Papal Address To Congress

[rodheadlee]

I don't think that he wrote this speech himself. But he didn't mention the plight of the christians in syria and iraq. Nor did he mention muslim extremism which has been reponsible for the bombing of churches and the rape of christian women. But he did mention extremism in general. And there were a lot of platitudes in his speech. But not much substance.

 

For example:

 

I will end my visit to your country in Philadelphia, where I will take part in the World Meeting of Families. It is my wish that throughout my visit the family should be a recurrent theme. How essential the family has been to the building of this country! And how worthy it remains of our support and encouragement! Yet I cannot hide my concern for the family, which is threatened, perhaps as never before, from within and without. Fundamental relationships are being called into question, as is the very basis of marriage and the family. I can only reiterate the importance and, above all, the richness and the beauty of family life.

 

Why not just call it for what it is: gay marriage . Why be afraid to name the problem? He hedged his bets throughout the speech by giving hiding messages instead of straight words.

Gay marriage is not the only threat to the family. In the modern world many people chose not to get married and raise a family. The don't want to share fiances or make a commitment. Many young men and women I know fear the law regarding marriage, alimony, child support. Divorce never favors the wage earner. Careers and school get in the way of long term relationships, Why get married when romance (sex) is readily available without commitment? 2nd Timothy 3 comes to mind.

1 This know also, that in the ^alast days perilous ^btimes shall come.

  2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, ^acovetous, boasters, ^bproud, blasphemers, ^cdisobedient to parents, ^dunthankful, unholy,

  3 Without ^anatural ^baffection, ^ctrucebreakers, ^dfalse accusers, ^eincontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

  4 ^aTraitors, ^bheady, ^chighminded, lovers of ^dpleasures more than lovers of God;

  5 Having a ^aform of godliness, but ^bdenying the power thereof: from such turn away.

  6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly ^awomen laden with sins, led away with divers ^blusts,

  7 Ever ^alearning, and never able to come to the ^bknowledge of the ^ctruth.

[jkwilliams]

You find it "amazing" that a church with approximately 80 times our membership is more visible than we are?

 

I find it to be the default assumption. What is amazing is that a church as small as ours doesn't disappear completely.

 

Well, if the gays get their way ...

[rodheadlee]

It was an elegant speech. I wasn't too impressed though.

My one question is why didn't he mention Christ at all?

I thought he mentioned Jesus once, I could be wrong.

[pogi]

The times are a changing Russell. The LDS church which claims to be the church of Jesus Christ has been on earth nigh on 200 years. Yet it has at best maybe 6 millions active members. It's influence overall on the human race is insignificant really. Yet the leader of the largest apostate Christian sect is at the cutting edge of world issues and can get air time with the U.S. Congress. Maybe this means nothing at all. Maybe the devil is better and PR than God is. 

 

 2,000 years will do that.  With only 185 years under our belt, our church is practically still a sperm compared to the Catholic church. 

 

Perhaps in another 1,815 years we will have mastered the art of PR and have the privilege of speaking to congress.  Keep your fingers crossed!!!  

 

15 million members with one of the highest activity rates of any church in just 2 lifetimes is pretty impressive.    

 

What was the Catholic church doing at year 200?  Some finally came around and accepted that Jesus was God (good), but started denying the distinction between the Father and the Son (bad).  Some insisted that was heresy and no one could agree on basic doctrine really.  In their defense, they didn't even have the Bible compiled yet; while we have published 3 books of scripture in that amount of time and are united on the basic doctrines.  But who is comparing?

 

P.S.  The devil is WAY better at PR than God is.  What can I say?  He knows the natural man and has mastered the art of appeal.  People are just drawn to him even when they don't like him.  That takes some serious skill!

Edited September 25, 2015 by pogi

[ERayR]

The times are a changing Russell. The LDS church which claims to be the church of Jesus Christ has been on earth nigh on 200 years. Yet it has at best maybe 6 millions active members. It's influence overall on the human race is insignificant really. Yet the leader of the largest apostate Christian sect is at the cutting edge of world issues and can get air time with the U.S. Congress. Maybe this means nothing at all. Maybe the devil is better and PR than God is.

Whatever it is it is amazing to me.

 

Need I ask, where is the separation of Church and State?  When some high school teem has prayer at the 50 yard line the world flies off its hinges but when the Pope tells congress how to legislate it gets rave reviews.  What if it were President Monson addressing congress?  The world would be coming to an end.  Go Figure

[Calm]

Don't Catholics view the pope as the vicar of Christ...and apostle of sorts?

I don't believe so.  While Peter was both an apostle and the first Bishop of Rome and they speak of apostolic succession, etc., they mean, I believe, authority was passed down from the Apostles to bishops and not that bishops are the equivalent of apostles.

 

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/index.htm

 

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PK.HTM

 

Maybe Rory or another Catholic who posts on the board will correct me if I am wrong.

add-on:

869 The Church is apostolic. She is built on a lasting foundation: "the twelve apostles of the Lamb" (⇒ Rev 21:14). She is indestructible (cf ⇒ Mt 16:18). She is upheld infallibly in the truth: Christ governs her through Peter and the other apostles, who are present in their successors, the Pope and the college of bishops.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P29.HTM#4FJ

Edited September 25, 2015 by Calm

[ERayR]

I don't believe so.  While Peter was both an apostle and the first Bishop of Rome and they speak of apostolic succession, etc., they mean, I believe, authority was passed down from the Apostles to bishops and not that bishops are the equivalent of apostles.

 

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/index.htm

 

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PK.HTM

 

Maybe Rory or another Catholic who posts on the board will correct me if I am wrong.

 

In news reports today I heard him referred to as the vicar of Christ.

[Teancum]

You find it "amazing" that a church with approximately 80 times our membership is more visible than we are?

 

I find it to be the default assumption. What is amazing is that a church as small as ours doesn't disappear completely.

You math is in error. I don't count the inactive LDS. On the other hand we ought to dismiss the inactive Catholics so maybe the math is fine.

Regardless my point was that it is all amazing. We have a teeny tiny sect that claims to be THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST that really has little impact on the world stage. It has had almost 200 years to be significant. Is it? Do you think it is? Yet we have an apostate sect that has a leader that has inroads to the U.S. President and congress just because he shows up. I know the BoM says the church of the lamb will be small as compared to the great and abominable church. But the church has back peddled on the idea that this is Catholocism. So I just find it all amazing.

As for your comment that it is amazing that the LDS church given how small it is has not disappeared I agree. Maybe that will come to pass 50 to 100 years from now. I don't see robust growth for now or for sometime. Maybe that will change. If not who knows.

[Teancum]

2,000 years will do that.  With only 185 years under our belt, our church is practically still a sperm compared to the Catholic church. 

 

Perhaps in another 1,815 years we will have mastered the art of PR and have the privilege of speaking to congress.  Keep your fingers crossed!!!  

 

15 million members with one of the highest activity rates of any church in just 2 lifetimes is pretty impressive.    

 

What was the Catholic church doing at year 200?  Some finally came around and accepted that Jesus was God (good), but started denying the distinction between the Father and the Son (bad).  Some insisted that was heresy and no one could agree on basic doctrine really.  In their defense, they didn't even have the Bible compiled yet; while we have published 3 books of scripture in that amount of time and are united on the basic doctrines.  But who is comparing?

 

P.S.  The devil is WAY better at PR than God is.  What can I say?  He knows the natural man and has mastered the art of appeal.  People are just drawn to him even when they don't like him.  That takes some serious skill!

30 to 35% activity rate is high?

[Teancum]

Need I ask, where is the separation of Church and State?  When some high school teem has prayer at the 50 yard line the world flies off its hinges but when the Pope tells congress how to legislate it gets rave reviews.  What if it were President Monson addressing congress?  The world would be coming to an end.  Go Figure

I am not sure what your point is.

[why me]

 

Gay marriage is not the only threat to the family. In the modern world many people chose not to get married and raise a family. The don't want to share fiances or make a commitment. Many young men and women I know fear the law regarding marriage, alimony, child support. Divorce never favors the wage earner. Careers and school get in the way of long term relationships, Why get married when romance (sex) is readily available without commitment? 2nd Timothy 3 comes to mind.

1 This know also, that in the ^alast days perilous ^btimes shall come.

  2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, ^acovetous, boasters, ^bproud, blasphemers, ^cdisobedient to parents, ^dunthankful, unholy,

  3 Without ^anatural ^baffection, ^ctrucebreakers, ^dfalse accusers, ^eincontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

  4 ^aTraitors, ^bheady, ^chighminded, lovers of ^dpleasures more than lovers of God;

  5 Having a ^aform of godliness, but ^bdenying the power thereof: from such turn away.

  6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly ^awomen laden with sins, led away with divers ^blusts,

  7 Ever ^alearning, and never able to come to the ^bknowledge of the ^ctruth.

 

You have in a way made my point. One can read anything he or she wishes into the speech. Also, what I did notice about the speech was that 'conservative' issues were opaque but the more  'liberal' issues were more clear. The speech writer did this on purpose if true because the advisors to the pope know the political climate and what could happen if such 'conservative' issues were named.

 

Also, I saw no mention of christ in the speech. Maybe I missed it. If not, this was also tactical. By mentioning christ, he could alienate potential people who are non-believers. Much better to leave christ behind to embrace the world. But is it right to do so?

Edited September 25, 2015 by why me

[Teancum]

I don't believe so.  While Peter was both an apostle and the first Bishop of Rome and they speak of apostolic succession, etc., they mean, I believe, authority was passed down from the Apostles to bishops and not that bishops are the equivalent of apostles. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/index.htm http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PK.HTM Maybe Rory or another Catholic who posts on the board will correct me if I am wrong.add-on:869 The Church is apostolic. She is built on a lasting foundation: "the twelve apostles of the Lamb" (⇒ Rev 21:14). She is indestructible (cf ⇒ Mt 16:18). She is upheld infallibly in the truth: Christ governs her through Peter and the other apostles, who are present in their successors, the Pope and the college of bishops.http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_P29.HTM#4FJ

http://www.aboutcatholics.com/beliefs/proof-and-reason-for-the-papal-office/

[ERayR]

I am not sure what your point is.

 

Where are the resident board separation of church and state activists?  Just curious.

[Calm]

http://www.aboutcatholics.com/beliefs/proof-and-reason-for-the-papal-office/

Are you saying this shows the Catholics see the Pope as the same as an apostle?  If so, please point to where in the article it says this.

 

I don't see anything on that page contradicting my links to the Vatican's site....which I would think would be accepted over any other site as authoritative for Catholics anyway.

[sunstoned]

For those who are interested, here is the text of the Holy Father's address:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/24/politics/pope-francis-congress-speech/index.html

 

I thought he did a great job -- his tone was very calm and fatherly, even as he said things that both parties agree and disagree with.

I am so impressed with him.  He is a most excellent example of a humble follower of Christ.

[sunstoned]

Agreed. Not everyone sees what's right in front of their faces.

Give it time.  I think most people will eventually come around and accept what is right and fair.    

[TheSkepticChristian]

Need I ask, where is the separation of Church and State? 

 

I agree there needs to be a separation of Church and State, but not separation of compassion,science, and state. 

 

Please don't tell me that our church keeps out of politics, our church made several in-kind donations to the "Yes on 8" campaign. 

 

"On Friday, 30 January, the Church filed the final report of its contributions (all of which were non-monetary) to the ProtectMarriage.com coalition. The report, submitted in advance of the 31 January deadline, details in-kind donations totaling $189,903.58" That is big value in politics. 

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/church-clarifies-proposition-8-filing-corrects-erroneous-news-reports

 

Obama Meets With Church Leaders To Discuss Immigration Reform In Utah

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865601049/LDS-Church-reaffirms-stance-on-immigration.html?pg=all

 

Utah lawmakers pass anti-discrimination bill with LGBT, Church leaders present 

http://www.religionnews.com/2015/03/12/utah-lawmakers-pass-anti-discrimination-bill-lgbt-mormon-support/

Edited September 25, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian

[why me]

I agree there needs to be a separation of Church and State, but not separation of compassion,science, and state. 

 

Please don't tell me that our church gets out of politics, our church made several in-kind donations to the "Yes on 8" campaign. 

http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_politics/California_Proposition_8/Questions_and_myths#Did_the_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints_contribute_money_to_the_.22Yes_on_8.22_campaign.3F

 

 

Obama Meets With Church Leaders To Discuss Immigration Reform In Utah

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865601049/LDS-Church-reaffirms-stance-on-immigration.html?pg=all

 

Utah lawmakers pass anti-discrimination bill with LGBT, Church leaders present 

http://www.religionnews.com/2015/03/12/utah-lawmakers-pass-anti-discrimination-bill-lgbt-mormon-support/

However, there may be a difference if a church leader addresses congress. The pope speech was void of mentioning christ. One reason for this was because he addressed congress. I am sure that his ghost writer knew this very well. The speech was a good secular speech but it wasn't a religious speech. I am sure that lds church leaders can also give a good secular speech which also names secular worries and make a hit. But a christian leader should not forget god and christ in her and his speech. However, such a speech about divorce, abortion, living a moral code, birth control etc, would go down like a led balloon. Thus, we have the pope's speech in congress devoid of catholic dogma.

Edited September 25, 2015 by why me

[saemo]

Don't Catholics view the pope as the vicar of Christ...and apostle of sorts? If not an apostle he sure is getting a lot more air time than the LDS leaders who claim to be apostles.

The Twelve are unique, as Acts describes a special personal prerogative that was theirs:

Acts 1:21

Therefore, it is necessary that one of the men who accompanied us the whole time the Lord Jesus came and went among us,

22

beginning from the baptism of John until the day on which he was taken up from us, become with us a witness to his resurrection.”

The Apostolic office, was handed on, with Catholics believing this office belongs to the successors of the Apostles, our Bishops, and so they carry on the prerogatives of the office.

The successor to Peter, who is the Bishop of Rome, is viewed as special among our Bishops, holding a place of prominence as Peter did. But like Jesus taught, to be prominent means to serve and sacrifice oneself in service of others. Particularly for clergy, in service to the Church, which getting into ecclesiology, we understand as a sign of the Kingdom of God on earth.

Anyway, the Bishop of Rome has several titles, one being Vicar of Christ, which technically, vicarius Christi is a title that can be applied to all our Bishops, it's meaning being Christ's representatives on earth. Over time, the title has become associated to the Bishop of Rome, in a special way, to indicate that the successor to Peter is installed to an office that has a special place in the hierarchy of the Catholic Church.

From the CCC: 1558 "Episcopal consecration confers, together with the office of sanctifying, also the offices of teaching and ruling. . . . In fact . . . by the imposition of hands and through the words of the consecration, the grace of the Holy Spirit is given, and a sacred character is impressed in such wise that bishops, in an eminent and visible manner, take the place of Christ himself, teacher, shepherd, and priest, and act as his representative (in Eius persona agant)."37 "By virtue, therefore, of the Holy Spirit who has been given to them, bishops have been constituted true and authentic teachers of the faith and have been made pontiffs and pastors."

Edited September 25, 2015 by saemo

[saemo]

Need I ask, where is the separation of Church and State?  When some high school teem has prayer at the 50 yard line the world flies off its hinges but when the Pope tells congress how to legislate it gets rave reviews.  What if it were President Monson addressing congress?  The world would be coming to an end.  Go Figure

Pope Francis is the Sovereign of the State of Vatican City, and is not the first head of a state to address the U.S. Congress.

Not all is favorable, the news I listened to while driving home reported the tea party republicans of the U.S. Congress, in a tizzy.

[why me]

Pope Francis is the Sovereign of the State of Vatican City, and is not the first head of a state to address the U.S. Congress.

Not all is favorable, the news I listened to while driving home reported the tea party republicans of the U.S. Congress, in a tizzy.

That is not all. Many conservative, social catholics are also a little disappointed. Not everyone is pleased with a political pope who takes a stance on secular issues that seem just a little too liberal in thought. Of course, a pope should be concerned with the spiritual direction of people that may lead them away from god. More time with god than with other secular issues that may distract the spiritual development of humanity.

[Teancum]

Are you saying this shows the Catholics see the Pope as the same as an apostle?  If so, please point to where in the article it says this.

 

I don't see anything on that page contradicting my links to the Vatican's site....which I would think would be accepted over any other site as authoritative for Catholics anyway.

No not saying they view him the same as the original apostles just as their rightful successor.

[Bobbieaware]

Where are the resident board separation of church and state activists? Just curious.

For such people, generally speaking, separation of church and state only needs to enforced when a spokesperson for a particular religion espouses conservative principles and traditional moral values. But if a spokesperson for a particular religion espouses liberal principles and progressive moral values, he or she is given a pass because such values are largely embraced by the secular humanist/atheist community, therefore the religious spokesperson is seen as an ally in the cause of a creating Godless state.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Bobbieaware

[Gervin]

However, there may be a difference if a church leader addresses congress. The pope speech was void of mentioning christ. One reason for this was because he addressed congress. I am sure that his ghost writer knew this very well. The speech was a good secular speech but it wasn't a religious speech. I am sure that lds church leaders can also give a good secular speech which also names secular worries and make a hit. But a christian leader should not forget god and christ in her and his speech. However, such a speech about divorce, abortion, living a moral code, birth control etc, would go down like a led balloon. Thus, we have the pope's speech in congress devoid of catholic dogma.

what leads you to believe that the man is incapable of writing his own speech?

 

living a moral code, birth control etc, would go down like a led balloon.

 

 

like a led zeppelin balloon

[TheSkepticChristian]

For such people, generally speaking, separation of church and state only needs to enforced when a spokesperson for a particular religion espouses conservative principles and traditional moral values. But if a spokesperson for a particular religion espouses liberal principles and progressive moral values, he or she is given a pass because such values are largely embraced by the secular humanist/atheist community, therefore the religious spokesperson is seen as an ally in the cause of a creating Godless state.

 

Please respond to post 42. One of the things I don't like is big money in politics, but our LDS church donated at least $189,903.58 (non-monetary) to a political campaign. I will forgive my church leaders for that, but please don't be a hypocrite .

 

As for Pope Francis, he is simply teaching Science and compassion for the poor.

 

Shep Smith (Fox News Host) said that the Pope's agenda is not political. He said,

 

I think that we are in a weird place in the world when the following things are considered political. Five things, I'm going to tick them off. These are the five things that were on [the pope] and our president's agenda. Caring for the marginalized and the poor. That's now political. Advancing economic opportunity for all. Political? Serving as good stewards of the environment. Protecting religious minorities and promoting religious freedom globally. Welcoming [and] integrating immigrants and refugees globally. And that's political? I mean, I don't know what we expect to hear from an organization's leader like the pope of the Catholic Church other than protect those who need help, bring in refugees who have no place because of war and violence and terrorism. These seem like universal truths that we should be good to others who have less than we do, that we should give shelter to those who don't have it. I think these were the teachings in the Bible of Jesus.

Edited September 25, 2015 by TheSkepticChristian