The 'Gospel' of Tolerance: You Must Approve Comments
The Gospel of Tolerance really only has one rule: thou shalt tolerate any action, belief, lifestyle, agenda, and person except the person who believes a certain lifestyle, action or agenda is wrong and has the gall to say so out loud. The real goal here is not acceptance but submission. It's not enough to "get along" or tolerate quietly. You must approve. You don't dare disapprove publicly. Those who don't tow the line ... Continue Reading
31 - 40 of 58 Comments
Leave a Comment
Most Popular
Editorial: Is the Scandal Ridden Obama Administration Becoming a House of Cards? Read More
Did God make junk? Scientists say 98 percent of human genome is junk Read More
There's the problem! Americans are out of touch with scientific consensus on climate change Read More
Courageous Cardinal Seán Patrick O'Malley Will Not Attend Boston College Commencement Read More
Sex In Uniform: Why the Increase in Sexual Assaults in the Military? Read More
Daily Readings
Reading 1, Acts 28:16-20, 30-31
On our arrival in Rome Paul was allowed to stay in lodgings of ... Read More
Psalm, Psalms 11:4, 5, 7
Yahweh in his holy temple! Yahweh, his throne is in heaven; his ... Read More
Gospel, John 21:20-25
Peter turned and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following ... Read More
Saint of the Day
St. Pope John I
May 18: St. John I, Pope and Martyr (Feast day - May 18) A native of ... Read More
Marketplace
Who's Who in Heaven: Real Saints for Families in Plain English Read More
Catholic Hand Stamped Keychain. St Christopher. Engraved. Gift for Men. Read More
Religious Freedom! What does that really mean? Freedom! What is freedom?
Is it to do whatever I please? Regardless of how it affects my neighbor? Certainly not! As soon as my 'freedom' affects my neighbor morally negatively, it is not a freedom anymore.
Tolerance! - I tolerate because I cannot accept but have to be civilized. Tolerance is a negative position. I do not tolerate homosexuality because it is wrong, it is a perversity and an abomination - no matter what the law dictates, it is a bad thing.
It is us, the heterosexuals, who suffer, because the law had tied our hands behind our backs by supporting the immoral acts in the name of 'freedom'. But, the 'freedom' given to homosexuals brings pain, disgust and sickness to the rest of our society - and we have no recourse except to protect our children and teach them the Truth.
And does anyone still wonder why the great nations of this world are crumbling?
I do disagree slightly with my beloved Archbishop Chaput. I do think "tolerance" is a Christian virtue that may be defined thus:
"Tolerance is that good habit – that is, a virtue – in which the Catholic Christian actively and consciously loves his neighbor, especially when the neighbor lives in grave sin, by avoiding judgment and showing him the same mercy the Lord shows us for our sins, as we choose the right means to eliminate or ameliorate the evil incurred in this world by the neighbor’s (and our own) actions, through the right exercise of the theological and cardinal virtues and the gifts of the Holy Spirit, so that both our neighbor and us might attain salvation and everlasting life in the world to come."
*People* are the objects of tolerance, not actions. If you wish to know how I reached this conclusion, you may read it all here:
http://vivificat1.blogspot.com/2011/08/catholic-definition-of-tolerance.html
+JMJ,
-Theo
Great article! Thank you Jennifer.
Wow ... powerful words. Great piece.
Did anyone notice the Sunday 09/04 reading . Ez 33:7-9. At the risk of being called intolerant and a bigot or racist we have a duty to call evil a sin.
Whoohooo, you go Jennifer!, thanks for putting this in writing. One of the biggest misconceptions regarding catholic teaching on homosexuality that I come across is that we have an "intolerance" towards the persons, not the sinful acts. The level of ignorance with what the Catholic church teaches is mindboggleing (esp in this age of info at a fingertips of the www), the same verb can be used on the other side of the coin, with those who do and thumb their noses at it.
Jarle Georg Tveitan: You have a misconception of what our founding Fathers meant by "religious freedom." You see, they did not want the GOVERNMENT to dictate to them how to express their faith. Remember, the monarch in England is the head of their church and calls the shots. So, in order to be able to express their faith as they saw fit, the founding Fathers felt that all Americans should have that freedom. It was NOT intended to protect citizens from each other, but to protect all citizens from a state-sanctioned religion. We are moving farther and farther from the founding fathers intent. We are being pressured now to belong to the government sanctioned religion of "secular humanism" and relativism, which boils down to simple nihilism. I would suggest that you read George Orwell's 1984. He was prophetic in that writing. What is really troubling is that more and more these "religious" tenets sanctioned and promoted by the marxist liberal mainstream media, liberal educrats, hollywood, and the pro-homosexual/abortion crowd, are no longer merely suggestions. They are becoming frighteningly more insistent and INTOLERANT of anyone who opposes those false tenets. If that isn't religious intolerance, I don't know what is. The neo-dark ages have arrived. Persecutions follow...make no mistake about it.
Heather, you speak of the importance of allowing religions "the freedom to stand up for what they believe is morally right and to live unhindered accordingly."
Arent non-religious people deserving of the same freedom? Shouldnt atheists, gays and lesbians also have "the freedom to stand up for what they believe is morally right and to live unhindered accordingly." even if what they believe is morally right is different from what you believe?
Sounds to me like you think of freedom as something that is reserved for people who share your views.
At which point your "freedom" becomes nothing more than tyranny.
Excellent article! You hit so many points dead on the head! I think many people need to take another look at what religious freedom means. Yes, our country supports religous freedom, and praise God for that when you look at the history of why religous freedom was so important especially at the time of the founding of our country. Along with that, every government has to stand on moral principles, to have a compass to guide its rulings and laws. Our country was founded on Christian moral principles and Natural Law. Our government should continue to abide by and uphold those principles. Unfortunately, there is a vast movement to remove our government from its Christian heritage and principles. In otherwards, there is a desire for a completely "unbiased, tolerant" government. To be so, it would have to be atheistic/agnostic...and what principles would then guide its policies and laws? The only thing they could posibly hold onto is the principle of "tolerance".
To promote tolerance, that would then require the government to put a halter/control on all religions that in any way do not abide by complete and absolute tolerance, or in the case of China, abide by what the government wants. In other words, not allowing various religions the freedom to stand up for what they believe is morally right and to live unhindered accordingly. (remember China?...you have the governmental approved catholic church that is regulated by the government and only allowed to uphold principles in-line with policies and laws that the government upholds. Then you have the underground Catholic church that holds to true catholic moral teaching ) -
thank you jennifer. this is an eye opener to every pretentious "tolerant"; to people who upholds religious freedom for their own selfish interest alone but intolerant to catholic beliefs. hope you continue your faithful mission. God bless you and your family.