fails to act this time, he’ll be gone as well.
What, exactly, would make the dean and former dean liberal Catholics for signing that letter? If you leave aside the pro-abortion congressmen who signed, there’s nothing objectionable about that letter. It is the case that Catholic social teaching extends to a lot of issues other than abortion (see, e.g., rerum novarum or deus caritas est), and it is also the case that the Republican party has talked a lot about abortion without doing anything. A Catholic is perfectly free to consider issues(such as those brought up in rerum novarum and deus caritas est) other than abortion in making a decision about which candidate to support. If the Republican party had given Catholics any reason to believe they would really end abortion, then perhaps there would be some obligation for Catholics to support the GOP.
I’m not saying it’s right of them to support Obama – even with most of the rest of Catholic social justice teaching on his side, he seems perhaps too pro-abortion. I am saying that it’s not necessarily the case that they’re violating Catholic teaching by supporting him and not the Republican party, at least, not so long as the Republican party continues to lack the will to do more than talk about abortion; especially given that the Republican party tends to disagree with Catholic teaching on economics and on war and the death penalty (though the last two aren’t exact comparisons to abortion, since war and the death penalty are theoretically justifiable, whereas abortion isn’t).
Are you making that claim as a Catholic or as a conservative American? I’m not disagreeing with you, Marxist communism and any derivatives that maintain dialectical materialism are evil. If you’re making that claim as a Catholic, I hope you also remember that papal condemnations of socialism find capitalism damnable as well, and for the same reason of materialist reductionism. You really ought to read rerum novarum.
I say it as an American who fought communism and remembers a Pope who fought communism as well.
No doubt capitalism has a dark side. We see it everyday with real estate scandals, deceitful sales tactics etc. That is why we should all strive to treat each other as we, ourselves, would like to be treated.
You’ve got to be kidding. This letter was written in response to criticism of Catholics who support abortion.
Again, you’ve got to be kidding.
Read the letter. And the comments that accompany it. If you see nothing objectionable in that letter, I should ask which signature is yours.
Again…
You really need to go back and look at just who in Congress blocked legislation on the subject and blocked the appointnent of judges who would not legislate from the bench. And while you’re at it, take a look at the Constitution. There is a very good argument that the issue of abortion is not a federal (Article 10) but a state issue. That would require action at the state, not the federal, level.
Then take a look at federal court decisions by activist judges (Carter and Clinton appointees mostly) have provided that abortion is a RIGHT (seemed to have missed that in the Bill of Rights) and who have blocked any attempts to overturn Roe v. Wade.
As for your attempt to play the moral equivalence card, that dog won’t hunt. Maybe it’s just me, but Church doctrine set forth as an extention of one of the Commandments carries a bit more weight than doctrine of purely a social nature.
If the Catholic Church doesn’t fire pedophile priests why should anyone expect it to fire lefty loony priests? Father Pfleger was making an empty taunt, knowing he would not be taken up on his challenge. After all, who has the Catholic Church fired? Anybody?
Really? How is
supporting abortion? It sounds more like people who are opposed to abortion and pissed at 30 years of the GOP promising to act and not doing anything.
First, what exactly do you mean by moral equivalence card. I did not draw any equivalence between abortion and supporting war or the death penalty. I specifically said to the contrary that abortion is not theoretically justifiable, but war and the death penalty are, even if not contemporarily. I did draw an equivalence between politicans who say they’re for abortion and vote accordingly and those who say they’re against abortion and don’t do anything. The end result is still more abortions. Second, Catholic doctrine on war, the death penalty, economic policies, etc. are all firmly rooted in Catholic belief in the dignity of human life, just as our belief concerning abortion. God commands things because they are just, not the other way around (which is the Occamite and then Lutheran/Calvinist position); murder and abortion are unjust because of human dignity.
So, how much room are you allowing for jurisprudential opinions to override moral ones? If the moral issue can be overridden by what opinion one has of the law, then what makes the letter signers liberal Catholics (and not just liberal Americans) at all? I think you and the letter signers are equally liberal Catholics, though you’re a conservative American. The conservative Catholic position, which I hold, is that there ought be no abortions. The jurisprudential question is an entirely separate issue. I
Also, Jim M., all the Democrats have done to block GOP legislation is threaten to filibuster. I’m from South Carolina. We know about filibusters. They don’t work. Even old Strom could talk for something like 24 hours and 15 minutes, and at the end of the day (well, not the same day
) the legislation still gets passed. The GOP never even forced the Democrats to actually filibuster.
Obviously, the Republicans feel very strongly about ending abortion if the only way to stop them is to threaten to talk for a while.
.
I’m not a Catholic, but the Catholics, by reason of the circumstances of my childhood, have always had my interest and sympathy.
Seems to me that the American branch at least is seriously hosed.
I know serious fundamental believers who can’t stand to go to church anymore — on the basis that the church doesn’t seem to take even the commandments seriously, let alone the tenets of Catholicism.
Can’t say as I really know the details … but from my vantage point it doesn’t look good.
These are some of the most morally serious people of my acquaintance.
Read it any way you like. We appear to be operating at two completely different depths. You might want to take another look at your “facts” and take another look at the issues raised rather than selectively picking those bits and pieces that neatly fit into your preconceived conclusions. For example, the Democrats did a little more than “threaten to filibuster”.
I believe by your comments you are clearly in the same camp as the signatories on that letter. And no amount of reason is going to stop the misdirection and justification in supporting a ticket that is clearly in favor of abortion. You would concede that “loss” to either teach the other guys a lesson or to advance other interests that are to you on a morally equivalent plane. In that regard, the Roman Catholic Church (the topic of discussion here) takes a contrary view.
Keep spinning if you like, but all the rationalization, justification and attempts to stick a square moral peg into a politically expedient round hole are not going to change what is right, and what is wrong.
If you have to go that far out on a limb to justify supporting Obama, you may want to ask yourself what other values and principles you are willing to sacrifice to rationalize your support for this seriously flawed candidate, and what other character flaws in the man you are willing to continue to ignore or excuse.
And here I thought human sacrifice went out of style long ago. Apparently, it is no longer a moral outrage when the end justifies the means.
I specifically said that those other interests are not morally equivalent. I said they’re grounded in the same moral principle in Catholic theology. That’s different. Catholic teaching on fornication and masturbation are grounded in the same sexual ethic, but one is a considerably graver sin than the other. I’m specifically, explicitly, and directly appealing to the gradation of moral evil. If you think I’m claiming an equivalency and not an analogy of proportion, then you’re either illiterate or you don’t grant the gradation of evil.
Yes, we are looking at this at two different levels. I’m looking at what the GOP has done, and you’re looking at what the GOP has said.
There are two questions: 1) What has the Republican party actually done to prevent/ban abortion? To the pro-Obama Catholics, and many other more politically centrist or right-win Catholics, it’s difficult to see that they’ve done anything, even when they briefly had both houses of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and (I think) the majority of governorships. It’s hard to buy the “Oh, but the Democrats’ stopped us” line, when The GOP can pass the Bush tax cuts, the Patriot act, the Iraq war, etc., but they can’t do anything about people killing babies. This isn’t about choosing a pro-abortion party to teach the pro-life party a lesson, this is about choosing between an openly pro-abortion party and an effectively pro-abortion party.
2) Why should anyone believe John McCain and the Republican party will do anything to end abortion? Obama seems excessively pro-abortion, even by Democratic party standards; McCain could make this an issue. Why hasn’t he? And if he does, why should anyone believe he’ll do something? I think the over-whelming majority of “liberal” Catholics (myself included), even in union, yellow-dog democrat families, would vote for McCain if McCain could be trusted to do something about abortion.
And let me reiterate. I’m not saying the parties are morally equivalent because the Democrats are pro-killing babies, but anti-war, etc. I’m saying the parties are equivalent on the abortion issue because as near as I can tell from what they’ve done, and not what they’ve said, they seem to both be in favor of killing babies. All the rhetoric in the world doesn’t amount to anything if Republicans are willing to put more effort into invading Iraq than into not killing babies.
The Democrap party is a safe harbor for the malicious freaks of the world. Phleger is one who thinks he can make racist rants as long as he is tarring his own group. He is one more piece of evidence that Obama has no judgement, no vision, no acumen, and no – zero – qualifications to lead this nation.
Something really wrong with this guy. For one thing, I’m sure that swearing from the pulpit would turn me off–let alond the things hs says. Can’t imagine my grandkids sitting there listening to this guy. Even if they don’t fire him, they need to put him in some monastic order that demands continual silence.
The Catholic Church does not fire anyone. They conceal the pedophile priests and the sanctuary activist priests.
The only way the Catholic Church in America is going to be forced to do anything is for all good and faithful Catholics to STOP attending their church services, stop putting money in the basket, and have their own, personal weekly talk with God in their own homes for a year or so. The Catholic Church in America would soon dry up, and voices would be raised to high heaven for the “organization” to start policing itself. The “organization” is bankrupt spiritually already – they think with the pocketbook – they plan with the pocketbook – they continue to shelter child molesters and this kind of hate-filled deviant to the detriment of the followers of Christ.
It wouldn’t take much time at all. The sad thing is that the true, modest, Christ following priests that are still out there might have to suffer for a while.
We can follow Christ without them. Believe it. Believe in yourselves.
fixed it for ya.
Other suggestions: Say the rosary with your family, pray and read from the Bible (I know, the Catholic Church has always told us that they are needed to “interpret” the Bible for us, but it’s not that hard. You can do it.) Take your tithe and give it to a soup kitchen, the local food bank, the local Meals on Wheels, the local Hospice, etc. These organizations are doing things FOR people, not sending the money on to the ORGANIZATION to spend on legal fees and court costs. (Can you tell I’ve about had it with my church?!!)
If you keep repeating tht to yourself, you just may believe it someday.
I won’t get into the fact that you totally ignored the point that the issue is more of a state issue under the Constitution. And I won’t get into the fact that the Republicans were successful in the long battle to ban partial birth abortion, even in light of Supreme Court precedent that proclaimed abortion as a Constitutional “right”. That among other initiatives vehememtly opposed by Democrats and liberal Catholics who part with the Church’s teachings when doctrine becomes inconvenient to follow.
It never ceases to amaze me as to the depth of denial and rationalization Obama supporters will go to back their candidate. While your postings here may assuage the deep guilt you harbor in supporting opposed to your moral beliefs, they come across to most of us as nothing more than a transparent delusion constructed to protect your own conscience. And at the same time is an object lesson in how those without strong convictions, values and morals will readily sacrifice a core conviction for what they claim to be a greater good. The epitome of the ends justifying the means for those of weak character.
Obama the “good christain”? His exposure to Christianity was molded by the likes of Wright and Phleger. A form of Christianity that excludes anyone not of a certain race, and rejects a god that open his arms to all races of mankind (that is one of the pillars of black liberation theology).
But you are certainly entitled to vote for whomever you want to teach those Republicans a lesson. And so what if you have to sacrifice some unborn children along the way; that’s just the price of admission into the Obama tent, and besides, those babies can’t vote anyway. Just remember, you will be voting your ticket, but you will not be voting your conscience. Your vote for Obama will be duly counted in the election, but your decision to abandon your moral principles will be counted in the next life.
Pfleger is an embarrassment to the Church, a left-wing Father Coughlin. One day he’s going to trip himself up, giving the Church the in it needs to get him out of there.
Since the dawn of my political awaking, when mormons in southern Idaho suggested that in the future (when I become a wage earner or property owner) I would have to give them ten percent of my earnings, property, etc., I have been mystified as to why church organizations enjoy tax exempt status. Theoretically it should be okay…the reality is that the abuse of the system is so rampant that blanket tax exempt status for religious organisations should be completely abandoned. Churches that protects pedophiles? Churches that give sanctuary to law-breakers? Churches that prey on old folks who don’t know how to protect their possessions? I don’t think so. At the very least, tax exemption should be limited to activities and costs that are related (with evidence) to charitable activities rendered to legal Americans (emphasis on the “legal”). This joker Pfleger only reinforces my beliefs.
P.S. Did I mention that atheists, who deserve a voice, might legitimately object to paying taxes that wouldn’t be there if churches paid a fair share of the USA tax?
One of the defense mechanisms employed by Obama supporters who also claim to be good Catholics and Christians is the perpetuation of the baseless whine that their support for Obama is justified in light of the Republican’s failure to do anything to address the issue of abortion. Not only is this position inconsistent with the facts, it conveniently ignores the concerted and very active efforts of Democrats in maintaining and expanding abortion “rights”. It is not enough that the “rights” exist, but the Democrats believe in and have lobbied for the government to fund the procedure. I can only imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth for a proposal to provide “free” firearms to all citizens to enable them to exercise their rights under the second amendment.
And what happened when the Republicans were successful in passing bans against partial birth abortions at the state level? The Democrats, including the purported Democratic nominee for president, threw every resource in their well funded arsenals to stop the ban of what is a heinous and barbaric procedure by any objective definition.
Yet, the “good Christians” seem only too willing to ignore Obama’s record on abortion (one of the few actual areas where a record exists of his views) for “the greater good”. What about his position on partial birth abortion?
If the Republicans did such a bad job on the issue, why have Democrats seized upon Republican efforts and accomplishments to garner support? And how on Earth does a person that claims to oppose abortion reconcile their support of Obama with the following communication (emphasis mine):
It is disingenuous in the extreme for an abortion opponent to claim they are justified in supporting Obama, particularly in light of Obama’s record.
Being vehemently opposed does not absolve the Republican party. There was vehement opposition to the free-soil and abolition movements, and that didn’t stop them 140 years ago. There was vehement opposition to the civil rights act and voting rights act. The fear of encountering vehement opposition isn’t an excuse for not doing anything.
You still haven’t said why I should believe McCain and/or a 2008 GOP-majority will do anything. The fact is, I can’t possibly vote my conscience. If I believed it were at all likely that a Republican president would act on abortion, I wouldn’t even consider voting for a Democrat. I’m not trying to teach anyone a lesson, other than that if Republicans want pro-life they should act pro-life. You keep on reading things into my argument that aren’t there. I didn’t call Obama a good Christian, I’m not sacrificing any babies. I’m just saying that abortion is just as legal after 6 years of a Republican congress and White House as it was before.
I have no reason to think that if I vote for Obama, I’ll be helping to elect a pro-abortion candidate at the expense of a pro-life one. I have a lot of reason to think I’d be voting for an overtly pro-abortion candidate at the expense of a covertly pro-abortion candidate.
I don’t care about bogus accusations of moral equivalence, abandoning my convictions, etc. Just tell me why, given the GOP’s past conduct, I should believe that a vote for McCain is a vote to end abortion.
And I don’t care about the constitutional question. A Catholic isn’t a liberal or conservative Catholic based on questions of civil law but on questions of theology. The morality of abortion has absolutely nothing to do with its legality.
Like I said, perhaps if you repeat it to yourself enough you’ll eventually believe what you are saying. For the rest of us, it is an amazing and revealing look into delusional rationalization.
Is there any reason not to believe what I’m saying? All you’re doing is accusing my of being delusional; this may be the case, but if it is, I would like some evidence to believe that I am. I’m too much of a Thomist to be biased in favor of presuming I’m delusional. Just let me know which claim is false:
1) Abortion is wrong.
2) Obama is pro-abortion, and on that point, is wrong.
3) The GOP has consistently claimed to be pro-life.
4) The GOP could’ve banned abortion, between 1/2005 and 1/2007 when they controlled Congress, the White House, maybe the Supreme Court, and the majority of state governor-ships.
5) The GOP didn’t ban or seriously restrict abortion, or even try very hard.
6) There’s no reason to believe that the next time they have power will be different from the last time.
7) There’s no reason to believe that the GOP is or will be de facto anti-abortion.
All I’m asking is to know why I should expect the GOP to end abortion. Please, give me a reason. I would be thrilled to be able to vote my conscience in November; as much as I disagree with the GOP on almost everything else, I wouldn’t hesitate to vote for them if I thought they’d end abortion. Give me some reason to believe. Please.
It doesn’t surprise me at all the catholic Church has not expelled this blacl preacher wannabee.
38 years ago Monday, My future wife and I went to her parish priest to ask to be married there. Since I am a Presbyterian, I was told I HAD to attend classes to convert to Catholicism or he would not allow us to be married in the church my wifes family had supported monetarily for years. I asked that for my wife, since she was Catholic and it mattered to her to be married in her church.
We were married in my church a month later and she hasn’t been to Mass since.
Oh, and by the way … this nonsense about voting for a party or person to prevent abortion is just that – nonsense. No President by himself can overturn Roe v Wade, and neither can any Congress or party. As long as we allow the Supreme Court to make law instead of interpreting the Constitution like they are supposed to do – it matters not which person or party is in “power”.
jroberts,
If you are serious in your request for information, I would be happy to pull some things together.
Bruce is right about one thing – it was the Supreme Court that recognized abortion as a right, and absent a Constitutional Amendment or action at the state level, only the Supreme Court can reverse itself. Which is why a candidate’s views on Supreme Court nominees are critical in the upcoming election.
With that said, the issue is not a Republican versus Democrat issue. There are more than a few Democrats that are pro-life, and more than a few Republicans who are pro-choice. If I recall correctly, the 3 recent Congressional elections in which Republicans lost long held seats were won by pro-life and pro Second Amendment Democrats.
You will get no argument from me on the disappontment with the Republican Party. Core principles have been abandoned and there has been a decided shift from Conservative values. As for McCain, I am no fan of his by any stretch of the imagination. For me, the decision on whether to vote for him or stay home in November may just boil down to his position on nominees for the Supreme Court.
Like I said, if you are truly interested in some information, I will pull it together.
I trust you aren’t laying all the blame for “vehement opposition” on the Republicans. History tells another tale.
Given the current cast of rumpswabs, you may be right, but with the Democrats, you are GUARANTEED to get a prolongation/increase of abortion and so called abortion rights.
Whatever you wish to say about the Republicans, they did fight to get the partial birth abortion ban passed, and at least you stand the chance of a tinker’s damn in getting a half decent appointment to the Supreme Court, which will undoubtedly have greater and longer term consequences for abortion than otherwise.
Why do you think all the abortion enthusiasts are in the Democrat party?
I am sorry to hear that you have this problem. One thing they should really consider is does not going to church and doing something else REALLY make you happy?
I’ve found out it doesn’t.
Secularism just doesn’t cut it.
How poorly Catholic leaders treat Blacks? That’s what this priest said according to the Jill Stanek article linked in Mrs. Malkin’s article?
What about Louis Farrahkan’s beloved Islam? Still taking Blacks as slaves. And Jeremiah Wright? Owns a big house and two Mercedes. Just think of the poverty he could eliminate by living a more humble lifestyle.
I really hate to see Catholic priest removed for a stance on politics because we need more priests.
Can’t Mr. Pfelger just simmer down? Because all of this mockery of Hilary and the idea it’s white people’s fault is sinful.