[Apologetics] RE: Birth Control Polls?

Wed Oct 27 16:10:19 EDT 2004

Jim,

You meant this humorously, so I won't hold you to it. 

However, if anyone seriously argued that only 7% of
Catholics support the Church's doctrine against
artificial birth control, I'd make them produce the
evidence of this dubious statement. 

He who asserts must prove.

Art

--- Jim Murphy <jmurf80 at msn.com> wrote:

---------------------------------

Polls have been done over and over and I've never seen
one even scare 10%.  I would guess that if you do a
google search you can find one.  

Jim

>From: Art Kelly <arthurkelly at yahoo.com> 
>To: Apologetics Group <apologetics at gathman.org> 
>Subject: RE: [Apologetics] About That Whole Kerry
Excommunication Thing 
>Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:30:19 -0700 (PDT) 
> 
>Jim, 
> 
>Your satire makes an interesting point. 
> 
>While there is a diffeence between what someone does 
>privately and what somenone does openly and publicly 
>to dissent from official church teaching, your humor 
>is nevertheless very well done. 
> 
>Oh, where did you get the 4% to 7%? How would anyone 
>know such a thing? 
> 
>Art 
> 
>--- Jim Murphy <jmurf80 at msn.com> wrote: 
> 
> 
>--------------------------------- 
> 
>Hello to all you Catholics 
> 
>My name is the Rev. Calvin Luther of "Let's Not Pray 
>to Mary Baptist Church."  I have noticed that you 
>Catholics are mighty inconsistent when It comes to 
>excommunicating members of your church.  I'd like to 
>help you out of this little problem.  Last time I 
>looked only about 4-7% of your members follow the 
>church teaching on the issue of birth control.  Why 
>not excommunicate the whole bunch.  A few Sundays
from 
>now just have them all sign what you might call a 
>doctrinal purity statement.  I'll have my church
buses 
>outside all of the Parishes in my neck of the woods 
>and I'll pass the word along to other ministers 
>throughout the country.  Just remember, "Jesus came 
>for the righteous".  Or was that for sinners?  Oh
heck 
>I can't remember. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >From: Dianne Dawson <rcdianne at yahoo.com> 
> >To: Apologetics Group <apologetics at gathman.org>, 
>   David Mullaney <MayDay1 at aol.com>, Holly Gatling 
><sccl at bellsouth.net>,        Mary Ellen Jackson 
><maryjackson8 at bellsouth.net> 
> >Subject: [Apologetics] About That Whole Kerry 
>Excommunication Thing 
> >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 06:21:01 -0700 (PDT) 
> > 
> >by Phil Lawler 
> > 
> >Other Articles by Phil Lawler 
> >Contact this Author About That Whole Kerry 
>Excommunication Thing 
> >10/27/04 
> > 
> > 
> >  Is Kerry excommunicated or not? If you have been 
>following this, your head may be spinning by now from

>all the charges, denials and counter-charges. 
> > 
> >The story that caused all the excitement was
reported 
>in an interview on the October 15, 2004 edition of 
>EWTN’s the World Over Live with Raymond Arroyo and
was 
>immediately reported online by a CWN (Catholic World 
>News) headline claiming that John Kerry had incurred 
>the penalty of excommunication because of his 
>continued public support for abortion and euthanasia,

>in defiance of Church teaching. 
> > 
> >At the center of the swirling controversy is Marc 
>Balestrieri, a California canon lawyer, who has 
>brought a canonical suit against Kerry (and others), 
>citing his flagrant dissent from Church teachings on 
>the dignity of life. This summer he visited Rome and 
>spoke to officials at the Congregation for the 
>Doctrine of the Faith, asking them whether public 
>support for abortion could be considered heresy, and 
>thus grounds for excommunication. On October 15th, he

>announced that he had received an affirmative answer.

> > 
> >Balestrieri's announcement drew a firestorm of 
>criticism. Vatican officials insisted that the
opinion 
>Balestrieri was citing — a 4-page letter from Father 
>Basil Cole, OP, a respected American theologian — was

>not an official response from the Vatican, nor an 
>authoritative statement of Church policy. 
> > 
> >That is true. But even if Father Cole's letter only

>expressed his own opinion, it is an opinion worthy of

>consideration. Marc Balestrieri asked a question, and

>he received an answer. The answer wasn't "official," 
>and it didn't come from the Vatican. But it still was

>an answer. And in the absence of any official
response 
>from Rome, it was the best answer available! 
> > 
> >Although several other media outlets have claimed 
>that the Vatican has rejected the notion that Kerry
is 
>subject to excommunication, as I see it, those other 
>outlets have the story wrong. 
> > 
> >Let me explain: 
> > 
> >The Vatican has not said that Father Cole's opinion

>is in error — only that it is not authoritative. 
>(Technically speaking, the Vatican has said nothing
at 
>all. There have been a few public comments by 
>individuals working in the Roman Curia, but no 
>"official" statement whatsoever on this topic.)
Father 
>Cole's judgment remains, at the least, a very 
>defensible position. One Catholic news agency quoted 
>an unnamed Vatican official as saying that Kerry is 
>not a heretic. But an offhand quote from an anonymous

>source is surely no more "official," and no more 
>persuasive, than a reasoned argument by a respected 
>scholar. And keep in mind that Father Cole's letter
to 
>Balestrieri was written at the request of a prominent

>Vatican official, who presumably had a rough idea of 
>what his fellow Dominican would say. 
> > 
> >Maybe Marc Balestrieri misled Vatican officials
about 
>the purpose of his questions, as one of the Vatican 
>officials implied. He insists that he did not, and
has 
>issued a statement rebutting the charges against him 
>as well as offered documentary proof on his website. 
>Probably he pressed his argument too far, by applying

>the logic of Father Cole's letter to the particular 
>case of John Kerry. Very likely he undermined his own

>canonical case by generating premature publicity. 
> > 
> >Nevertheless, give Marc Balestrieri credit for this

>much: He asked a very provocative question: Is a 
>Catholic politician like John Kerry subject to the 
>penalty of excommunication? 
> > 
> >The answer he received was unofficial. The answer
was 
>unauthoritative. The answer was debatable. But the 
>answer was Yes. 
> > 
> > 
> >Phil Lawler is editor of the online service
Catholic 
>World News. This article is adapted from the CWN 
>Weekly News Summary, and is used with permission of 
>the author. 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >Like a deer that longs for running waters so my
soul 
>longs for you, O God. 
> > 
> >Ps 42:1 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >--------------------------------- 
> >Do you Yahoo!? 
> >Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We 
>finish. 
> 
>_______________________________________________Apologetics

>mailing 
>listApologetics at gathman.orghttp://bmsi.com/mailman/listinfo/apologetics

> 
> 
>===== 
>ART KELLY, ATM-S 
>13524 Brightfield Lane 
>Herndon, Virginia 20171-3360 
>(703) 904-3763 home 
>arthurkelly at yahoo.com 
>art.kelly at cox.net 
>akelly at americantarget.com 
>ArtK135 at Netscape.net 
> 
> 
>_______________________________________________ 
>Apologetics mailing list 
>Apologetics at gathman.org 
>http://bmsi.com/mailman/listinfo/apologetics 
> 
><!DSPAM:FFDBA7D885931412128944348> 
> 

=====
ART KELLY, ATM-S
13524 Brightfield Lane 
Herndon, Virginia 20171-3360 
(703) 904-3763 home 
arthurkelly at yahoo.com
art.kelly at cox.net
akelly at americantarget.com
ArtK135 at Netscape.net