- in a studio that was not a town hall...
pos·ture
Pronunciation: \ˈpäs-chər\
Function: noun/verb
Etymology: Middle French, from Italian postura, from Latin positura, from positus
Definition:
n. the way a person holds and positions his/her body; a situation or condition; one's attitude or the social or political position one takes towards an issue or another person;
v. to put one's body into a posture or series of postures, especially hoping that one will be noticed and admired; to pretend
It's likely that Saturday Night Live will parody what took place Tuesday night with candidates McCain and Obama at center stage.
Isn't that somewhat redundant? A parody of a skit?
Or were we supposed to take seriously the posturing, the slogans, the sound bytes, the "he said/he said's," and all the inaccuracies and errors one hopes weren't intentional?
But if the mistakes were not intentional, how are they defensible?
Whom should we believe?
-ConcordPastor
I wonder what Lincoln and Douglas would think of our 21st century debates?
ReplyDeleteAll I know is that I got mighty tired of hearing John McCain say "my friends" to the audience. You betcha, by golly, I got might tired of that I'll have ya know.
I was offended by a lot of things on both sides, but the worst was when McCain said, with apparent venom, "that one."
ReplyDeleteSeems like there is bunch of anti-Republican feeling here. Is it possible that this is turning into a political blog? Is that the direction people want to go?
ReplyDeleteAs long as the Church addresses itself to the political situation (which it will always do) there will be room for discussion of attending issues on this page.
ReplyDeleteThe church attends to the moral issues that are out in the public square. As for particular candidates, it wisely refrains.
ReplyDeleteThe Church (note the upper case C)wisely refrains from commenting on particular candidates while the church (note the lower case C) is free to do so.
ReplyDeleteAnd what are we to think when you, as Pastor, open your internet cafe as it were, and then publish (and you must approve these messages, one by one) messages that tilt against one candidate? After all, you are a real Pastor of a real Parish.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous: I hope that the real people of the real parish of which I am the real pastor (and the real readers of this blog who live beyond my parish boundaries but who visit here) will learn that this is a blog where the real guidelines for forming consciences for faithful citizenship, written by the real American Catholic bishops have been posted and where the pastor really encourages his readers to bring their faith and church teaching to bear upon their real decisions in the coming election.
ReplyDeleteAnd if you, Anonymous, would like to "tilt" in another direction - you are really free to do so.
Really!
Amen to that- here is to tilting away in the directions that our prayerful and informed hearts and consciences lead us to!
ReplyDeleteMy heart leads me away from a candidate who voted three times to deny basic medical care to infants born alive after attempted abortions. Away from a candidate who launched his campaign in the living room of a couple responsible for terrorists bombings at a police station and a judge's home (not to mention a plot against the Pentagon). My heart misses a beat when I read of schemes for massive voter fraud perpetrated by ACORN, a group associated with one of the major candidates from his "community organizer" days. And away from a candidate who associated with a pastor who says "God Damn America" and a limelight-seeking priest who ridicules a female senator during a sermon.
ReplyDeleteI prefer a man who was tortured for his country and broken. I prefer a woman who was willing to bear a less than perfect child.
Our Lord never pulled His punches on the hard truths of His gospel. When He saw sin he named it. His response was "go -- and do no sin this sin again."
Too many people are quick these days to claim cheap grace for themselves, offering themselves absolution without repentance, without penance.
Anonymous 10:24 AM, I am not sure where you get your information, but I would like to refer you to the sidebar dotCommonweal (ACORN grilled) for additional information on one of the topics mentioned in your comment.
ReplyDeleteI would caution not to believe everything you hear. Many of the pundits spew a lot of misinformation or twisted information. Much of it is mean spirited and hate filled.
I rely on PBS for my TV news. In my opinion they offer as unbiased coverage as you can find in the media.
Dear anonymous 3:53,
ReplyDeleteTry googling "acorn voter fraud 2008" and you will find stories in the Washington Post, UPI, the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Fox News and a Kansas City TV station all dealing with ACORN fraud probes, raids or indictments. All it takes is .31 seconds.
I used to donate to PBS, until WGBH sold my name to the state Democratic Party and I was suddenly getting invitations to $1,000-a-plate dinners for Ted Kennedy. Even though that was a while back, I still have a bad taste in my mouth. PBS doesn't seem unbiased to me, for that reason.
Anonymous 3:53,
ReplyDeleteI think it is hard to know for certain how political campaigns get people's names, although you seem to be sure PBS was involved in your case.
I would like to comment that for years I received thank-yous for my past large contributions, and invitations to upcoming award dinners (I was asked to contribute much more at said dinners)for the Republican Party. The amusing fact is that I have never contributed a cent to the Republican Party. Nor ever been registered as a Republican. Not to mention that I think my total life contributions to another party do not total more than $20.00.
I am probably THE MOST UNINFORMED person in the United States on many political issues. (I am embarrassed to say this, but also know that, under the circumstances, that is just the way it is... )
ReplyDeleteWith that said, I am glad I read through the comments on this post. It was hard to read- I felt "attacks" happening that, for lack of a better way to say it, didn't seem fair.
But then I realized- (I think maybe my heart and eyes opened)- that this is okay. As long as people can try to keep an open mind and heart while voicing their opinions and thoughts and feelings, I think this is okay. Hard, but okay.
Thank you, ConcordPastor, for keeping your mind and heart and eyes open.
Yes, it seems a shame that attacks have been leveled, particularly at anyone who deviates from the party line.
ReplyDeleteClear statements of doctrine are "sledgehammer" statements. What that shows is a woeful lack of teaching-- clearly these must be unfamiliar concepts to have spark such a harsh reaction.
A person who stands up for the Republican candidate is urged to watch PBS -- without the thrust of the issues listed in the post (infanticide, association with domestic terrorists, children with disabilities) being addressed. Even the New York Times has written about Ayers and Wright, so they can't be dismissed.
"It's so hard" ... "it doesn't seem fair"... that other people have other opinions? Have any of you ever been in a courtroom, newsroom, boardroom, where opinions are contested? Ever graded papers in a class where students were desperate to get a grade so they could get into the right grad school, and had to make and defend giving a B or (gasp) C?
Don't any of you realize that things are gravely serious in the world?
Sorry to interrupt the group hug.
BTW, WGBH did indeed give names to the Democrats. It was, at the time, a front page story in the Globe. (And that can be found easily via Google.)
...I'm not sure if your comment, 'anonymous', was directed toward me, but I know at least part of it was. I did not say 'it's hard' or 'unfair' that other people have opinions.
ReplyDelete-(and, I did mention that I am very uninformed... )
I don't know, maybe I shouldn't have commented... yes, I should have. My thoughts and opinions may not be "informative" or "informed" or even well educated... but, all I was trying to say was that I'm glad people can give their opinions and thoughts, whatever they may be, and hopefully we all can learn from all of them.
"Clear statements of doctrine" are not sledgehammers unless they are wielded as sledgehammers. Doctrinal statements of their nature need to be precise and often sound clinical or impersonal in their phrasing - that's to avoid confusion about what the Church teaches.
ReplyDeleteThen there must be prayerful consideration of the statements, instruction on them, theology books written about them, pastoral application of them, forums in which they can be discussed - all, it's to be hoped, leading to greater faithfulness in living a Christian moral life.
Because I, too, am concerned that some think nothing is gravely seriously wrong)I preached the following in a recent homily:
One of the responsibilities of adults is to teach children right from wrong. How will our children grow up, what will become of our society if we believe it’s wrong to say that some things are wrong?
Jesus was never reluctant to name wrong doing when he encountered it. And Jesus never named a sin or a sinner without offering an ocean of mercy to the one who had failed.
Just so must be the way in which we name right and wrong and love one another deeply enough to keep each other out of harm’s way. (posted on September 6, 2008)
More on this same theme in this weekend's homily...
Joey: your comments are most welcome - as are the comments of the legion of "Anonymous" on all sides of many issues.
ReplyDeleteThere is a reason that I do love The Eucharist. I am remiss in not being able to quote this exactly - or to remember the person who said it, however....
ReplyDeleteIt goes something like this- Communion is the one place we communicate the most and we do it without talking.
That is not to demean or belittle talk, but I wonder what common union (words my own pastor uses daily) we might find in broken bread and in each other, rather than in slinging harsh words and doing so anonymously at that.
We are called together in Christ Jesus and that Christ is revealed in broken bread... and in each other.
Not in google, harsh words or spurious accusations on any side of the politcal divide.
My own heart breaks at the world we are creating in this campaign. I feel the anger too, but I pray for peace and work for justice.
I can't be yelling at anyone when I am taking in the Body of Christ and when I am in the Body of Christ, I am less likely to want to cut off some other part of my own body.
Fran
"Not in google, harsh words or spurious accusations on any side of the politcal divide."
ReplyDeleteJust a quick question: Going to Google to determine facts to support a point set out in a post doesn't seem a hostile act. Concord Pastor has asked people to link to sources to support statements -- I recall him asking for a source for the statement that 90 percent of Down Syndrome children were aborted.
Discussion without facts seems much more likely to cause bad feelings and promote disunity than does rationally supported and factual assertions.
If there are sources that all can check, we move away from spurious, do we not?