E-Mail 'Labour leader David Cunliffe speaks to Catholic Massgoers' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'Labour leader David Cunliffe speaks to Catholic Massgoers' to a friend

* Required Field

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...

7 Responses to Labour leader David Cunliffe speaks to Catholic Massgoers

  1. Timothy K. says:

    I’m sorry but a Catholic Mass is not an appropriate place for politicians to stand on their soap boxes.

    Yes they can come and mingle afterwards but why should parishioners have to sit and listen to political grand-standing before the final blessing and mass has finished?

    The fact that a TV3 camera crew are there turns the whole thing into a sideshow.

    Mass is for worship and prayer.

    It’s not a campaign trail.

    Go knock on some doors instead and leave church-goers to enjoy Mass or service in their parishes!

    And this applies to all politicians, not just Labour!

  2. Joe Hannah says:

    Am I right in thinking Lyndsay Freer is a spokesperson for our Bishop.

    How can she allow David Cunliffe to speak in a Catholic Church when a vote for the Labour party’s policy on euthanasia will probably send Catholics to Hell.

    Ms Maryan Street removed her End of Life Choice Bill from the private member’s bill ballot this year out of concern a debate about euthanasia could come up in election year and become a political football. Labour was also concerned the bill could distract from its main policies and deter more conservative voters.

    Asked whether she would revisit the issue after the general election, Ms Street said: “I’ll put it back in the ballot like a shot. That will be one of my first actions.” She hoped that if Labour formed a government next year it could be adopted as policy. (The last attempt to legalise euthanasia, in 2003, failed by 60 votes to 58.)

    A vote for this party with this policy is a mortal sin.

    Archbishop Raymond Burke the Vatican said “Catholics who support pro-abortion candidates participate in a grave evil. They must show a change of heart and be sacramentally reconciled or refrain from receiving Holy Communion.” If you think this does not also apply to euthanasia as well then ask your Parish Priest. God chooses when we die, not some doctor aided and abetted by the Labour Party.
    Joe Hannah

    • Tricia Kane says:

      I am disturbed by Joe Hannah, or any other person, stating that Catholics who vote for a political party that promulgates abortion or euthanasia are in mortal sin, and will go to hell.

      No one has the right to judge another person’s heart.

      The primacy of conscience was re-emphasised at Vatican II, do you remember?

      It is very dangerous to vote on one issue alone.

      If Catholics disagree with a policy, then join that party and work to change it. The policies may be in conflict with Catholic teaching, but they are not compulsory.

      Do not judge, remember!

  3. Francis Ford says:

    Re Lyndsay Freers comments, was Lyndsay present?

    Is there a transcript of the Labour leaders “talk” that we all could check?

    The “usual times” for notices and announcements has been used in my 30+ years of Mass going, to announce things pertinent to the Parish, upcoming meetings and the like.

    Why was the Mass not completed with the final blessing and then those of the congregation who wished, be invited to a hall or such facility to, listen to the political broadcast?

    Also why the Party leader and not the local member.

    We know David Cunliffe does not live in Mangere because he recently invited the nation to be in awe of his expensive home in Herne Bay.

  4. Joe Hannah says:

    Tricia Kane says that voting for a party or candidate that promotes euthanasia or abortion is OK. The Church teaches that it is not. Aiding with foreknowledge the commissioning of a mortal sin is itself a mortal sin. Catechism of the Catholic Church Abortion
    2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.71 Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.72 My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.73
    2271 Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion.
    This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law: You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.74 God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.75
    2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"76 "by the very commission of the offense,"77 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.78 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
    2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation: "The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."79
    "The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined…. As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."80
    2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being. Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human foetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual…. It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."81
    2275 "One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival."82 "It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material."83 "Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity"84 which are unique and unrepeatable.

  5. Joe Hannah says:

    Catechism of the Catholic Church
    2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible.
    2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable. Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and excluded.
    2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always, be respected.
    2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable. Palliative care is a special form of disinterested charity.
    As such it should be encouraged.
    2269 The fifth commandment forbids doing anything with the intention of indirectly bringing about a person's death. The moral law prohibits exposing someone to mortal danger without grave reason, as well as refusing assistance to a person in danger.
    The duty of making oneself a neighbour to others and actively serving them becomes even more urgent when it involves the disadvantaged, in whatever area this may be. "As you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me."

  6. Joe Hannah says:

    Further to Tricia Kane
    As for saying” Do not judge, remember”
    In Matthew 7:2-5, Jesus warns against judging someone else for his sin when you yourself are sinning even worse. That is the kind of judging Jesus commanded us not to do.
    If a believer sees another believer sinning, it is his Christian duty to lovingly and respectfully confront the person with his sin (Matthew 18:15-17). This is not judging, but rather pointing out the truth in hope—and with the ultimate goal—of bringing repentance in the other person (James 5:20) and restoration to the fellowship. We are to speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15). We are to proclaim what God's Word says about sin. 2 Timothy 4:2 instructs us, "Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage — with great patience and careful instruction." We are to "judge" sin, but always with the goal of presenting the solution for sin and its consequences—the Lord Jesus Christ (John 14:6).
    “Charity is what gives form to faith. Charity is the love of God and consequently the love of neighbour. Therefore it is about a faith that turns toward this neighbour who is certainly in error and reminds him of the truth, but in such a manner that, thanks to these reminders, the Christian will be able to sow the faith, re-establish someone in the truth, and lead this soul toward the truth. Therefore it is not a bitter zeal; on the contrary it is a faith made warm by charity.”
    Close friends also have greater obligations to instruct and admonish one another (cf. Jas 5:19; Gal 6:1). Hence, it is not the proper nature of a close relationship to simply overlook significant matters.

    The primacy of conscience was re-emphasised at Vatican II, do you remember?
    Religious freedom, in turn, which men demand as necessary to fulfill their duty to worship God, has to do with immunity from coercion in civil society. Therefore it leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ.
    Those of us who remain true to the doctrines and discipline of the Catholic Faith have been dropped into the middle of a fierce war between Christ’s Church and the ‘Culture of Death’ and in the heat of this battle we find we have no generals to lead us. What’s worse is that the generals are either ignoring the war by pretending it’s not happening or even negotiating over drinks with the enemy the Church’s terms of surrender.

    God does LOVE us unconditionally but He does not SAVE us unconditionally.