From Maine to Phoenix to southern Louisiana, Catholic churches across the USA this weekend echoed with scorn for a new federal rule requiring faith-based employers to include birth control and other reproductive services in their health care coverage.
Dozens of priests took the rare step of reading letters from the pulpit urging parishioners to reach out to Washington and oppose the rule, enacted this month.
The rule requires nearly all employers to provide their employees access to health insurance that covers artificial contraception, sterilization services and the "morning after" birth control pill....
jpw wrote: âŠ Peter and Paul would never have allowed their money to go to abortifacients and went to prison many times for far less.
Pure speculation. That belongs in a historical novel, not an argument about what Scripture teaches. And anyone who paid their taxes to corrupt publicans back then (you think IRS agents are ruthless?) funded a radically pagan, violent regime, including circuses which murdered innocents. Yet where is Jesus the Tax Protestor?
"Lost men don't change their morals nor can others make them change, by legislative mandate or otherwise. Jesus Christ changes the hearts of men, through His gospel, one person at a time"
Quite so, TT, amen! But Rome doesn't believe this, which is why she & her âProtestantâ fellow-travelers make so much political noise. She has always stood for compelling belief & good works via external means.
The Catholic Bishop of Lincoln made a very public that he didn't want such qualifications being placed in the insurance programs of the Catholic Church. These restrictions are an anathema to the Romish church. These qualifications are also not acceptable to many Christians either. Of course we will agree to the fact that, Should Roman Catholicism really be classified as a Christian religion? -- No.
I'm sorry gentleman. I think you're talking in circles around each other. Or maybe I don't know what you're trying to say. "Correcting Rome's very depraved morals" and "care[ing] for those who have no voice" don't necessarily go hand in hand. "Care[ing] for those who have no voice," those who are weaker, oppressed, alien, orphan, widow, etc., is a very explicit Biblical mandate found throughout both testaments. I think that that is undisputed. Right? But that doesn't necessarily lead to "correcting Rome's very depraved morals," which I agree is NOT a mandate, possibly not even a concern of the church. Lost men don't change their morals nor can others make them change, by legislative mandate or otherwise. Jesus Christ changes the hearts of men, through His gospel, one person at a time. I'm not sure what you two are disagreeing about, or if you're disagreeing at all.
What were Christians doing in Rome way back when? Rescuing those abandoned babies...
Neil-- "am I my brother's keeper?" course not, you're free to have your money stripped from your wallet to pay for scandalous things. Peter and Paul would never have allowed their money to go to abortifacients and went to prison many times for far less.
commenters on here are right......much of the evangelical church has been abosrbed into globalism. the local church is too busy introducing new surveillance programs for S.S. to stay with the times of mother state than to worry, like RCC about the abortifacients.
since RCC did all those bad things back then and teaches a false gospel, it gives warrant today for protestants to do anything because they are free in Christ. hmm.
the love of Christ is a far cry from any of this intellectual manuevering.
for any Catholics reading this, thank you for carrying the prolife banner while the evangelicals waste away in their own crusades.
Then you have a problem with Peter & Paul, and by implication, God. Take it up with Him, for I can find not a shred of Biblical evidence that the Apostles or the early church concerned themselves with correcting Rome's very depraved morals. You are in effect denying the Sufficiency of Scripture.
Neil any society that overlooks and fails to care for those who have no voice will reap what they sow. The gospel does invade every facet of life. Should we just stand back and gather inside our own little mini kingdoms we call church or should we go be salty and try to make a difference.
Remember that the RCC is a vast empire, a sort of multinational corporation, even a government, with vast property holdings & NGOs way beyond scope of the Biblical church. It is only natural that such a political mandate is going affect their institutions with something to lose, such as hospitals. So pardon my cynicism, but where you stand depends a lot on where you sit.
And âProtestantâ parachurches & megachurches are in a similar position. Like Rome, they are not content to restrict themselves to Sola Scriptura on the proper role of the church.
Ancient Rome was no more merciful towards children (or people in general), abandonment of unwanted newborns being a common custom. So why didn't Peter or Paul organize a protest to âraise awarenessâ of pagans who flout Biblical moral standards? Evidently their focus was too narrow, only on the Gospel & church edification, whereas modern politically-aware Christians know better.
This is one issue where Catholics have it right. I attended a rally for life last weekend and couldn't help but notice the strong showing by the various catholic institutions. We, Protestants need to step it up on crucial issues, especially issues of life.