Two Kinds of Christians

I was raised as a Roman Catholic. Up until my late teens I was a very strict follower of the faith, went to church every Sunday, etc. But then I gradually fell away from the Church. There were several reasons for this but here’s a recent story that reminded me of one of the most significant ones.
There have long been two distinct trains of thought within the Christian faith. One involves always turning the other cheek and providing constant handouts to whomever asks, no questions asked. The other involves holding transgressors accountable for their misdeeds and acts of charity more in line with “a hand up”. Ayn Rand’s philosophy is definitely connected with the latter. While I don’t agree with everything she has written, there’s absolutely no doubt that Atlas Shrugged had a profound effect on me when I read it in late 1993.
The earlier referenced news story refers to a group called American Values Network (AVN). Within the article, AVN is exposed for the frauds they actually are:

While the AVN is officially a non-partisan organization that wants to see Christians at the helm of both political parties, they’ve been vocal supporters for a number of Democratic initiatives, such as health reform and the anti-nuclear START treaty. They also focus on non-political initiatives such as medical aid for impoverished populations and housing aid for veterans, and advocate for morality-based policy solutions to climate change.

Reading between the lines, they’re mostly just a Leftist front group. The problem with that is that Leftism is, in practice, a religion (read “cult”) all on its own. Its precepts always supercede those of any formal religion. Leftists (aka “cult members”) can talk all they want about being Christian but in point of fact, that’s almost always just a talking point.
Getting back to the difference between a hand out and a hand up, Dennis Miller explains it another way: The Clueless versus the Helpless

79 Replies to “Two Kinds of Christians”

  1. I read an article a couple of days ago that basically laid down the chain of evidence which proved that radical leftwingers were funding religous oranizations with the intent to turn them into social justice Soro’s type advocates and it worked.

  2. I wouldn’t be surprised, Rose. If you follow Mark Steyn’s writing wrt the Church of England, the theory you’ve brought forth fits perfectly in with the reality of the situation of its imminent destruction.

  3. Unfortunately, The Church allowed itself to be removed from the marketplace of ideas decades ago. In that time “Christian thought” has been allowed to decay. Whenever a vacuum of thought is allowed to exist within any organization it can easily be infiltrated by external forces. The intended purpose of “organized” religion is to be a guide post to its adherants, allowing exploration of thought and belief with some defined boundaries. Instead it does little more that preserve theological doctrine, and contributes little intelect to current affairs.
    However, this is a generality and there are still some really engaged churches out there.

  4. Like many people, I began thinking of attending my childhood church when I reached some kind of maturity, but that coincided with the Mike Harris years in Ontario (ah, memories…). I quickly learned people with my political ideas were apparently not welcome in any church in Ontario.
    I’d like to say I developed my own sense of spirituality due to this rejection, but actually I just watched more NFL pregame shows. Yeah, me and Homer…

  5. Wiki:
    The Protestant work ethic (or the Puritan work ethic) is a concept in sociology, economics and history, attributable to the work of Max Weber. It is based upon the notion that the Calvinist emphasis on the necessity for hard work as a component of a person’s calling and worldly success and as a visible sign or result (not a cause) of personal salvation.
    It is argued that Protestants beginning with Martin Luther had reconceptualised worldly work as a duty which benefits both the individual and society as a whole. Thus, the Catholic idea of good works was transformed into an obligation to work diligently as a sign of grace.
    Whereas Catholicism teaches that good works are required of Catholics to be saved (viewing salvation as a future event), the Reformers taught that good works were only a consequence of an already-received salvation.

  6. “…advocate for morality-based policy solutions to climate change.” Not scientifically based policy solutions? Well, that’s a bit, um, who’s moralities exactly are we talking about here?

  7. The Church of Rome is in an extraordinary struggle with leftist thought at the moment, too. The prime example is the Canadian Church’s charity Development and Peace, which has become an entrenched, predominantly Quebecois beauracracy, which is supporting numerous Marxist organizations in the global south despite growing opposition and outrage here at home from both Church leaders and lay people.

  8. Forcing someone to pay for government ran social programs, is as worthless as those who feel entitled in receiving it. Neither challenges the heart.
    I am a Christian who does not believe in the concept of “forced compassion”. Conviction is what drives me to help, not guilt. Especially not the guilt that has constantly been thrust upon me by the government and media.
    Who I give to and how much should be between the receiver and myself. It should not be the governments decision.
    In regards to the “Wildrose” thread earlier today, I am a Christian voting for a non-Christian premiere in the next election of Alberta.

  9. Charity must stem from the heart, from the basis of one’s religion. Not just works, but faith. Christians are meant to be charitable because of Christ. Welfare, ect. is merely a cog in the governmental machine. You don’t give because you want to; you have to. Attempting to term welfare as some kind of charity is just disingenuous to say the least.
    I am pleased to see someone mention how much of a scam Development and Peace is. Thanks.

  10. Ignorance is bliss, right GYM?
    The definitive verse on this question, IMHO, is render onto Ceasar what is Ceasar, render onto God what is God’s.
    Once a religion’s focus shifts to a political movement rather than a means to achieve inner peace, it always ends badly.
    Just check out our extreme Muslim friends.

  11. “Ignorance is bliss, right GYM?” This is not ignorance, set you free, it’s called reality.

  12. EPHESIANS Chapter 1
    10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
    11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
    12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
    13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise,
    14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the REDEMPTION of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.
    We have the promise of redemption.
    We who are here are not yet redeemed.
    The Holy Spirit is like an engagement ring, a promise of the wedding of the Bride Groom with the Bride, yet to come.
    “Ignorance is bliss, right GYM?” This is not ignorance, set you free, it’s called reality.
    ~ryan
    A limited view of reality.
    1 CORINTHIANS Chapter 13
    10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
    11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
    12 For now we see through a glass, DARKLY; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

  13. Maybe leftist Christianism can be split into two groups. Strategic lobby group types and misguided well-meaning types. Either way, leftism obliterates the purpose of the church, and shifts the responsibility to the government. To the country’s financial detriment.
    Health care, education and social programs all used to happen without tax dollars.

  14. there’s absolutely no doubt that Atlas Shrugged had a profound effect on me when I read it in late 1993.
    Tell me, Robert, were you perchance a bookish fourteen year old in late 1993?

  15. A tad older than 14 then, Phil. I was working for a very large & overly bureaucratic company in Ontario at the time. My boss was driving me nuts. The only thing he excelled at was the Art of Not Making Decisions. Instead, he let his underlings make them all, claiming credit when they worked out and standing clear when they did not. In the first few chapters of Atlas Shrugged, I “saw” several of the people I worked for. And I realized I was not the one who was insane!!

  16. Apologies in advance for a lengthy post.
    I was raised in the United Church of Canada, an institution which I derided a few months ago in the National Post as the modern incarnation of comedian Flip Wilson’s “Church of What’s Happening Now”. The UCC of my childhood was against abortion, against (not outlawing, but disapproving of) divorce, against promiscuity, against drug and alcohol abuse, etc. Now – if it’s not actively in favour of the these things, it no longer objects to any of them.
    I married a Catholic, and after years with her, I came to appreciate the Catholic church for its constancy. “Modern” people take the Catholic church’s glacial approach to change as a fault; I see it as a virtue. If you claim to be the keeper of eternal verities, how can you change those “eternal” truths every few years? I remember what a huge thing it was to allow people to eat meat on Fridays, and that was – what? – 40 years ago?
    As a Protestant, I live with my guilt (which is immense and, to my mind, unforgivable), and I envy my Catholic friends their rite of confession, contrition, penance, and absolution. I wonder what it’s like to feel – to truly feel – that you have unburdened yourself to God, and that you have been forgiven for your foolish human frailty. But for anyone to believe that (and I mean deep down, in the bottom of your heart, scraping the depths of your soul believe, not some facile Madonna-esque kabbala dabbling), you need to believe the entire Catholic myth and mysticism, which is too hard for me at present.
    I am, I realize, an odd duck. I went to Expo 67 in Montreal at age 11. Because our cottage was on Lake Champlain, we entertained guests all summer; I visited the fair over 60 times. When you’re bright yet provincial, that exposure to all the best the world had to offer in film, sound, multi-media (long before the age of iPods, laptops, and the internet) was, to recycle a phrase from that era, “mindblowing”. I was never happy in a conventional school from that point forward, knowing that so much better, so much more engaging, and so much more powerful ways of teaching were there.
    I also read, in quick succession, Nineteeneightyfour, The Fountainhead, and Atlas Shrugged – all in 1968 at age 12. From that point on, I viewed all authorities with suspicion – school, church, government, police, what have you. Little I have seen in the last 40+ years has disabused me of that stance. Fans of the TV show “House” are familiar with Greg’s Theorem: “Everybody lies”. Every so called authority has adhered to that, in my experience. The Catholic Church falls under that rubric as well, yet I find it hard to condemn the entire institution.
    To me, virtually all the Catholic Church’s problems stem from one fundamental issue: the celibacy of priests. That is the worm in the Church’s apple, the snake in its garden if you will. If priests were allowed to marry, to have children, to let one of the strongest, most elemental drives present in humans – to have sex, to have a marriage, to have children – present itself, then I think most of the “scandals” surrounding the Church would disappear. But, as I noted above, the Church’s strength, and its weakness, is its resistance to change.
    I am not a Biblical literalist. I don’t believe the world was created in “seven days” (as in 168 hours). I don’t believe dinosaurs walked the earth with men. I am a Jesus skeptic. I don’t doubt such a man existed; whether he was the Son of God, whether he worked miracles, whether he was resurrected from his tomb – I can’t have an intelligent opinion. Pace Pascal’s Wager, I think it prudent to follow the teachings of Christ, and I try to do so.
    If I win the lottery next week, and have $1 million to give to charity, would I give it to any level of our government, or any currently popular charity, or the Catholic church? I hope it doesn’t surprise anyone that it would be the latter. Of all the entities on this Earth, the Catholic church, for all its faults, has bettered more lives, raised more hope, and created more good than any I can think of. Is it perfect? Of course not. Can it make things better, faster, quicker, and with less corruption than government? Indisputable, in my book.

  17. Health care, education and social programs all used to happen without tax dollars.
    ~Leslie
    Yes, and vote buying used to be illegal, but if the government creates a program which directly pays a household or member of an identity group or delivers a service that alleviates the need for the lucky candidate of the program and buys votes that way, then it’s somehow legal if every political party does it and none of them calls shenanigans on the other.

  18. Health care, education and social programs all used to happen without tax dollars.
    Yeah, just like in Haiti, now there’s a model.
    Sorry, Robert, I forgot subtlety is not the strong suit of the small dead mind.

  19. As a Christian I would like to add my two cents worth. Christianity is neither left nor right because its ideals are drawn upon by both the left and the right. That some take one teaching or another and run it to an extreme position should surprise no one. After all what good idea isn’t worth co-opting into your pet theme.

  20. Whoops. Here it is: There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.

  21. You noted:
    “One involves always turning the other cheek and providing constant handouts to whomever asks, no questions asked”.
    May years ago Father Tessier, a priest in Calgary said this at a sermon:
    “There is no virtue in poverty, it is incumbent on poor to get themselves out of poverty and on rich to do charity.”
    It expresses quite clearly that you have to do for yourself if you expect help.
    To throw money around like socialists do is counterproductive, though it may get you elected.

  22. This is not a great place to be instructing/receiving catechism. Starting a discussion (?) like this here, is like taking a bus that you know will run out of gas before the first stop.

  23. Actually, lwestin, there is nothing religious about the statement, it just so happens that a priest said it.
    Many times people try to divine things that are not. Why would that be?

  24. Because I find religion interesting I tend to take note of peoples religious beliefs. Honestly, I have not been overly impressed with the religious right (Evangelical), the religious left (United Church, Anglican) or the hybrids (Catholics). I didn’t find that any of those religions produced a better quality of citizen than the non-religious population. In fact, those that feel the need to constantly talk about their faith tended to be the most difficult to work with.
    In the end, I have decided that Christianity is much more attractive in theory than in practice.

  25. Posted by: LC Bennett at June 27, 2011 11:53 PM
    It appears you make a mistake that many people do.
    You can see the imperfections in others placed against the template; rather than using your God-given abilities to pursue your own self-improvement.
    If I’m incorrect, please forgive me.

  26. Kevin B, as a Protestant, your guilt is not unforgivable. You don’t need confession, contrition, penance or absolution. If your heart is true, you keep the faith.

  27. Kelly:
    I thank you for your kind words. I would – I would – that they were true.

  28. No, I still enjoy learning stuff on my own but I no longer have an interest in organized religion. The ideals of Christianity – morality, honesty, tolerance, etc. – are simply not reflected in the product, IMO. Much like Al Gore, most of the Christians I knew did not practice what they preached (or what their ministers preached). I fail to see the relevance of organized religion if they are ineffective at their task.

  29. kelly:
    Yep, and you can learn without a teacher, do brain surgery on yourself and be a top-flight athlete without a coach pushing you.
    You could, but it’s usually better if you learn from somebody who knows a bit more about the subject … those things you say you don’t need, actually you do need.
    Otherwise, a person could fool themselves into believing that they are perfected just by being ‘born again.’
    Never has worked that way.

  30. Grew up Calvinist .. Presbyterian.
    No hope of escaping judgement for even thinking like a dope. Turns out that the feminists and the peecee activists have wormed their way into even that stoicist doctrinairium …. being righteous and pure is tough…. until the progressives fix it for you.
    Then it’s as easy as pie.

  31. Have to say it: Catholics are in general pinkos and hypocrites.
    Indeed it was a shock for me to learn over the years just how far to the left most Catholics are – they tend to cover themselves in a very thin veneer of conservatism, some don’t even both to cover themselves at all.
    Don’t even get me started on their hypocrisy.

  32. Yuck. If only it were possible to keep all that religious nonsense out of politics. There is already enough BS in play already.

  33. Interesting and worthy discussion.
    I hate to be the bearer of bad or good news, depending on your personal belief system, but the official Church of Satan is in agreement with the American Values Network (AVN)on this one. The philosophy of Ayn Rand is an officially acknowledged source for some of the Satanic philosophy as outlined in The Satanic Bible by Anton LaVey, yet it does not embrace all aspects of objectivism. Perhaps this is why the AVN holds the position it does. Ironically, the AVN seems to have fallen for the same lie as the Church of Satan. Talk about paradoxes. I will attempt to clarify.
    The Bible states that Christians are to be the light of the world and the salt of the earth (Sermon on the Mount Matthew 5-7), yet we are not be conformed to this world (Romans 12:2)for the simple reason that if Christians conform to the world we lose our saltiness (savor)and our light is hidden.
    Politically, Christians are to pray and live the Lord’s prayer (italics mine):
    Our Father, who art in heaven,
    hallowed be thy name.
    Thy Kingdom come,
    thy will be done,
    on earth as it is in heaven

    Give us this day our daily bread.
    And forgive us our trespasses,
    as we forgive those who trespass against us.
    And lead us not into temptation,
    but deliver us from evil.
    For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory. For ever and ever. Amen
    How are Christians to treat others: What does light, salt, and the golden rule look like on a practical level? Jesus tells us in Matthew 25: 35-46 and many other scriptures, but I think the one below is the reason why so many Christians and the AVN buy into the socialist/liberal political ideology. (KJV)
    For I was an hungred , and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty , and ye gave me drink : I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying , Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:for I was hungry, and you gave Me nothing to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave Me nothing to drink; I was a stranger, and you did not invite Me in; naked, and you did not clothe Me; sick, and in prison, and you did not visit Me.’ Then they themselves also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?’ “Then He will answer them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ “These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
    We are to do these things on our own accord, I’m not convinced we can say well I did all those things through paying taxes by living in a socialist country. Socialism attempts to be a poor counterfeit for the kingdom of heaven on earth. It’s mans attempt at a forced utopia that denies us our God given free will to choose. It’s a disingenuous false doctrine that seeks to replace God and make the system itself God. It’s deceiving in that it “has a form of godliness but denies the power. Have nothing to do with them”(2 Timothy 3:5).
    The bible states that Satan is the God of this world (2 Corinthians 4:4). Meaning that “Satan is the major influence on the mind-set expressed by the ideals, opinions, goals, hopes and views of the majority of people. His areas of influence also encompass the world’s philosophies, education, and commerce. The thoughts, ideas, speculations and false religions of the world are under his control and have sprung from his lies and deceptions.”
    http://www.gotquestions.org/Satan-god-world.html
    Many who call themselves atheists would be surprised to discover, upon reading the Church of Satan’s theory/practice, that they are really technically Satanists, yet I must add the caveat that the Church of Satan does state that not all their beliefs and practices are listed therin, but most are.
    churchofsatan dot com/Pages/SatObj.html
    (SDA usually allows only one link per post)

  34. If the bible is an accurate reflection of the words and deeds of Jesus, then Jesus was the worlds first recorded communist. He specifically told his followers to abandon worldly goods, take care of others, forgive transgressions, etc. Of course, the reasoning given was that the world was coming to an end, so all that mattered was pleasing god … but, regardless, if you’re not an all-forgiving-commie then you’re not following the teachings of Christ.

  35. Alex, you are making a common mistake that many make. You are confusing a system of government with God. The first thing the communists did was to ban and utterly deny the existence of God. The system itself wanted to be worshiped and tithed to through taxes and the forced re-distribution of wealth. God is not a system and a system is not God.
    A system can not change a mans heart, it can force a man to behave a certain way under the threat of punishment or for an anticipated reward, yet the man’s heart remains unchanged and the system becomes more and more tyrannical in it’s attempt to ensure the man complies to maintain it’s authority as your God. How silly to think that laws can eliminate hate from a mans heart, as if pretending can cause an emotion to cease to exist. Have you ever had the experience of being forced by circumstance to do something, yet you were seething underneath or filled with resentment for having to do it, yet pretended to be genuine? That is what socialism does – good works must come from the heart and not be forced or mandated. That’s why God says he prefers you be either hot or cold, he spits lukewarm people out of his mouth. (Rev: 3:16)Compare that verse with John 3:16.
    Jesus said that unless a man becomes born again he can not enter heaven. That means repenting, accepting Jesus’ death on the cross as a sacrifice for your sins and living your life in joyful communion with the Holy Spirit which is given to you when you accept God’s free gift of salvation through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
    Hope that helped clarify the issue for you.

  36. Alex, you are making a common mistake that many make. You are confusing a system of government with God. The first thing the communists did was to ban and utterly deny the existence of God. The system itself wanted to be worshiped and tithed to through taxes and the forced re-distribution of wealth. God is not a system and a system is not God.
    A system can not change a mans heart, it can force a man to behave a certain way under the threat of punishment or for an anticipated reward, yet the man’s heart remains unchanged and the system becomes more and more tyrannical in it’s attempt to ensure the man complies to maintain it’s authority as your God. How silly to think that laws can eliminate hate from a mans heart, as if pretending can cause an emotion to cease to exist. Have you ever had the experience of being forced by circumstance to do something, yet you were seething underneath or filled with resentment for having to do it, yet pretended to be genuine? That is what socialism does – good works must come from the heart and not be forced or mandated. That’s why God says he prefers you be either hot or cold, he spits lukewarm people out of his mouth. (Rev: 3:16)Compare that verse with John 3:16.
    Jesus said that unless a man becomes born again he can not enter heaven. That means repenting, accepting Jesus’ death on the cross as a sacrifice for your sins and living your life in joyful communion with the Holy Spirit which is given to you when you accept God’s free gift of salvation through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
    Hope that helped clarify the issue for you.

  37. I’m sorry … your comment seems to be directed at me, yet has nothing to do with what I said. Are you speaking to some other alex?

  38. KevinB: ” … virtually all the Catholic Church’s problems stem from one fundamental issue: the celibacy of priests. That is the worm in the Church’s apple, the snake in its garden if you will. If priests were allowed to marry, to have children, to let one of the strongest, most elemental drives present in humans – to have sex, to have a marriage, to have children – present itself, then I think most of the ‘scandals’ surrounding the Church would disappear. But, as I noted above, the Church’s strength, and its weakness, is its resistance to change.”
    I appreciate your appreciation of the strengths of the Catholic Church. Years ago, I left the Anglican Church to enter into full communion with the Catholic Church, because of its faithfulness to Scripture and, IMO, its realistic understanding of fallen human nature. Most of the mainline churches have fallen for the modernist Kool-Aid that humankind, at heart, is good and that the role of the Church is to collect money to redistribute to the poor in order to be do-gooders. They seem to have forgotten Jesus’s words, “The poor will always be with us,” as they rush around trying to fix every global problem, forgetting in their frenzy to pray as they rely on their limited human understanding for solutions. Now, they want government money to spread a wider humanitarian net of compassion. They’re misguided to say the least and dead wrong in this approach if one is to be blunt.
    When I made the decision to enter into the Catholic Church, I liked to say “I’m going from trouble to trouble.” And that’s the truth! No Church is perfect but the Catholic Church is the best of the lot!
    Now, Kevin, for your statement about celibate priests: Celibacy fully understood and embraced is not the problem — and a married priesthood is not the answer. There are probably as many sexually related scandals in non-Catholic churches, but we often don’t hear about them because they tend to be adult-to-adult. Many a clergy marriage has floundered on the shoals of clergy affairs with parishioners or organists.
    You’re probably not aware that clergy marriages in North America are breaking up faster than the national average. There are HUGE stresses on clergy marriages and clergy families as the lives of very many parishioners are spinning out of control. ‘Used to be that clergy could depend on stable families and lots of volunteer help. Nowadays, clergy are dealing with unprecedented numbers of broken homes, fatherless children, drug and alcohol abuses, falling attendance, volunteers 80 and over who they bury with alarming regularity — and no replacement help is at hand.
    The answer to the sex scandals in the Catholic Church is not, I assure you, a married priesthood. With 3% of clergy abusing (way too high a percentage but it is the same in any profession), the Catholic Church is left with 97% of its clergy who minister sacrificially to their congregations. When celibacy is embraced as a gift rather than seen as a privation, clergy are remarkably effective. I’m fortunate to know a great many priests in the latter category.

  39. To add to batb
    THAT is why i am a lutheran , god made woman from man and brought them together one of the earliest signals from god for men and women to be together god wanted this …the whole priest’s can’t marry stuff is to much for any man to handle it is in our blood to want to be with a woman god made them for us it is natural for a woman to want a man . that was one of the early thing’s that made me wonder about catholisism. i still agree with mosto f it i am not bashing it i just have a few disagreement’s . but see it still as a legitamit church !!

  40. Phil, that was hilarious.
    Ayn Rand had a lot of good ideas. But her twisted personal life, and the bizarre effect she seems to have had/and still has on her followers prevents me from taking them that seriously.
    It’s so much fun to be lectured by Objectivists who mock religious people for quoting two thousand year old scriptures that have inspired great art (and a few good deeds now and then) — all the while basing their own morality on a glorified mid-twentieth century “airport” novel…

  41. Ayn Rand, 1968: An embryo has no rights. Rights do not pertain to a potential, only to an actual being. A child cannot acquire any rights until it is born. The living take precedence over the not-yet-living (or the unborn). Abortion is a moral right–which should be left to the sole discretion of the woman involved; morally, nothing other than her wish in the matter is to be considered. Who can conceivably have the right to dictate to her what disposition she is to make of the functions of her own body?
    Kate McMillan, 2005 [in response to the question, “Who are your intellectual heroes?”]: Ayn Rand

  42. Was Jesus the first communist? No I’m sure someone had tried that earlier however His followers did try communism in Jerusalem and some say that they almost starved to death as a result. The point however is that Jesus never laid out any sort of statist agenda. His calling to give without question or reserve was aimed at individuals not states. The significance of this teaching has meaning well beyond the scope of this discussion. Paul’s teaching that the Church shouldn’t be feeding the slaggards is aimed both at individuals and the church but again not at the state.
    My particular practice of Charity (love) is to provide emergency funding only but followed with finding steady work for the needy. Its a combination of Jesus’ and Paul’s teaching that I pray is the best demonstration of Christian love. Constantly receiving something for nothing is soul destroying and society corrupting.

  43. Kevin, thank you for your thoughtful post. I’m a Catholic convert from Anglicanism, which, like the United Church, has been “tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles” (Ephesians 4:14): both of these churches have embraced all kinds of practices which they considered sin just a few decades ago! Kyrie eleison.
    Celibacy is a particular charism, which is lived, by and with grace, by most Catholic priests. Our secular, anti-Christian age has skewed this issue completely out of shape. Who’d be surprised that the Zeitgeist believes that everyone must have sex to be happy? What a myth! I’m sorry that you aren’t yet comfortable with confession, “The Sacrament of Reconciliation”: yes, it can be scary, but I’ve found that it’s actually a great blessing and a means of “amazing grace” for healing the heart and mind. Maybe one day, you’ll be able to try it out . . .
    It made my heart glad to see you write this: “If I win the lottery next week, and have $1 million to give to charity, would I give it to any level of our government, or any currently popular charity, or the Catholic church? I hope it doesn’t surprise anyone that it would be the latter. Of all the entities on this Earth, the Catholic church, for all its faults, has bettered more lives, raised more hope, and created more good than any I can think of. Is it perfect? Of course not. Can it make things better, faster, quicker, and with less corruption than government? Indisputable, in my book.” Deo gratias!
    This link mirrors your thoughts here:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vs6qZd_xP1w&feature=related

  44. My very favourable reponse to Kevin has been held. ???
    Anyway, Kevin, I hope my post gets released.

Navigation