Nick Gillespie | October 13, 2004
As a lapsed Catholic, my favorite part of the debate so far has been Kerry's invocation of the doctrine of works as a path to salvation (was disappointed that Bush didn't respond with the Pauline doctrine that all your works are rags in a fire...).
Both candidates are drawing sharper distinctions now, especially on health care and Social Security. Indeed, they're both shouting out the longstanding Dem vs. Rep wisdom on these issues. Which might mean this debate is besides the point.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
It's intriguing that Kerry chose that particular passage in
response to a question about why he doesn't apply his faith to his
work. Probably one of the worst possible verses in the entire Bible
to use in that context, though slightly better than "Blessed are
they who will dash your newborns upon the rocks."
Of course, it's most likely that he just wanted to show off his
knowledge of the Bible.
I was amused by Kerry's moves to out-God Bush. But who knows, maybe he *is* more a "man of faith" than Bush, as Bush's faith has always struck me as more a political maneuver than actual belief.
Of course, it's most likely that he just wanted to show off
his knowledge of the Bible.
Knowledge of the bible, of course, is proof of the charge that
Kerry isn't a real Catholic.
Independent of the merits, I think the abortion litmus test in
both major parties is a significant contributor to why the
candidates we get suck. Not the only one (I think campaign finance
"reform" is another big one), but a pretty big factor.
No one who wants to have a snowballs chance in an Iraq summer to be
nominated would ever say: "I don't know if Roe should be overturned
or not, but whether or not that happens I will respect the rulings
of the court. There are other issues that are a hell of a lot more
important for a Supreme Court justice I might nominate...like
protecting the constitutional rights that are clearly enumerated in
the Bill of Rights."
Tim,
I agree -- and my comment was facetious, since I suspect Kerry was
just repeating a Bible verse he'd heard without really thinking
about what it meant. I mean, how do you say, "I have faith but it
doesn't influence my politics," and then trot out "Faith without
works is dead"?
crimethink,
Its kind of interesting how many Christians slaughtered each other
over those doctrinal differences. Every so often, when I get a soft
spot for Christianity, all I have to do is read Martin Luther's
thoughts on the Jews, and how mass killings and the destruction of
their religion and culture by the sword were the best thing for
them.
So Kerry's an ex-altar boy, and Bush is an ex-drunk. That JFK II
is living in sin with a woman not his wife (no divorce for
Catholics, right, and his {ex-}wife is still alive), means "he's
going to hell" anyway.
His assertion that the doctrine of works requires him to use the
government to rearrange society is nothing less than Liberation
Theology, if in a diluted form. Peter, put up your sword
would be my reply, if I were still religious. That'd apply to
Bushie's government support for "religious values," too.
Kevin
(ex-altar boy, ex-Catholic, not currently drunk.)
kevrob,
The notion of a just prince creating a righteous society is a lot
older than the fad of liberation theology; it was central to
Luther's theology for example.
Actually, kevrob, Kerry obtained an annulment of his first
marriage, so technically his second marriage is valid.
The issue of Catholic marriage tribunals run amok is one for
another forum.
"works as a path to salvation "
As a lapsed Catholic myself, I recognize this as the complete
opposite of what Jesus said according to the New Testament. But I
figure most politicans have already violated the false god
commandment, so nothing else they say on the subject matters.
Patrick,
Bush's faith is doubtless self-serving, but I think it's genuine
for just that reason. Feeling that he's been selected by God for
the historic mission of saving the world is a very nice alternative
to admitting that Poppy and his political connections have bought
the presidency for him, like so many of his other failed ventures,
and him as an empty vessel. It reaffirms his sense of entitlement,
but gets him off the hook with his family and makes him out to be
something more than just another worthless frat boy.
I think that's the subtext to his "higher authority" remark when he
was asked whether he consulted his father before the war.
If he loses this election, do you think he'll try to go "mano a
mano" with God?
I know that Kerry sought an annulment, but I don't
believe anyone really knows if he received one. Such judgments are
not public records in the U.S. What a crock, to make "bastards"
(sic) out of his kids, though.
I still think anyone who uses the teachings of Jesus as an excuse
to order the world through coercion doesn't get the Gospel
message.
Kevin
"Actually, kevrob, Kerry obtained an annulment of his first
marriage, so technically his second marriage is valid."
I wonder how much he had to pay for that?
kevrob,
If his marriage to THK was blessed in the Church, that's a good
sign the previous one was annulled.
BTW, divorced and remarried Catholics are also forbidden from
receiving Communion, so if it wasn't annulled, I guess Kerry has
two strikes against him in that regard. :D
On a damp May night on Nantucket nine years ago, John F.
Kerry and Teresa Heinz exchanged wedding vows in a small civil
ceremony at Heinz's oceanfront home.
http://news.bostonherald.com/national/view.bg?articleid=36509&format=
Boston Herald, Wednesday, July 21, 2004
Couple of fornicators, goin' to hell. :)
Kevin
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245