WashPost Slams Archbishop, Distorts Catholic Teaching


It never ceases to amaze me to see how ignorant The Washington Post is about Catholic teaching---the latest example being staff writer Peter Slevin's liberally biased slam against Abp. Raymond Burke on p. A2 of the May 29 edition. The ignorance (or anti-Catholicism?) is clear in the very first sentence, which is false, in the first paragraph. "When it comes to expressing his views of church values, Roman Catholic Archbishop Raymond Burke has a habit of making headlines, not always to the satisfaction of his flock," writes Slevin. These are not, of course, "his views." They are the views and stipulations of the Catholic Catechism, the Code of Canon Law, and numerous papal encyclicals that often teach definitively on certain matters. Slevin apparently never cracked the Catechism, and he apparently never Googled it because it is online, as is the Vatican, with all the relevant documents.

Abp. Burke has spoken out against abortion; against politicians who support abortion; against entertainers who support anti-Catholic teachings but also want to perform at Catholic functions; against using embryonic stem cells for research; and so on. And this is what apparently ticks Slevin and his editors off: A Catholic Bishop who actually tells his flock the Truth about Catholic teaching and how Catholics must strive to seek holiness and save their souls.

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Slevin further reveals his ignorance and liberal bias by relying on several liberal and wayward Catholics to comment on Abp. Burke. For instance, Slevin calls on Geri Redden, "a pro-choice former Catholic" to tell Post readers that Burke is "archaic and kind of an embarrassment. He seems to think he is back in the old days when he could really tell people how to live their lives." ... Hmm. It seems that the same could be said of Jesus Christ; he was "archaic ... old days" and He actually did "tell people how to live their lives." Sorry to disappoint Redden and The Post but that is what Christianity is all about: following the teachings of Jesus Christ as given to the world by Him, the apostles, and the Bible.

Slevin also relies on wayward Catholic Rep. David Obey (D-Wisc.), who, in one of his essays, says that Abp. Burke threatened "to use his ecclesiastical authority to punish me if I did not conform my voting record to his view of what Catholic dogma required." Again, "his view"? Apparently, the fine Congressman Obey doesn't know his basic Catechism either.

Slevin and his Post editors could have easily found many solid, faithful, honest and straightforward bishops and priests and laity to comment on Abp. Burke and the Church's moral teaching. But they didn't. They went the liberally biased route and left the false impression that religious figures are somehow not supposed to speak about public policy issues--------a long-held liberal view in direct contradiction to the Founding Fathers and to the precedent set by Christ Himself and the apostles.

Raymond Burke is a bishop, a shepherd. He has to tell his flock the way it is. He has to try to bring the lost sheep home. That is his duty. He cannot remain silent. The Washington Post and the liberal media don't like that, but they shouldn't expect Christians to shut up anytme soon---go ask the martyrs of the Coliseum.

Editor's Note: Photo of Abp. Burke via Wikipedia.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I am not catholic, but I do b

I am not catholic, but I do belive and try to follow the teaching of Jesus Christ. Sometimes I wish I could call down lightning to strike these unbelivers. After all , that is what they are. As with Sgt. York, a little lightning strike might go along ways.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

Amen bass...The majority of 

Amen bass...

The majority of leftists in this country along with the print and regular televised media agenda, only agree with the ACLU type of religion.

My way or the highway....

Which is non-religion if they have their way.

Despicable agenda IMHO.

It will eventually be their own down-fall...one way or the other.

They just don't get that the

They just don't get that the Catholic Church isn't a democracy, where members get to vote on the teachings of the Church. They may not like it. But, that's the way it is.

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

They don't get it because th

They don't get it because they have their own religion, which is an amalgam of various humanistic philosophies with one basic tenet: "The only absolute is that that those who believe in absolutes, other than this one, are evil."

Couldn't agree more, Chris

 Chris, your comment brought back memories of 25 years ago when I graduated from Andrean High, (Catholic) in Merrillville, IN and at our "Senior Dinner", one of the students was complaining about something with the Mass the Thursday before graduation and Sister Christopher in her big, booming, obnoxious voice said to this kid "Look Eric, this is not a democracy here and neither is the church and if you don't want to show up then fine, don't show up on Sunday either!", and she wasn't kidding.  This kid showed up halfway through the Mass and he wasn't allowed to walk on Sunday.  If I remember correctly, he was po'd that other ministers would be taking part in the service dragging it out in downtown Gary at the Cathederal (even though it was a Catholic school, at that time it was about 55% Catholic).  Knowing this kid, I would venture a guess he would be late for his "bong party", everybody has them!

I always do laugh at the press who don't get the fact that they can't have their way, although there are plenty of "cafeteria Catholics"-like my silly  cousin who is part of some group called "Catholics for Choice".  But she's the type the newspapers like.

Terri,Your story brought back

Terri,

Your story brought back memories of my parochial school days. If I had said something like that at Christ the King, Sister Lucina would have broken a year's supply of pointers over my head, before switching to rulers. Then she would have sent me to  principal, Sister Beatrice (nickname "Beat Us"), to let her have a crack at me... :)

The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.

- Arabian Proverb

Wow, where do I sign up?!

Wow, where do I sign up?!

"If their sins were as scarlet, they are now white as snow" Isaiah 1:18

Bellevue

I think Bellevue would work out nicely for ya Jason.

Facts, shmacts

threatened "to use his ecclesiastical authority to punish me if I did not conform my voting record to his view of what Catholic dogma required."

This statement pretty much sums up the liberal interpretation of how the Catholic church operates. "punish me", "his view" - these phrases suggest that it is the Archbishop himself who determines when a Catholic politician is acting in opposition to Catholic doctrine.

You are correct, Michael. "The Catechism of the Catholic Church" is available to anyone who wants to bother to read it in order to provide an insight into Catholic teaching. I find that the most vociferous critics of the Catholic church are those who were once practicing Catholics, but have since "fallen away". And the secular libs are more than happy to latch on to such people rather than actually doing the research for themselves. It doesn't matter who you are or what your position may be in American society - if you profess to be a Catholic, you should be faithful to the teachings of the Church.

I am a Christian- I am a Catholic--

I am a Christian- I am a Catholic--can someone get Slevin to play Christian and lion with me in a stadium somewhere? Oh, what fun we will have!

A little lightening up--on this thread

A little lightening up--on this thread

A Parrot Named Moses A burglar broke into a house one night. He shone his flashlight around,
looking for valuables. He picked up a CD player to place in his sack,
when a strange, disembodied voice echoed from the dark saying,
"Jesus is watching you."

He nearly jumped out of his skin, clicked his flashlight off, and froze.

When he heard nothing more after a bit, he shook his head and
continued. Just as he pulled the stereo out so he could disconnect
the wires, clear as a bell he heard, "Jesus is watching you."

Freaked out, he shined his light around frantically, looking for the
source of the voice. Finally, in the corner of the room, his
flashlight beam came to rest on a parrot.

"Did you say that?" he hissed at the parrot.

"Yep," the parrot confessed, then squawked, "I'm just trying to
warn you that he's watching you"

The burglar relaxed. "Warn me, huh? Who in the world are you?"

"Moses," replied the bird.

"Moses?" the burglar laughed. "What kind of people would name a
bird Moses?"

"The kind of people that would name a Rottweiler Jesus."

LOL misterb...I have heard th

LOL misterb...I have heard that long ago, forgot about it though.

Good one...

Nothing like laughter to soothe the soul.

I have come to understand the

I have come to understand the bias of certain stories, certain statements, but...seriously. Liberal bias because of the word "views"?

And did he threaten "to use his ecclesiastical authority to punish me if I did not conform my voting record to his view of what Catholic dogma required"?

Bal,What if i had a complain

Bal,

What if i had a complaint about my instructor and his views because i said 1+1=3 but my instructor said no 1+1=2; would the Post be biased if they reported both myself and my instructor as equally valid?

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.   

Religion is not math. There i

Religion is not math. There is more than one religion.

Bal, are you saying they ar

Bal, are you saying they are all correct?

Balboa

Well, just for fun, lets say we were counting in base 10.  As you know there are many bases available in mathematics.  Also for funsies, lets say we were talking about a Roman Catholic Bishop who was talking to a Roman Catholic politician. 

Try again, the point is that the doctrine of the church is objective just as is the math.  It's not just a point of view, it's doctrine.  Now there is no one twisting the politicians arm forcing him to continue to claim to be a Catholic, he can join another religion.

Supreme Court,  National Security,  Borders,  Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.   

Please read the article Bal

Bal - Please read the article linked by Michael.  It's a pure slam-fest.  It is everything Michael stated in his title - WashPost Slams Archbishop, Distorts Catholic Teaching.  That is the only point Michael was trying to make - and if you read the article it is obvious that is what Slevin did.  It's really a shame.  I have read a great deal of the Archbishops writings and what other good folks in the Church have had to say about him.  He is a very decent human being and very much Christ-centered and I find it amazing that anyone writing in the "On Faith" section would pursuit this insulting, erroneous angle that Slevin chose to take.  I really don't see any reason to be upset with Michael.  He just wrote a factual piece using text from the slanderous article.  Thanks for hearing me out -Hugh-

I'm gonna read it, but "views

I'm gonna read it, but "views"? A writer is "slamming" the Catholicism by using the word "views"? I'm just saying if you're going to write about this article slamming Catholicism, don't present your argument with word choice. Gimme something I can hang my hat on.

balboa - read the other paragraphs above, you mook

balboa - read the other paragraphs above, you mook. I understand your boogling eyeballs focused on the darker highlighted text in the lead in (then likely stopped reading)- how about parapgraphs 2,3,4 and 5 for " the PIN to hang your hat on " ? (so it conforms to the shape of your head of course).

Then you claim, after you're lying in your complaint about "view" being what the lead in uses for it's criticisms and outline of the bias ( being one of ten or twenty things pointed out)....

Ya see more than the word "view" in those lead in paragraphs above, you insane burbling doofus ? There are multiple paragraphs with differentiated complaints.

 Gawd, how did you get it down to the word "view" ?

 I'll say, it's likely the PIN SHAPED HOOK you need for your hat.

 Really, what the hell is wrong with you ? I keep telling myself, you're not really that stupid, you cannot actually be that stupid. I mean when it comes to movies you actually make comments that appear to have some sort of intelligence surrounding them.

 Are you just TRYING so hard to be a smart aleck, or are you really that dense ? That's all I really want to know. I want you to confirm that you are not trying to be a smart aleck jerk, and are really having what appears to me to be severe problems in comprehension. Well, are you goofing off, or are you serious ?

Ignorance

The Catholic Church in America and elsewhere began to crumble many years ago when it bent on its core principles. As can be seen from this story and some of the comments here, the church is viewed by many as an open society in which the individual can make up his/her own mind and live by his/her own rules. The Archbishop says "no", either you are a Catholic or you are not a Catholic, make your choice. The "progressives" hate this and, therefore, dislike the Archbishop. After all, he appears to represent a "conservative" point of view.  We can't have that now, can we?

NEVER,NEVER trust a liberal

God Bless Cardinal Burke

Last time I remember Bishops caving in to pressure from secularists, the Church later found itself having to explain why so many pedophiles had slipped through the ordination process.  Yeah, lets make that mistake again Slevin.

God bless Cardinal Burke.  He is an incredibly humble servant of Christ while at the same time, due to his gift of wisdom, a member of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signature (highest court of appeal in matters concerning the Church's tribunals) - a rare combination only possible through a long prayerful life coupled with self-sacrifice and grace.  One would think that bit of background would have somehow found it's way into an article about Burke in the "On Faith" section.  But no, this was an all out slam fest - Slevin is playing with fire.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention Mr. Chapman.

Michael Chapman

That was a very well written rebuttal to that liberal diatribe.

The Archbishop is not imposing his views, just simply following the teachings of Jesus Christ which is so eloquently spelled out in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Another Fidei Defensor!

Hurrah!

"The Truth is absolute.", Pope Benedict XVI

Realitive vs Absolute Morality

This is a perfect example of the new wishy, washy, relative morality vs. the Church's absolutes.  The Church does not change its doctrines on a whim. Just because something is trendy today, doesn't make it right.  The Bishop does not need to take a poll on which sound bite to use.  He is doing his assigned job, which is to teach Church doctrine.  The church is not a democracy. Get over it. 

Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend.  Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --- Groucho Marx

Look, I am sick to death of

Look, I am sick to death of all these "Catholics", like those quoted in the story, who want the Church to cater to their views and allow them to do whatever they want and still be Catholics. No one is forced to join the Catholic Church or to stay there.

When you want Italian food, you go to an Italian restaurant. You don't go to a Chinese restaurant, and complain because they don't serve Italian food! The teachings of the Catholic Church are not secret; they are well-known. Why someone would join the Church and then complain that they want women priests, married priests, divorce and abortion is beyond me. And why someone would join or stay in a Church whose teachings they disagree with is even farther out of my realm of understanding.

The people who complain are the ones who want to do what they want and still call themselves Catholics. Well, Abe Lincoln once posed the riddle: How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? The other person said 5. Lincoln said: Wrong. Four. Calling the tail a leg doesn't make it one. People can call themselves Catholic, but if they arent' following the teaching of the Church they are not Catholics. The Catholic Church is just the place they choose to go on Sundays.

motherbelt.......thank you, t

motherbelt...

....thank you, thank you, thank you.

You said it all...

Plus I hope I remember that great info. you posted about President Abe Lincoln...that is beautiful....too bad the leftists in this world do not or cannot or refuse to grasp that simple fact.

motherbelt, I think the probl

motherbelt, I think the problem is these Catholics in name only are born into a church, and see it as a social place...but are embarressed by some of the beliefs.  They don't have a testimony, but don't want to lose the social aspects so wish to change the church.  You hit the nail on the head, if a church took a poll on what they should believe, then its worthless. 

Just a couple points, and a q

Just a couple points, and a question ...

An old Jesuit once said to me that the worst thing to happen to the clergy was Hollywood. Years ago, Hollywood always portrayed priests as kind, meek, and gentle. As the old fellow said to me, that describes the sheep, not the shepherd. Sometimes the shepherd has to lead the sheep where they don’t want to go, and that’s why shepherds have those big sticks.

Also, some people claim they left the church because they didn’t like the priest. These same people would abandon their baseball team because they didn’t like the catcher. (Or my example: they would abandon America because they didn’t like the president. We’ve heard a lot of that recently, haven’t we?) That kind of person was going to leave anyway.

What I can’t understand is what the writer, Peter Slevin, thought he was accomplishing with this piece. First, Burke is in St. Louis, and this is a Washington Post article. Was Slevin encouraging St. Louis Catholics to oppose their bishop, or was he warning the DC diocese how good they had it? Burke is a hard ass. I know plenty of hard asses, and truth be told, I like most of them. What was the point of this piece?

What was the point of this

What was the point of this piece? - KC Mulville

The point was simply to badmouth the Catholic Church and one of its leaders. And like most of the MSM, Spelvin wants to show how "out of step with the times" the Church is. It drives them nuts that the Church doesn't change her teaching on divorce and abortion (I believe those are the two biggies) just because of public opinion. For me, the only surprise in that article was that he didn't have a quote from Frances Kissling (I think that's her name), the "spokesperson" of Catholics for Free Choice.

Folks let me get in, and sinc

Folks let me get in, and since we're discussing a specific religious doctrine, here are a couple two cents q's: Are Catholics Christian? Is Christianity a religion? Are the Seven Sacraments Biblical doctrine? Outside of the Seven Sacraments, will the Roman Catholic church function? How about excommunicating catholics, is it Biblical teaching? Did Jesus really made water into wine? Is the Pope really infallible?

This is a good start...What's next, Islam? Mormonism? Lot's to talk about. And if our basis to answer these questions are just "views" without any reference, I think we will be serve better if we're "silent". Bible- New and Old Testament should be our text, hence CHRISTianity. But then again, this is a forum where all are encouraged to practice Freedom of Expression. Who knows, you might be the next "convert"...

Regarding Lincoln's comment about calling a dog's tail a leg

When I was a teenager, I wrote this poem, one of my best, that addresses this:

To name a name
And say the name is true
Is not to name
The breath
that gave it due.

To name a name
And say the name is true
Is not to name
The
breath that gave it do.

To name a name
And say the name is true
Is not to name
The
BREATH that gave it dew.

(Sorry cannot get the formatting correct)

Not a Democrap or a lip-brawl, mostly a conserve-a-tiff. Famous words of elderly from movie "Moonstruck: "Somebody tell a joke" .judahisbenheard.com

What's worse: the deliberate

What's worse: the deliberate use of a non-story by the WaPo to bash Catholics and Catholicism or the supposedly Catholic politician who uses the Catholic Church's teachings and faith to further his ambitions? 

That's more sinful, Mr. Obey, to USE your church and abuse it with the express purpose of helping yourself, than supposedly just 'questioning' tenets of faith.  

Rather sleazy, just like a pol, huh?

Anyone who says they support the troops but not the mission is a liar.

Jesus is God. Jesus can tell

Jesus is God. Jesus can tell people how to live. We can tell people, but there should be some humbleness to what we say. And we should point out when we are telling someone what God says, that God says it, that we are just repeating what God says. No one is God and no one is a stand in for God.

I do not agree that it is liberal bias to speak against a faith-belief. I speak against any faith-belief that is not of the true 'born again' in Christ Biblical Christian faith-belief, which includes speaking against Catholicism. And I am the furthest thing from a bias-liberal.

We all must realize that in order for someone to be "fully whatever" faith one is, one is going to be fully against all faiths that go against that faith.

Debra...

And this site is not the place to broadcast your bigotry

And this site is not the place to broadcast your "special" bigotry, Church Lady.

"I speak against any faith-belief that is"

"I speak against any faith-belief that is not of the true 'born again' in Christ Biblical Christian faith-belief, which includes speaking against Catholicism."

Your soul must be black, you will sleep in eternity with the devil--you have no tolerance and no love. The only difference between you and a jihadist is that you have not yet resorted to violence. I am bloody sick and tired of you and the things you post. You are a messenger of hate and intolerance. God has not struck you down, but, you hateful woman, you will stand before Him and He will ask you why you felt you were ordained by Him to spread your lies and hate. You will spend eternity in damnation.

You turn every post into a thread of YOUR faith-belief--you egotistical woman!

Go somewhere else and spread your message of hate and do not even try to  rebut that it is hate. If you insist on staying here, please place your faith-belief hate messages in a forum, where they SHOULD be ignored.

I have avoided posting to you for months now. I will , after this post, return to that position

 You are Jezebel!.

I am not the topic here.  .

Interesting responses from such "Tolerant" people. I am to only be tolerant of that which God is tolerant of. However, I am not the topic here.  ...Debra

However, I am not the topic here. ...Debra

 However, I am not the topic here.  ...Debra

FALSE--you make YOURSELF the topic with your "faith-belief" hate filled statements.

And you really tick me off with your unbelievable, hypocritical statement about "tolerant" people,as I have expressed on NB before and I am sure that many other bloggers who are not blinded by religious bigotry and hate, as you are, will remember from my previous posts.(Months ago, before I refused to participate in turning this site into the Debra/Tumbler religious combat zone). Between you and Tumbler I have read enough intolerance , bigotry and hate to last me all of my days.

Goodbye!!!!!!!!!!!! Jezebel!

PS One last thought--for Heaven's sake --SHUT UP about religion. Discuss  media matters, please.

misterbill, My comment that I

misterbill,

My comment that I am not the topic here, was directed at those who wish to make me the topic. Of course I will be in my posts, because one naturally posts that which one believes.

You however have crossed a line with personal attacks and are in need of growing up. Until you do, I will ignore your post --I have no need to speak with people who behave as you are behaving.

Debra...

Your arrogant bigotry makes you the topic, Church Lady

Your constant arrogant bigotry makes you the topic, Church Lady.   Your religious intolerance does not belong on this media bias board.

Be careful RJ.  Without into

Be careful RJ.  Without intolerant Christians like her, W would have never won the 2000 election. 

Like or not these people are deeply intertwined with your side.  Debra's no different than Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell or James Dobson. 

Not worried about Debra

She's less likely to suck up to radical Islam than the Muslicrats are.

Conservatives will hand over an Eric Rudolph in a heartbeat.  The same can't be said for the Left and their apologist, head in the sand mindset.

Gore lied. Nobody fried

Unlike the knee-jerk Democrats, Leon

Unlike the knee-jerk Democrats, Leon, those who vote Republican have a history of debate and disagreement.   I strongly disagree with her approach, but I'll take her voting choice over that of the anti-American Socialists you favor...

Actually, Debra and her ilk a

Actually, Debra and her ilk are the definition of Anti-American. 

Hating other Americans based simply on their religious beliefs goes against the fundamental tenents upon which our country was founded.

show me the hate

Where has she ever explicitly said she hated anybody? I am not talking about lifestyles, I mean actually people.

Hating other Americans based simply on their religious beliefs goes
against the fundamental tenents upon which our country was founded.

That's funny...what tenet is that?

Leon we agree, bigots goes ag

Leon we agree, bigots goes against the fundamental tenents upon what our country was founded...however, part of freedom is allowing bigots to be bigots...a paradox yes?

Sure I have no problem with s

Sure I have no problem with somebody being a bigot.  It's their personal choice.

But we should always call them out as such and make it clear that they are bigots. 

Leon...r u the judge

Leon, are you the one that gets to decide who is and is not a BIGOT? By what standard and terms?

If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG.

Yes, I decide for myself who

Yes, I decide for myself who I think is a bigot.  Doesn't everyone make their own decision on this matter?

Leon..what? ... part II

So if you believe someone is a BIGOT, then you feel that it is okay to call them such. Sounds kind of hateful and intolerant.

Also, you never answered by what measure you choose to judge people to assign them the status of BIGOT.

and and and, as rational Amer

and and and, as rational Americans, we should never ever defend any sort of bigoted speech (we shouldn't prevent it, but we really shouldn't ever excuse it).  Again, this includes Pat Robertson, Falwell, Dobson, etc.  I've seen rampant excusing of their bigoted speech on this site.

To me bigots are not the problem.  They are easily identifiable and thus, easily marginalized.  I'm more terrified of the people that profess to be tolerant, but then defend bigoted speech, like on Newsbusters.

Leon - your hatred and bigotr

Leon - your hatred and bigotry of all things conservative is shocking. Don't you see anything wrong on the left??? No bogotry there at all huh?

Specifics, Leon

"...like on Newsbusters"

Specifics, Leon, instead of generalities....or slink away.

Uh, how about the myriad of p

Uh, how about the myriad of posts defending Falwell's hate speech following his death. 

I.E. in response to the direct, hateful quotes I posted twice.

Can you be more specific as w

Can you be more specific as what he said, and how it is bigotry?

Oh, so you're just speaking of "some", Leon

Oh, so it's just "some" people, not "Newsbusters", as you implied in your attempt to paint all with the same brush.  Got it. 

Well, heck, if you want to play the game of guilt by association, NB must be really dirty...it  even lets Trolls like you, LeftWing, j. faux wilson, etc, post here at will...... 

RJ,I never said it was all of

RJ,

I never said it was all of Newsbusters.  I said and I quote "like on Newsbusters".

Once again in your haste to morph into an attack dog, you've created a nonexistant argument.

weenie words, leon

Weenie words, leon.  Your implication was clear in the context.

So Leon

So Leon, do you outright condemn Hillary Clinton for her " You f*ing JEW bastar* ! " spew ?

I also want confirmation that you condemn democrat Moran for his " Well it was a jewess" as he put down the questioner publicly with his racist screed against her.

Let's add in your condemnatrion concerning Al Sharpton's "Heime town " remarks, and his attacks on jews.

 I also want you to say you vehemently condemn all the hispanic racist hatred lines that include their words for "whites" - which are pure racism as well.

 Let's not forget the general " I hate zio-jews" and the "jewish cabal of PNAC" - and the general hatred the democrats all together spew - take Jimmy Carter for instance - let's hear the condemnation there.

 So, you can start with HILLARY - and end with Jimmy Carter. I'm waiting for your condemnations instead of your silent or more public support as I've seen in the past here. 

Do Americans have to overreact ?

Leon:

I have to inform you that up to now you've been guilty only of smearing the Virgin Mary --for whatever personal reasons of yours. May God forgive the offense.

But here you smear an American who indeed has freedom of speech. No matter how she may exploit it, or what for. -- You make an uncalled-for personal attack.

She NEVER expressed hatred for anybody. She has called other faiths false, believing that hers is the true faith.

I don't think Debra's main flaw is hating; it's Pride. We all have this fault, up to a point. But, since she equates her faith with a divine truth; her  pride is out of control. You cannot communicate with a person like Debra. Her mind is made up.

Tumbler,You'll have to jog my

Tumbler,

You'll have to jog my memory.  I don't remember ever saying anything about the Virgin Mary, so I have no clue what you're talking about.

I didn't attack Debra, I merely pointed out that she was intolerant.  I am right on this fact. 

Calling other faiths false is being intolerant and close-minded. 

Why is this so hard for you to understand? 

Dear Leon:

I could have confused the post I'm thinking about with one of yours. It's in words to this effect; Mary went on to have sex after the birth of Our Lord. It was a CRUDE post; the offender said, "Why couldn't Mary "get it on."--? Puke !

But if you don't remember saying it, I surely have confused you for "Lion King."

If it was really him I sincerely apologize for saying you did it. (He is just the feeble-minded sort to make statements like that. Debra herself was complicit in that stupidity.) Forgive me if I thought wrongly of you.

Tumbler,Definitely wasn't me.

Tumbler,

Definitely wasn't me.  I don't think I've ever even typed the word 'Mary' on this site.

No need for apologies, it was just some simple confusion.  I'll live.

still, I was mistaken

OK, but I am sorry. I called you for one of "Lion King's" great blnders.

tumbleweed...it wasn't me either

tumbler...it wasn't me either...I guess by your standards, does that make you a liar or just mistaken?

[be careful how you answer lest you be confused for a hypocrite]

tumbler...waiting...

Care or dare to answer?

Was Mary a virgin, before or

Was Mary a virgin, before or after she begat Jesus? Was mary still a virgin after she delivered Jesus? Did Mary had more children after Jesus? Did Mary needed a Saviour when cousin Elisabeth visited her, carrying John in her womb? Was Mary the mother of God...So then, God is not eternal. Which Mary are you talking about?

I knew between the "I-am

I knew between the "I-am-a-better-Christian-than-you" Debra, the "holier-than-thou-bigots", Leon, and the rest of the crew who get off-topic would muck up the point of this thread. 

Anyone who says they support the troops but not the mission is a liar. 

Exactly, kathleenirish. I'

Exactly, kathleenirish. I'm sure there are other forums where people can bring up any subject they want, and hash it to death. I've been at work all day and just popped in, and when I see where this thread has gone, I think there is justification for the administrators, at some point to close a thread. This looks like one of those times.

KI and MBelt

KI and MBelt  --if only they would close the thread!!!!!!

misterb...I see Debra got her

misterb...

I see Debra got her mission accomplished with help from a few of her pals.

I saw this early this morning, saw where she said she didn't want this to be about her....

Yeah right...when pigs fly.

I really like NB--best site around--

I really like NB--best site around--but I often go to other sites the past few weeks. I cannot stand the arguments about religion. They are senseless and foolish. Not the content, there are many learned people here--the concept that this is a religious forum. It is not.

gotta go--just got babysitting duties.

Do Americans have to overreact ?

Leon:

I have to inform you that up to now you've been guilty only of smearing the Virgin Mary --for whatever personal reasons of yours. May God forgive the offense.

But here you smear an American who indeed has freedom of speech. No matter how she may exploit it, or what for. -- You make an uncalled-for personal attack.

She NEVER expressed hatred for anybody. She has called other faiths false, believing that hers is the true faith.

I don't think Debra's main flaw is hating; it's Pride. We all have this fault, up to a point. But, since she equates her faith with a divine truth; her  pride is out of control. You cannot communicate with a person like Debra. Her mind is made up.

tumbleweed...get your facts straight

get your facts straight

Tumbler,Mary was married. Fac
Submitted by DebraJMSmith on May 26, 2007 - 03:30.

Tumbler,

Mary
was married. She had other children, like James. And you cannot show me
a place in Scripture saying she remained a virgin. There is, however,
Scripture that says that Josheph did not have sex with her till after
Jesus was born.

Mt 1:25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

Face
it, Tumbler. The woman 'got it on.' You are 68 years old, Tumbler. It
is time to grow up and not get grossed out at the thought of sex. Sex
is a beautiful thing between a husband and wife and it is Biblical for
a woman to give herself to her husband. Had Mary not, she would have
been sinning.

Debra...

:o)

the blind leading the blind

Mary is the mother of God. She is a Virgin even now; because God chose her, a virgin, to become the mother of His divine Son. She had NO MORE children.

TILL-- is not proof or even relevant to her subsequent married life; and the marriage to Joseph has never been consummated; it never will. It's called CHASTITY, my ignorant friend. Mary had taken a VOW before God; to be ever a virgin. If she had NOT, He would not have called her to become mother of His Son. That's a no-brainer. Christ's Church refers to St. Joseph as her "chaste spouse, and it's a revealed truth, Son. --Definitely NOT a sin, as Debra believes. Because His Church declares it, you lose.)

Opinions of your sort are purely stupiditiy posing as wisdom. Jesus gave His mother into the care of John the evangelist, because she had no children to take her in subsequent to His death on the cross. How can you think her "other" son James would not have gone after his mother ? Are you're dumber than I thought ?

As for SEX, my dumb heretic; it is sacred between two spouses in its ordinary mode. But even married couples have taken vows of chastity and offered it up to God. They're called to sainthood !

If sex is all this megillah you propose as INDISPENSABLE and NECESSARY, why did JESUS choose celibacy for Himself ? --Was Jesus "sinning ?" Or have you swallowed that crap about the Da Vinci Code ? (That would be your kind of faith, all right.)

the marriage to Joseph has ne

the marriage to Joseph has never been consummated;

You might want to read:   46While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you."

Another reference in John: 2But when the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles was near, 3Jesus' brothers said to him, "You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples may see the miracles you do. 4No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world."

Are you denying James is the brother of Jesus? 18Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter[a] and stayed with him fifteen days. 19I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord's brother. 20I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie.

On the testimony of two or three witnesses every fact will be confirmed.

Now I ask you, how did Jesus get brothers if Joseph didn't consumate his marriage to Mary???? No where does it say Joseph married another woman other than Mary.  I think you overstepped this one.  In fact, doesn't the Catholic Church acknowledge Jesus' brothers?

“The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.” – Marcus Aurelius

dscott: are you sincere ?

Dear Dscott,

If you're sincerely interested in the truth, here goes:

Mary as I said above is a Virgin, and the Church teaches this as an infallible truth.

The words "brother, sister" and "brethren" in ALL the semitic languages of the time did NOT always mean SIBLING. --Sure, we accept the clear words Joseph had eleven brothers, -- (Joseph of the coat of many colors,) But in less obvious verses it also meant any KIN, a brother was just a cousin. Or even an uncle ? The translation is incorrect if we try to say Jesus had siblings, seeing all the contextual truths of His life. We definitely know there were no siblings of His at the foot of the cross when He died.

Do you really THINK He would've dismissed their absence as a coincidence? Do you think He would've entrusted Mary to the care of anyone BUT His brothers and sisters the siblings ? Of course not. She had no other sons; and Jesus knows that !

But the really important fact has to be the testimony of his ONLY Church. No denominational church or sect has any link to the apostles and Jesus Christ. All these "authorities" are NOT Christ's Church. The Catholic Church IS .

And she is endowed with the Holy Spirit, who keeps Catholic doctrine free of any error. We rely then, on the testimony of God's Holy Spirit, when we accept the teaching of the Church. AS JESUS COMMANDED US. Knowing this, we need only the testimony of the Church to ascertain any truth, no matter how ambiguous; and particularly when it comes to settling true meanings of scripture open to misinterpretation. The Holy Spirit cannot allow any deception to enter into the deposit of faith; Jesus promised us. It's in the BIBLE, and I can give you proof-text if you insist. Therefore, when she teaches Mary and Joseph were chaste, and she ever-virgin; the matter isn't open to any dispute. --Especially when those who dispute have their clear confict of interest: by discreditng the teaching of Christ's Church, they further their OWN means. They exist to oppose the Catholic faith ! That's how come DEBRA will always say it's false if taught by the Catholic Church. To admit it's true is to confess her own faith is suspect. She will insist that only from the Bible can she believe a "faith-belief." Despite the Bible never having told us such things. The Bible upholds all Catholic doctrine, bar none.

"The Bible upholds all C

"The Bible upholds all Catholic doctrine, bar none."  That is your opinion, are you tolerant of millions of Protestants that do not agree?

no, I'm tolerant

Millions of faithful protestants will arrive at salvation, despite their many errors. But that's not because they believed anti-catholic doctrine. It mostly will come about because they truly LOVE