Posted on 07/23/2008 2:47:21 PM PDT by Pyro7480
When Gov. Alfred E. Smith ran for president in 1928, his candidacy was derailed in large part by anti-Catholic prejudice. It has been nearly 48 years since John F. Kennedy became the first (and so far only) Roman Catholic president, but experts say that anti-Catholic sentiment — much of it originating in, or as a response to, immigrants in New York — remains an enduring force in American culture.
That was the consensus of a panel assembled at the Museum of the City of New York on Tuesday night to consider the question, “Is Anti-Catholicism Dead?”
...The Rev. Richard John Neuhaus — a leading conservative intellectual, a former Lutheran pastor and the editor of the leading Catholic journal First Things — offered a surprising view on the question.
“To be a Catholic is not to be refused positions of influence in our society,” he said. “Indeed, one of the most acceptable things is to be a bad Catholic, and in the view of many people, the only good Catholic is a bad Catholic.”
...He added that anti-Catholicism was as likely to come from the left — sometimes from commentators who believe that a “threatening theological insurgency is engineered and directed by Catholics,” with evangelical Protestants merely as the movement’s “foot soldiers.”
(Excerpt) Read more at cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Not around here it’s not...
Catholic ping!
You said: Not around here it’s not...
You ain’t lyin’!
Catholics are second only to Mormons in being the most hated brand of religion by the moonbats of the religious left. Of course if they are a CINO, like JF Kerry or a faux Mormon, like Harry Reid, they get a pass.
The vast majority of “Anti-Catholicism” today is from the Secular Left. They hate the “Evangelicals” just as bad, if not worse, than the Catholics.
Not in FreeRepublic it’s not! We’ve got some of the most hateful anti-Catholic bigots in the world on this forum.
I think a more relevant question would be “Is the NYT dead?”
I would love to make a bet with anyone at the Times - in 100 years, the Times will be gone, but Catholics will still be here.
Father Neuhaus got it right. At least among the left wing intelligentsia.
ROTFLMTO
Go to a thread titled, (I omit the screaming all-caps) “Roman Catholicism Spawned the Apostasy of Evangelicalism”.
Whew, their keyboards must be full of sweat. This harmless mackerel-snapper got called all kinds of names for pointing out American anti-Catholicsm in its various regional forms.
lolrofapimprfi . . . *gasp*
Seriously...LOLOL
religious right too...even more so. Read a few threads on the religion forum and tell me it isn't so.
The Secular Left has always hated the Catholic Church the most. From the beginning, the Church stood against contraception, abortion, homosexual sin, feminism, and every other attack against the family and the moral law.
The GOP has never nominated one. They came close with Giuliani leading the pack. [don't throw up at that thought that he could have become the first GOP Catholic nominee].
Whew!
[dabs eyes with tissue]
THAT’S a good one.
**snort**
No, he aint.
Glad you’re back. Twernt as much fun.
Petronski was suspended?
They’re joking right? As far as I can tell it’s alive and well and being fed.
Aw shucks!
Yep. Now he’s back, shiny as a new penny.
What is funny about that is Catholics have no problem telling Protestants they are going to hell because they don't belong to 'The Church', but when Protestants say something about what is wrong with the Catholic beliefs, they are horrible anti-Catholic bigots.
We can put that behind us now. RM gave me a very fair hearing.
Yep, I even took a shower!
I will second that.....I am so glad that Petronski is back...
I think we all needed one after that particular thread.
It’s not Catholicism per se that’s hated by the Beautiful People, it’s any religion with a non-negotiable moral code.
Perhaps I should say, any religion with a non-negotiable moral code that does not enforce it’s writ with violence.
Violence wins plenty of respect from the Left.
You mean like this?
The Catholic Church is "Satan’s best counterfeit of Christianity"?
BTW I met Father Neuhaus years ago when he was Reverend Neuhaus. My Theology professor at Fordham arranged for a group of us to interview him about the Lutheran liturgy for our class in comparative Christian Liturgy. Much younger then, you were still impressed with his intelligence, holiness, and faith, as well as his easy manner. He was a liberal then, giving sanctuary to two draft dodgers in his church.
Rats! I would have gone if I knew about it. I learned about the exhibit from the Society of St. Hugh of Cluny blog.
You said: Catholics have no problem telling Protestants they are going to hell because they don’t belong to ‘The Church’
Um. Wrong. Catholics in particular do not judge the eternal destination of anybody, Catholic or non-Catholic. There is not one person who has ever lived that the Catholic Church (or practicing Catholics) states is in hell or destined for hell. Catholic belief is that only God can judge.
Now I do not doubt that you can find some Catholics who would make a pronouncement like that, but they would be wrong. Just like the time when my kids were going trick or treating on Halloween many moons ago and a Baptist family down the street told them they were going to hell because they were Catholics.
Any good Catholic knows that decision is WAY above our pay grade.
About the only place you'll see that sort of pronouncement made is in something like Sister Mary Ignatius Explains It All for You, which is a Broadway secular anti-(ex-)Catholic's idea of an old-fashioned yardstick-wielding teaching sister.
So Catholics believe non-Catholics can be saved without the sacraments????
After all, divide and conquer and all that.
Sometimes I wonder if some of the really enthusiastic haters on this board aren't agents provocateurs from somewhere like DU (and I don't mean Ducks Unlimited! :o) )
I am going to the county fair right now, but I will find one over the next day. I am certain I can find many who stated we can't be saved, so maybe the hell part was only implied.
Not without Baptism -- but there's Baptism of Blood and even Baptism of Desire as well as the ordinary Baptism by water and the Holy Ghost.
So there is always the possibility of salvation. God has the power to reach out and save anyone, anywhere, as long as they truly desire it.
But we believe the safest and surest way is with the benefit of all the Sacraments of the Church -- especially that of Reconciliation (Confession).
And even if you do find a poster who said that, they are wrong and in conflict with the teaching of the Church.
Clearly the NYT is carrying out its mandate to propagandize "balance" for the good of its constituency.
Catholics believe that judging is God’s business not mans. It is just not part of Catholic outlook to state if someone is saved or not. And we pray constantly for the salvation of all men.
On a personal note, for example, in 1991 when the first Gulf War kicked off I was a battery commander in an artillery unit. The first thing I did when I heard the battle had started was to pray for the salvation of souls who had just died on both sides. I did not pray that those who were Catholics were saved, I prayed for everyone. That is Catholic.
A lot of folks get wrapped around a Catholic Church statement that says “there is no salvation outside the Church”, erroneously thinking that it means that if you are not Catholic you are not saved. But if you actually read the statements what it means is that the Church is the wellspring of Christ’s graces and that even those who are not Catholic are recipients of some measure of those graces.
It is far more common, at least in FR fora, for Catholics to be mocked with the label of Universalism because we believe, as the Catechism teaches, that
"All men are called to this catholic unity of the People of God. . . . And to it, in different ways, belong or are ordered: the Catholic faithful, others who believe in Christ, and finally all mankind, called by God's grace to salvation."
It's instructive to enter the Catechism text here and read on for a couple of paragraphs about how seriously we take the Scriptural teaching that God wills that all men be saved by and through Christ--- though not all men will accept this great gift of Salvation, and thus are lost.
No, it's not Universalism, but it is as far from what you said, AR, as it is Biblically possible to go.
I challenge you to find one -- one--- Catholic FReper who said that somebody's going to hell because they're not Catholic. I seriously doubt that you can.
But if you do ---find me that ignoramus and I will whup some l'arnin' into him. And don't think I won't.
Amen to that...
Ironically, I feel the same way about Muslims.
Any particular poster individually, or re the group said poster belongs to?
Thank you for taking up where my laziness caused me not to go. Where I was paraphrasing conceptually you documented what the Church teaches.
Are you team 3?
That's what I said.
Nobody here is responsible for what some anonymous somebody somewhere on the internet claiming to be a Catholic has said at some point in the past.
Like, say, Charles Kingsley's evil Jesuit Eustace in one of his novels . . . (and Kingsley was an Anglican!)
And the people said . . . AMEN!
That’s only because you finally had the time to. :-0
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.