Obama to meet Pope Benedict XVI in July

Why bother...OB has no connection with the Catholic Church. Why did Pelosi get away with a visit before OB? Well, perhaps because she is in charge. And what a hypocracy she lives.

President Obama is define himself as of now, he has to be that way. All president
were like that. Otherwise this country would been so doomed. If he wants to win
the next elections he better, keep the definition of himself and make everyone
deal with it. he is the leader, not the other way around. Getting it.

I wonder if the Holy Father will honor him like they did at the former Notre Dame ..... ?

Uh... why don't you just change the name of this column to Articles of Catholic Faith. As far as I can see, the only time OTHER relgions are mentioned on this column is when they tangentally have something to do with Catholicism. You know the percentage of people in New England who are Catholic is down to 36%. That means that there are an awful lot of non-Catholics about.

If the pope had any chutzpah, he'd refuse to visit with the American president and let him know why in no uncertain terms... Why would you meet with someone voluntarily who is completely against everything you believe in? The "pope" is not supposed to be a political office. It's a religious office...

Why are all these people of faith bothering to stand in the rain at abortion clinics, handing out pamphlets and holding themselves up for ridicule by the press when they stand with their protest signs at the state house when reps are voting on gay marriage if their own clergy won't back them up? If their own Pope won't back them up?

I know this will never be posted - but how does someone like BHO meet with a past (past only because WII is over) member of the Hitler Youth?

I hope President Obama confronts the pope about his unscientific and immoral opposition to condoms for HIV prevention and confronts the pope about the pope's violent hatred of gay people. I hope the president encourages the pope to defrock American bishops who enabled priests to run their child rape racket for decades. The US and the Vatican relationship is a two-way street, not just the president showing up to get a lecture.

The reason they would meet is that both men are Heads of STate. This is not hard to understand. Otherwise, the constant whining by extremes from both ends of the spectrum never ends. Fortunately, most of us are in the middle and have learned to tune it all out.

KJR ... "at the former Notre Dame...?"
It's not Notre Dame anymore? *ducks and hides from flying vegetables*

Dan? As far as I have read, Il Papa was in the Hitler Youth during WWII, because it was compulsory, as was later military service. His service was described as unenthusiastic. His father was known to oppose the Nazis because their believes opposed Christianity. He also deserted later in the war when opportunity presented. Those who know me on the blog here know that I am no friend to the RCC, but you are speaking fron either ignorance or cruelty and either way need to be corrected .

Maybe ZEROBAMA will confess to the pope that he's relly a muslim?

Hi Mike, All, Marko,

Thanks Mike for the visit info

"1.I hope President Obama confronts the pope about his unscientific and immoral opposition to condoms for HIV prevention"

Your statement is wrong and led by people like Planned Parenthood which should be titled Planned Abortion, SIDS. Please study the ABC formula used successfully in Africa. In Africa the condom solution doesn't work

"and confronts the pope about the pope's violent hatred of gay people."

This is simply untrue. Another poster wanted to degrade the Pope because of his youth and his country's experience after WW-I. Well the Pope learned first hand about hate from the Holocaust which included gays, Polish, gypsies, , , Now should homosexuals, trans, switchers, and practicing bis be elevated as they are in the USA to lead religious orders and lead youth into "follow me" ??

"I hope the president encourages the pope to defrock American bishops who enabled priests to run their child rape racket for decades"

Don't know, this would have to come case by case. The Spotlight team did have some articles on the Bishops' difficulty in understanding how homosexuals and others in the Priesthood who abused people couldn't just go to a ReTraining Center and be healed.

NOW The Pope could ask for Dick Cheney to be put on a pole and face A War Crime trial for torture world wide. I mean Dick has admitted to be a torture supporter numerous times and is proud of his torture record.

The Pope will have a lot to say. This president of yours is way out of line. He will do much harm to the usa. He has no plan and all that he does is backward.

EML - I am Catholic and I totally agree with you. I'd like to learn more about other faiths in the community. I guess the blog does serve as a support group for ex-catholics, and gives them a place to express their anger. I hadn't realized how hard it is for them to move on in their spiritual lives

I can't believe the Pope is choosing to honor someone who supports thing like abortion. Or similar evils such as social justice, democracy, condoms, and the separation of church and state.

If the Pope won't back the good Republican bishops who rightly protested Obama's appearance at Notre Dame, who will? It's time for him to step up and denounce this blatant politicization of religion.

Dan the Realist?

For someone who is claiming to be part of the real world, You might want to check your facts. I assume by your parenthetical statement, you mean to assert that Joseph Ratzinger would have remained in Hitler Youth if WWII were still carrying on today? The truth is Joseph Ratzinger deserted the HJ, in order to pursue his studies in the seminary. And lest you think his move to the seminary was an attempt to escape, I urge you to check your logic. If he truly supported Hitler, why would he "escape"!? Or maybe, Dan, it's a conspiracy, Ratzinger decided to beome a preist, knowing one day he would be Pope...and be consequently Hitler's pope. Dan the realist, does this scenario sound at all reasonable? A 60+ year charade? Get Real Dan!

Obama has to meet with the Pope. The Pope is a political figure as head of the Vatican State. The two should talk about world issues...that is it!!!! The Pope has no right to tell Obama how to lead the USA in the same way Obama has no right to tell the Pope how to govern the Vatican.
Personally, I find the whole visit kind of useless for Obama. The Pope needs to show so it looks like he is doing something useful (besides hating gay people, letting diddler priests hide in his sovereign State, and all-but denying the Holocaust even happened by allowing two clergy who deny it happened to continue to serve).

"Why are all these people of faith bothering to stand in the rain at abortion clinics, handing out pamphlets and holding themselves up for ridicule by the press when they stand with their protest signs at the state house when reps are voting on gay marriage if their own clergy won't back them up?"
Posted by iamjohngalt June 24, 09 03:17 AM

Because they need to control the lives of others. Because they're terrified of women with rights. Because they fear sexuality of any sort, especially that which they don't understand. Because they need to demonize those who live their lives on their own terms, rather than on the terms demanded by the zealots. Since you asked.

Posted by KJR June 23, 09 10:45 PM

Holy Father??? Hmmm...not sure if they'll post this, but this is a particularly funny piece from The Onion 4/6/2009:

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/panicked_sweat_covered_pope?utm_source=a-section

ontheleft,

What percent of abortions due you believe are due to rape or LIFE of the mother at risk? When do you believe it is reasonable for someone to be against abortion? 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 8.months? Only when the child was conceived by rape or the mother is at risk? In other words are you in any situation your so called antichoice?

Posted by Miguel Calderon June 24, 09 11:16 AM

Or maybe it's to confront exactly the sort of, at best, hypocrisy, and at worst, support for all manner of evil that exists among so many of the "devout". Maybe it's to express opinions about what are really opinions - you call it religion or faith, but it really is all opinion. On the other hand, Miguel, maybe you find those with spiritualities that differ from your own to be threatening. Who knows?

"This president of yours is way out of line. He will do much harm to the usa. He has no plan and all that he does is backward."
Posted by jose June 24, 09 10:22 AM

Care to elaborate, Jose, or is this just some typically baseless right wing drivel? Harm to the USA? Were you awake during the previous administration? No plan? Now that's humorous - some of the most well thought out policies in decades, but he has no plan? Perhaps you're attempting irony here. By the way, the President of the United States does not answer to the Pope of Vatican City.

OnTheLeft:
so, butchering one's child in the womb = "living li[fe] on their own terms"? That right there nicely encapsulates the moral and intellectual dysfunction that pervades the Left, where, e.g., dripping some water on the forehead of a mass murderer terrorist is an unspeakable evil but yet it's a-OK to suction an infant's skull out with a vacuum. As to gay marriage, no one I know has any objection to people living whatever lifestyle they choose- they issue is whether the rest of society has to be coerced into altering longstanding social institutions to acommodate them.

"butchering a child in the womb? You mean the little, tiny cluster of cells? You mean a woman who makes a decision about her body?

GADS - probably another MAN who is threatened by women and can't get a date voicing his opinion.

Whatsa matter? Trying to control women's lives because in private you are scared of women? Pathetic

Kai - I was making a point about Notre Shame, I mean Dame. It is not what is used to be. By the way, good post on the ignorant post about Benedict in the Nazi youth.

ontheleft - yes, "Holy Father" is one of the names given to the pope. I would have though that someone of your vast knowlege knew that.

T Bagger - he is not honoring him like Fr. Jenkins at ND. He is meeting him as a Head of State. By the way, the USCCB praised Bishop D'Arcy for his outspokenness rehar5ding Notre Dame. Fr. jenikins is the dissenter, not Bishop D'Arcy.

proudtobecatholic: ontheleft propably won't tell you, but the instance of rape, incest or "heath of the mother" (whatever that means) is about 1/2 of 1%. They always bring this up, but would never agree to prohibit abortion is all cases but this 1/2 of 1%. It is a total red herring, as I know you are aware.

Maureeen, in addition to the "cluster of cells" whose heart is beating, may have a separate blood type, brain waves, and feels pain - and most of all, the most innocent of all - deserves to live. Were you not one of those clusters at some point? (ps, I am not scared of women, I love them).

Posted by Maureen June 24, 09 03:47 PM

And therein, Maureen, lies the gist of the anti-choice movement. These terrified males, having to deal with women as equals rather than as doormats. It has long been my contention that the anti-choicers resent the fact that women can tell them that, no, they won't have their kids and, by extension, no, they won't sleep with them. Though I can say truthfully that not all of us who are male are terrified of women as equals, and many of us (and this will seem like betrayal to the "devout") actually prefer life that way.

Posted by KJR June 24, 09 04:08 PM

KJR, do you not ever come close to getting anything at all between the lines? I'm aware of the man's title. Did you follow through and check the link provided?

By the way (and this goes to Jim as well - I'll answer you both on this), women have the sole right to their reproductive destinies, and the right to not undergo an unwanted pregnancy. They have the right to make medical decisions for themselves, without interference from the "devout", or from anyone else. Roe v Wade was decided quite wisely. And independent brain waves occur at about the end of the second trimester. Reference the decision and see what was written about state interest in a pregnancy.

One last thing, KJR. Most US Catholics reject your dark ages viewpoints - they actually voted for Obama in larger numbers than did the electorate as a whole. And the whining bishops in the Notre Dame matter constitute a minority of the whole. So it is you and they who are actually the faux Catholics, the (as you would call them) dissenters.

Posted by jason June 24, 09 08:28 AM

And if he were a Muslim? He's not, of course, but the know-nothings on the right do love to make stuff up, don't they? At any rate, if he were a Muslim, what's it to you, Jason? Read Article VI of the US Constitution, especially the bit about religious tests for public office. I'll make it easy for you - those are prohibited.

Posted by KJR June 24, 09 04:10 PM

KJR, did the Iraqi kids killed in your party's illegal war deserve to die? How about the Iraqi adults? The American servicemen and women? They all had beating hearts, blood types, brain waves, felt pain and terror, and could have had joyous and full lives, but your administration decided that they were utterly expendable. And you voted for those people. But tell us all how you're "pro-life".

KJR,

Which really makes it difficult to respect ontheleft's opinion. I believe he doesn't answer because I believe at some point he believs the unborn child actually becomes a person with rights before they are actually born. This would mean in some cases he would be part of his mythical anti choice group. He's sort of like the teens who I text who continue to respond until they get asked something they don't want to answer so sort of pretend like they aren't seeing the written words. ontheleft seems to only respond to what he is comfortable responding to and/or what isn't difficult for him to answer. I am genuinely clear that he would be much more cordial if say we where sitting in a bar but I can honestly say I have never heard anyone in any form of communication before who is so unwilling to listen to anothers poin of view.

I wish he would not bother meeting with a right wing religous zealot - Obama seems to be more concerned about actually doing things, changing things, fixing things - not getting bogged down in a lot of idealogical bs that has been going nowhere fast for centuries. I feel that meeting the Pope is beneath Obama.

OnTheLeft -
I was agreeing with EML that this blog "On Faith" presents only news stories on the Catholic Faith. I would like to see more stories about different faith traditions, or "opinions" as you would have it.

ontheleft: "One last thing, KJR. Most US Catholics reject your dark ages viewpoints - they actually voted for Obama in larger numbers than did the electorate as a whole. And the whining bishops in the Notre Dame matter constitute a minority of the whole. So it is you and they who are actually the faux Catholics, the (as you would call them) dissenters."

Oh really? That would make it a democracy, (which the Church is not) and if you identify yourself as part of th Church , it seems only logical that that means you are in communion with the Church and her teachings and authority. No matter how much you want to make the dissenters the authority, its is a sham, they are not in communion, and by definition, are dissenters.

Will Obama & First Lady call him Holy Father? Attend a Roman Catholic MASS & do as the Catholics do kneel and stand up at certain stages of the MASS like everyone else does at the MASS? I've noticed the First Lady WOULD NOT CONFORM TO ENGLAND'S TRADITIONAL COURTSEY TO THE QUEEN !!! FUNNY AT THE MIDDLE EAST & AFRICAN PLACES THEY "CONFORM TO THOSE TRADITION/CULTURE." I don't know what to make of it - but it is GOOD FOR THE PRES AND HIS WIFE TO VISIT AND SEE ALL THE DIFFERENT COUNTRIES AND CULTURES AND RELIGIONS.

OnTheLeft-

Haven't you learned anything yet? Democracy is not a virtue (but guess what form of government is)! And neither is dissent!

Holiness is to be found solely in conformity — I mean, communion — with the Authority. This makes heresy — I mean, dissent — unholy. That is, doubleplusungood.

Why is that so hard for you infidels — I mean liberals — to understand?

ontheleft,

By the way (and this goes to Jim as well - I'll answer you both on this), women have the sole right to their reproductive destinies, and the right to not undergo an unwanted pregnancy. They have the right to make medical decisions for themselves, without interference from the "devout", or from anyone else. Roe v Wade was decided quite wisely. And independent brain waves occur at about the end of the second trimester. Reference the decision and see what was written about state interest in a pregnancy

Posted by OnTheLeft June 24, 09 04:43 PM

So I never want to be accused of putting words in anyone's mouth or keyboard but form this it sounds as if you believe a women should be able to have an abortion anytime prior to birth for any reason? Even though you believe the unborn child has independent brain waves what around month six?

Peace and Blessings

ontheleft.

to bad science hasn't determined how someone gest pregnant. If people knew how maybe there would be less need for abortions as they could avoid in 99% of cases having unwanted pregnancies.

I love you!

It can only be a good thing for President Obama to meet with the Pope. There is zero chance that the Prez. could in any way influence the Pope, but hopefully maybe a tiny chance of the latter. Even if Obama were not to change his opinions on any one issue, which he probably won't, at least he will come away with a better sense of the Judaeo-Christian-Greco-Roman culture of these last 2000 years, how its leader thinks, in terms of eternal verities, not passing poll numbers, how the US is merely an offshoot of that culture, and even the enlightenment of europe which is the other pillar of US civilization is itself only an offshoot, a watered down version of Judaism and Christianity. I hope this intangible sense of romanita will give this intelligent but very young, inexperienced man a sense of gravitas, of the permanence of things, and yet the need to re-inforce the foundations of the Western Atlantic culture before it totally disappears.

Posted by proud2bcatholic June 24, 09 04:44 PM

Which part of my belief that Roe v Wade was decided wisely don't you get? Read the decision. So should I presume that you, like KJR, believe that women should have to die for your religious beliefs? Or that they should have to ask for your permission in the conduct of their private lives?

Posted by Miguel Calderon June 24, 09 04:54 PM

Gotcha, and I agree - that would be pretty cool.

Posted by KJR June 24, 09 04:59 PM

OK, we've covered this before, KJR. Now pay attention. Once upon a time, the church, in fact, functioned as a form of democracy. For example, bishops needed approval of their "flocks". It became a monarchy by simple usurpation of power. It is you, KJR, who plays the dissenter among US Catholics, you, the faux Catholic, you, who, were he alive today, would be among those calling for the execution of Jesus. You belong to a pretty small minority that is interested in a return to the Dark Ages, a time when, for example, women would be subservient to the likes of terrified males like you.

Posted by wepraiseyouontheleft June 25, 09 10:18 AM

What!! You claim that science hasn't determined how someone gets pregnant? I don't know what to make of that statement. Can I presume that your contention is the same bit of snark and sarcasm that lead you to claim that you love those for whom you have obvious contempt? I mean, you can't be serious about either of those statements. I'll presume those to be, as I said, attempts at sarcasm, though I'd have to admit, the point eludes me.

Yes wepraise, you bring up a good point. If people could only know what it is that causes 99% of the pregancies that are not attributable to rape or incest, we could reduce them...... your point is well stated. But for now, society demands that women have the right to kill their baby for something that they chose to do, willingly and with full knowlege of the chance of creating life - because that pesky little child will be too much of a burden. Sounds rather Nazi-ish to me... but it is the tragic truth. Recall how the "abortion" movement started - Margaret Sanger wanted to elimiate people of color or those whose economic value to society didn't meet a
certain threshold. Pathetic and true.

""The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it." Margaret Sanger, Women and the New Race (Eugenics Publ. Co., 1920, 1923)

On blacks, immigrants and indigents:
"...human weeds,' 'reckless breeders,' 'spawning... human beings who never should have been born." Margaret Sanger, Pivot of Civilization, referring to immigrants and poor people.

Margaret Sanger, the Patron Saint of ontheleft and the pro-abortion crowd.

ontheleft:
"And therein, Maureen, lies the gist of the anti-choice movement. These terrified males, having to deal with women as equals rather than as doormats."

You might be surprised to find that my wife does not feel nor is she (and I am sure I speak to the millions of other pro-life men and women) is treated like a doormat. To the contrary, she is the joy of my life, my best friend, and my soul-mate. And guess what, she is as pro-life as anyone I have ever met. Are you going to insult her and all of the other majority of women in this county to oppose abortion? You hate them as much as you hate the idea that an unborn child should have the right to life, and it is woefully sad, ontheleft. But have hope, I have no doubt that many on this Board are praying for you.

You know, just had a thought...

I would like to propose that we start a Novena for ontheleft, that God might soften his heart... We can coordinate a starting date once all have committed.

Who is in?

Posted by ontheleft @2:24 pm
"Posted by KJR June 24, 09 04:59 PM

OK, we've covered this before, KJR. Now pay attention. Once upon a time, the church, in fact, functioned as a form of democracy. For example, bishops needed approval of their "flocks". It became a monarchy by simple usurpation of power. It is you, KJR, who plays the dissenter among US Catholics, you, the faux Catholic, you, who, were he alive today, would be among those calling for the execution of Jesus. You belong to a pretty small minority that is interested in a return to the Dark Ages, a time when, for example, women would be subservient to the likes of terrified males like you"

Actually, ontheleft, you exaggerate as always. The Church was never a democracy. It started out with the apostles, and there is not hint that they were anything but the undisputed leaders in their communities, although all of them had plenty of help from lay people, female and male. The structure developed into one of consultation, with one, the bishop, in control, but he did much consulation, with his clergy and people, and those from hearby dioceses. Actually, the Church is back to this consultative structure, Pope consulting Cardinals and bishops, bishops have diocesan pastoral and financil councils, as does each parish.

Your are right however, that the 'power' of the Bishop of Rome only developed over time, mostly by default.. It took a sharp upward thrust from the 1100's onward, and Trent and Vatcan I were the pinnacle of the monarchial church. With Vatican II it has moved back in the consulative direction, not enough for some 'democrats,' too much who think we have become mushy and inefficient compared to the 'army' paradigm.

ontheleft,

I'm not talking about what is leagl I'm asking for your opinion.

So I never want to be accused of putting words in anyone's mouth or keyboard but form this it sounds as if you believe a women should be able to have an abortion anytime prior to birth for any reason? Even though you believe the unborn child has independent brain waves what around month six?

Peace and Blessings

OntheLeft,

And now I will try and answer your question which was
So should I presume that you, like KJR, believe that women should have to die for your religious beliefs? Or that they should have to ask for your permission in the conduct of their private lives?

My guess is your referring to my feeling abortion is always wrong. I believe if the doctors know for sure that a woman will die due to her birthing her child that is sounds reasonable she could choose to terminate the unborn child. First I'm not sure if this is something that can ever be definitively known. That being said as I've said several times before just as my wife and I for our son and my Mom and Dad for me would take a bullet or jump in front of a car for their child I believe my wife and Mom also would have risked their lives for their unborn child. I would hope even in today's culture most would feel the same. I also know if they said to my Mom or wife you may die but your child may live they would still have birthed their children. Of course I'm not the acme judgement company so if all abortions where make illegal but those where the woman is told she will definetely die I guess I would have to go along with that. If my math is correct that would make 99.9something percent illegal.

As I've stated to you I don't know about 77 time 7 times before no one needs to aks ME permission about anything but I believe a persons rights begin at conception when their gender, eye color, hair color, etc are determined. It is Ok for you to disagree but at least give me the right to my own opinions. I believe you have the right to be pro abortion even though I believe it's wrong. Why can't you just say it's Ok for me to have my opinions as well?

Peace and Blessings

ontheleft,

take a deep breath brother. Isn't Ok to disagree with someone and still be cordial and kid around a bit.

And as far as the whether I love everyone, even those I disgaree with, let's try this again. You often speak about those who follow say the Church Hierachy and not what Jesus taught. I try to follow Jesus great commandment which is to love God with my whole heart, mind, and soul and to love my fellow man/woman. Jesus also made it clear we must love our enemies. One of the most influential statements in my on going conversion was when I heard someone say Love is a decision and not an emotion. I do love you becuase Jesus tells me to and because you where made in the image of likeness of God. I hope someday you will enjoy eternity with God in Heaven. Although I can get frustrated it is pretty easy for me to love even those who I disagree on almost everything. Like my dad for instance. The first thing I pray about when I hear of someones death is that even if they didn't accept Jesus that He with his great mercy will give them one last chance to enjoy paradise. I could look Jesus or any human in the eye and say I want everyone to go to Heaven. Just becuase you say I don't love you or can't love people I disagree with doesn't make it so.

Posted by wepraiseyouontheleft June 26, 09 10:41 AM

What you don't get is that this has nothing to do with disagreement. While I find your login amusing (and I have to say it's pretty cool to tick off the "devout" to the point where my own login is integrated into yours), it demonstrates contempt. Now, I'm not bothered at all by your contempt, or anyone else's for that matter. But love is a serious matter, and too many of the "devout" throw the word around until it no longer has meaning. You demonstrate your contempt every time you post. You can't claim anything but contempt for those of whom you are contemptuous. It's like proud2b, attacking a young gay man who posts here, then claiming he loves him. Utter nonsense. As I said, I have no objection to, nor hurt feelings from, your or anyone's contempt. But you guys really do need to stop your cheapening of the whole idea of love by making claims that are patently absurd. This is not about disagreement.

ontheleft,

If it makes you feel better to say your ticking me off then go with that. The truth is however I have never been ticked off by anything blogged at me. In the beginning I was a bit frustrated as you didn't seem to respect me or anyone else having a different opinion which is where my login came from but angry not at all. Since my conversion several years ago I have learned that many will disagree and/or think I'm brainwashed, etc. Although you probably won't agree as you know me better then I know myself I am incredibly content with my life and with my positions on what I know to be the Truth. As a matter of fact recently I was accused of being to happy and was described by a co-worker who ran into a friend of mine that I am happy go lucky. I wasn't even offended being called lucky even though I don't believe in luck.

So you disagree with Jesus teaching that says we must love all?

ontheleft,

I do love you (Jesus tells me I must) and actually I sort of like (which I'm not called to). I don't believe there is anything wrong with me joking a bit with you. I'm sure if we met at a social function we might even enjoy having some small talk. Just as you feel my opinions/beliefs are skewed I believe some of yours are. That's OK. I am comfortable with myself as a man and believe God appreciates the effort I make to try and love him, my fellow man and to serve Him and them as well. I can't tell for sure but I will change my login from anything to do with yours because it might be upsetting you.

Posted by theartistfromerlyknownaswepraiseyouontheleft June 27, 09 09:36 AM

No, I disagree that Christians follow that teaching. You will also note the number of times I've stated that all people need to get to whatever is next in their own manner, and that all of these that do not harm others are good. So if you're happy in your religious beliefs, that's a fine thing. I'm certainly happy in my beliefs. But problems arise at the point at which people attempt to impose their religion on others.