Martino Wants to Deny! (crime, tax, exemptions)

[Mr Yuk]

Originally Posted by ScranBarre

3.) Where was Bishop Martino during the past eight years of the Bush presidency, urging action on his behalf? Where was Bishop Martino in the 1990s? Was he pestering President Clinton to fight abortions or was he covering up the tracks of these altar boy sex scandals?

.

I am getting sick and tired of people bringing up these sex scandals every time they hear something they don't like from the Catholic Church. For starters, when most of these incidents were happening in the Scranton diocese, Martino was not the Bishop. Timlin was the Bishop who turned a blind eye to the pervert priests.

And in reality, the Catholic Church has no more of a problem with perverts than any other profession. Its just magnified when it comes to the Church. Percentage wise, there are just as many or more perverts/molestors that are teachers as there are priests....why don't people crucify teachers they way have priests on this issue?

[AmeriKenArtist]

Originally Posted by ScranBarre

It should come as no surprise that the VAST MAJORITY of the 57 comments thus far relating to this article on the web site of the Scranton Times-Tribune are more or less in accordance with my own beliefs.

1.) If you're going to open your yaps so much about politics, then you should have your tax-exempt statuses revoked.

2.) Why should Roman Catholics vote solely on the abortion issue when every Republican president since Roe v. Wade (1973!) has not a done a damn thing to overturn it? Furthermore, a president alone can't overturn a Supreme Court decision. Did they honestly think that Sen. McCain would have been any different than any of his predecessors, especially since he was a MODERATE Republican?

3.) Where was Bishop Martino during the past eight years of the Bush presidency, urging action on his behalf? Where was Bishop Martino in the 1990s? Was he pestering President Clinton to fight abortions or was he covering up the tracks of these altar boy sex scandals?

4.) If you're going to deny communion to anyone who is pro-choice, then how are you going to make that distinction during mass. Furthermore, why would you accept money from parishioners whom you refuse to serve communion to? Hypocritical, are we?

5.) Obviously the Roman Catholic church doesn't have as much influence as it would lead you to believe if President-Elect Obama won by such a hefty margin in heavily Roman Catholic states like our own.

It is the blatant hypocrisy that makes me sick! And the saddest aspect, is people continue to quietly saunter in and take their weekly mental manipulations. Children see through it!

[MermanMike]

If a gift is not offered freely, you are better off without it. I think it was Jesus who said something like, let he who is without sin, cast the first stone...I guess Bishop Martino finds himself fit to cast stones.

[greentown]

Originally Posted by go phillies

Martino is technically right, although I disagree with the way he speaks his mind on these issues, and the way he seems to talk down to people rather than to them. If these politicians are truly Catholic, and they actively support a grave sin like abortion, they should know enough themselves not to go up for Communion. I even know better, I haven't received Communion in months just over missing a few Masses and some other minor stuff. Some Catholics take the Eucharist too lightly.

Great information in this post! The funny thing about this thread is that most of those who are so vehemently upset about Bishop Martino and the Catholic church aren't even Catholic and don't understand the whole process of reconciliation and communion and the church's teachings on life issues. I agree that if these politicians want to tout themselves as Catholic in order to garner votes, they need to be Catholic in spirit, not just in name.

[SteelCityRising]

Originally Posted by greentown

Great information in this post! The funny thing about this thread is that most of those who are so vehemently upset about Bishop Martino and the Catholic church aren't even Catholic and don't understand the whole process of reconciliation and communion and the church's teachings on life issues. I agree that if these politicians want to tout themselves as Catholic in order to garner votes, they need to be Catholic in spirit, not just in name.

You didn't address the point though as to why it is acceptable that the Diocese of Scranton will accept donations and financial contributions from the very same people to whom they will be denying the Sacrament of Communion. If Bishop Martino is going to be so vehement about this issue, then I want him to force his priests to ask for a show of hands during mass to show who voted for Sen. Obama and who voted for Sen. McCain so that they can decide whom they're going to accept offerings from and whom they're going to offer the wine and bread too.

By the way, we're all Protestants for a reason. I'm pro-life. However, I also feel as if churches should NOT interfere with politics (that's part of their tax-exempt status requirements, is it not?) It seems as if Bishop Martino has been getting himself into more and more controversy the more and more he opens his mouth and inserts foot later. How exactly is your Roman Catholic diocese going to continue to operate if it does the "noble" thing and doesn't take the money from those whom they have branded "beneath" those who voted against Sen. Obama?

[AmeriKenArtist]

I don't agree with abortion, but I have no right to tell other people what to do with their personal lives! As just mentioned, why would I cast a stone against anyone else? I think it is arrogant and hypocritical to do this, especially in the name of Jesus! It is so blatant. catholic doctrine has been so manipulated, especially in the 5th century. I am so happy that I wasn't raised beneath that cloak!

[NYRangers 2008]

Originally Posted by go phillies

I am getting sick and tired of people bringing up these sex scandals every time they hear something they don't like from the Catholic Church. For starters, when most of these incidents were happening in the Scranton diocese, Martino was not the Bishop. Timlin was the Bishop who turned a blind eye to the pervert priests.

And in reality, the Catholic Church has no more of a problem with perverts than any other profession. Its just magnified when it comes to the Church. Percentage wise, there are just as many or more perverts/molestors that are teachers as there are priests....why don't people crucify teachers they way have priests on this issue?

This is very true. It's unfair to single out just the Catholic Church when it comes to sex scandals. There are perverts all over, from every field and every walk of life. The Catholics believe what they believe and it shouldn't bother anyone else or their beliefs in God.

[AmeriKenArtist]

The catholic church singled itself out by the grand scale of abuse that was covered up for decades!! Priests were moved around the country, and they simply had sex with more children! THAT is what is so despicable about the catholic church's involvement!

I was living in Boston when the news finally got international attention. The "holier than thou" attitude was neauseating! cardinal law(I call him Lawless) should have been imprisioned along with all the perverted priests that had their sexual way with so many children in that part of our country! Instead, he got a sweet little job back in Italy! The church leaders stonewalled the people and never once apologized to anyone face to face!

If you dare, rent the movie "Deliver Us From Evil." This is the true story of Catholic priest Father Oliver O'Grady who abused both boys and girls. It is difficult to watch! And it is the truth!

There is NO defense for these criminals hiding behind their costumes!

[greentown]

Originally Posted by ScranBarre

You didn't address the point though as to why it is acceptable that the Diocese of Scranton will accept donations and financial contributions from the very same people to whom they will be denying the Sacrament of Communion. If Bishop Martino is going to be so vehement about this issue, then I want him to force his priests to ask for a show of hands during mass to show who voted for Sen. Obama and who voted for Sen. McCain so that they can decide whom they're going to accept offerings from and whom they're going to offer the wine and bread too.

By the way, we're all Protestants for a reason. I'm pro-life. However, I also feel as if churches should NOT interfere with politics (that's part of their tax-exempt status requirements, is it not?) It seems as if Bishop Martino has been getting himself into more and more controversy the more and more he opens his mouth and inserts foot later. How exactly is your Roman Catholic diocese going to continue to operate if it does the "noble" thing and doesn't take the money from those whom they have branded "beneath" those who voted against Sen. Obama?

I will try to explain this in as simple terms as I can. When you receive the Sacrament of Communion in the Catholic church, YOU have the obligation to first examine your conscience and be sure that your soul is free of sin. In other words, the priest that gives you communion has no way of knowing what is in your soul and whether you are free of sin. Only YOU can make that decision. No matter what you saw on WNEP or the Scranton Times, rest assured that Bishop Martino is not going to have any way of knowing who voted for McCain or Obama. It's not so much a question of voting for either man; it is whether you support the church's law regarding life and not resorting to abortion. You may want to look up Canon Law regarding abortion to help you understand where all of this originates. If people do not want to follow these rules, no one can force them to, and if they choose to not donate money to the church, then so be it. I guess that is between them and a higher power. However, the bishop is obligated to follow these laws and they are very strict.

[DE_NePA]

Scranbarre - religion is not a democracy. There are religious laws (canon), and if someone doesn't agree with them, that does not empower to ignore or them. I'm not Catholic. I was raised Catholic, but at a certain point I rejected a good part of their teachings. Once that decision is made, it would be hypocritical to consider to consider myself a Catholic from that point on. However, many might be tempted to rationalize their position to a point where they can take the comfort of the rules and teachings that they agree with, but blithley ignore what they don't. That's their choice. But an ordained cleric of the Church can not knowingly ignore the canon. If he knows a person has sinned, and knows that the person has not repented, he is forbidden from serving Communion. Doesn't mean the person is not welcome in the church, or that the priest/celric owuld not minister to the person. But sacraments have rules pertaining to thier administration. As for not accepting donations, it would be no more logical for the church to reject the tithe of a sinner than it would for civic government to reject the tax dollar of a felon. Paying taxes doesn't give you the right to ignore civil and criminal laws, and making a tithe doesn't give you the right to ignore church canon. There's no logic in advocating either.
I care not in the least about your sexuality, but I'll point out that of all the folks that post here, you're the only one whose sexuality I know anything about. You wave it around like a challenge sometimes. You're an intelligent, articulate guy, but when I see the venom that you poured out over this issue, I wonder if the church could do any good in your eyes, given its stance on your sexuality. I think you have blood in your eye over it.
The simple fact is, the Catholic Church, just like any other religion, government or any sort of group of people, has rules/laws, and penalties for breaking them. Someone is tasked with enforcing them. You don't have a beef with the enforcer, you have a beef with the rule. If someone doesn't want to subjected to a rule, they have the choice to leave the religion, country, group, etc that has adopted the rule. If they choose not too, they accept the consequences of breaking the rule.
If anyone wants a religion that allows them to do exactly what they want, when they want, its available. Its called agnosticism.