www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall We must conform our hearts to His

Say what you like about Pat Buchanan, he is not a "good politician" and speaks his mind without taking a poll first. I have worshiped with him at the [indult] Latin Mass in DC and he certainly appears to be a serious Catholic. I may have issues with some of his political views [though fewer in recent years as he has moved away from conventional Republicanism and toward pro-labor populism] but for you to disparage his faith is judgemental and uncharitable.

I would have to agree. If Buchanan were a "good politician," he would be in some elected office. I view him as an honest man with sincere beliefs, who also speaks his mind. Does that mean I always agree with him? No. But it means I respect his sincerity.

I agree. Pat Buchanan is well known for his adherence to Catholicism, especially in the area of social teaching. He doesn�t �play the religion card to his 'benefit' if and when it suits him.� He lives his faith everyday.

Buchanan�s opposition of NAFTA was a mistake. NAFTA is very pro-labor, creating thousands of jobs for poor people in Mexico as well as making goods cheaper for the American consumer. This is freeing American workers to retrain for higher paying jobs. The problems with NAFTA have been created mostly by the labor unions. But these same unions are still complaining that the United States should have enacted tariffs against the importation of light bulbs because it decimated the candlemakers union.

The assumption that Wild Goose makes, if I'm understanding him, is that from 29 ad to 95 ad the Church made a drastic change in its focus. It went from being a primitive society that demanded only passionate devotion to God to an institution with rules and regulations. I have heard of some rabid anti-Catholics (they would be anti-Orthodox if they knew anything about Orthodoxy) who make such a claim. The Mormons even claim that the Church moved into heresy during the writing of the New Testament. I have heard of such but I don't think I've met many people like this. Most contend that the Church continued to exist at least until Nicea I. Some would even give it until Charlemegne. All that is quite fanciful. To dismiss the sanctity of all those Christians from mid to late first century on is just incredible. One bit of that foolishness can be seen by asking oneself this simple question: "How do I know that my understanding of Jesus and his dynamic life is any better than St. John Chrysostom's, Gregory Palamas, St. Francis of Assisi's, or any of the myriad saints that have lived from 95 to 2005?" One way I might think that is if I'd been overtaken by hubris. Perhaps Wild Goose suffers from that spiritual affliction.

Dan L

PS Of course I may still not understand what he is talking about.

Sorry I'm a little confused. I dont exactly know what you're trying to say. I dont know the whole body of Catholic teaching and I think if I tried I'd be holding seashells by the seashore as I breathed my last. All I know is that the Word was made flesh and told the Apostles that whoever hears them hears Him and the one who sent Him. So I follow their successors as the Bible and the witness of early Church history says I should. I dont know about the rest of what you're saying, I dont fully understand what you want me to answer you.

Sorry

Well, Buchanan has several shortcomings regarding the social teachings, chiefly his hostility to [mostly Catholic] immigrants.
Blaming the labor unions for the devastation that NAFTA wreaked on American industry is like blaming Greenpeace for the Alaskan oil slick :rolleyes: .

Iconophile and byzanTN and CJ,

Here�s what I said about a religion card, and not about Pat�s faith: �Like most 'good' politicians, he will play the religion card to his 'benefit' if and when it suits him.�

I�ve never worshipped with or prayed with or attended a Bible study with Pat either� so I couldn�t comment on his faith in Christ or his faith in the magisterial teaching of the Church. I don�t impugn or disparage the faith of God�s own and I don�t take lightly having that charge laid at my door either, thanks.


Dan L,

Here�s what I said about a change of focus even in the pages of the NT: �Within the New Testament there is movement from faith as trust in God to adherence to a set of beliefs.� I don�t know where you get 29 C.E. from� the earliest NT writing (epistle) we have (from the hand of Paul) is probably 49 C.E. and the latest writings of the NT most likely were composed just a bit after 110 C.E.

[hubris - Overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance. ETYMOLOGY: Greek, excessive pride, wanton violence ]

The above may be, to use the words of iconophile, �disparaging, judgmental and uncharitable.� (St Matthew 5.22) I haven�t dismissed any saint�s sanctity�I have simply noted what every scholar/reader of the NT can see for himself or herself. A former pastor of your repute and years service for the Lord/in the Church (30 yrs) surely knows what the scholars/readers know.


Myles,
Is this the passage you have in mind when you say the Word told the Apostles:

Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesare'a Philip'pi, he asked his disciples, "Who do men say that the Son of man is?" 14 And they said, "Some say John the Baptist, others say Eli'jah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." 15 He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" 16 Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 17 And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." 20 Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ. 21 From that time Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised. 22 And Peter took him and began to rebuke him, saying, "God forbid, Lord! This shall never happen to you." 23 But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men." St Matthew 16.13-23 ? (see this book: Peter in the New Testament: A Collaborative Assessment by Protestant and Roman Catholic Scholars, 1973 Augsburg and Paulist; 1974 Geoffrey Chapman)

Or these three:

"Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me; and whoever receives me, receives not me but him who sent me." St Mark 9.37

"He who hears you hears me, and he who rejects you rejects me, and he who rejects me rejects him who sent me." St Luke 10.16

�Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears my word and believes him who sent me, has eternal life; he does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.� St John 5.24 ?

In truth, the Word told the Apostles many things� "Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book�" St John 20.30


�


Did some not understand my use of �repose� and �repository� a few posts back? Perhaps the above will help. blessing to all, wg

We must conform our hearts to His...

('His' refers to the Lord's... not P Buchanan's. Can we please start another topic elsewhere... if some want to discuss the 'heart' of Pat... )

Pat Buchanan is not hostile to immigrants. He is against ILLEGAL immigration.

Americans want to buy quality products and the lowest possible cost. Where there is a choice between two identical items people will buy the cheapest one. Labor unions are largely responsible for the exportation of manufacturing to Mexico because they fight increased productivity. New technology means that fewer, less skilled people can produce more and better goods. Technology advancement means that some jobs will go away. The candlemakers union was devastated because people started using electric lights. Unions fight progress because membership = political power.

American-made Hondas and Toyotas routinely rank far above Chevrolets, Fords and Chryslers in quality. Labor unions are largely responsible for this.

You have made a serious accusation.

Can you give some examples where Pat Buchanan has played the religious card?

Can you give some examples where he ignored his faith because it did not support his political position?

Do you consider every public mention of religion or morality to be playing the religion card?

Hi CJ,

Not that I have a PhD in English... but this is what I have said on two occasions before now:

... I'm awfully sorry to have led you to misunderstand.... blessing, wg