He also needs to release the text of his own sermons, something his campaign has refused to do.

His mentor was know for being rather anti-Catholic and no doubt we would find some of that in his sermons.

Under no circumstances would I release the text of my sermons if I were Huckabee. That would just give the media and opposition researchers fodder to pick and choose and take things out of context in an effort to twist his religious beliefs.

Don't forget what the Dems did to Bobby Jindal by twisting what he wrote in the New Oxford Review in order to make him sound like a bigot and a religious nut.

I don't support Huckabee. But I don't believe he should be judged by what his supporters, or even his friends believe. I think it's enough if he says and proves that he doesn't share those views. I'm not opposed seeing what his sermons have to say though. Let the public see it and make their own judgements.

Hmm....

I actually have to agree with the quotes about the Catholic Church. If anyone thinks that they did not play a part in the dark ages, perhaps you should read a history book about how they killed scientists who disagreed with their doctrine that the Earth was the center of the universe.

And if you think that they don't use nations and politics to get what they want, you are deluding yourself. When other religions begin to threaten their "religious rule" in a nation, they typically appeal to the ruling class to have that competitor banned or have them individually killed.

What's funny, is that Huckabee does the same thing. He made an appeal to Michigan religious leaders to get out the vote for him. And of course, they should do this because he is Catholic, not because he is good presidential material.

If anyone can't smell the hypocrisy in all of this, well, then I guess I understand the current state of this nation and the world as a whole.

Religion is devotion to God and his Kingdom. If one used religion to further political goals or even man's government, then that smacks of blashemy and hypocrisy.

Jake,

Could you provide any evidence to support your allegations against His Church?

If not, you should read up on your history and you'll see how the mainstream media and some protestant bigots have created lies about the Church to defame Her.

Sure...

First: The Bible says that to identify the true religion one must look at her fruits.

Hucklebee is a minister and ran a church. He is using religion to further his political ambitions. His fruitage is rotten.

Second: Need I mention Galileo. The Catholic Church killed his scientific teachings about the universe because they differed from their "literal: interpretation of scripture that the Earth is the center of the universe. (Where does the Bible ever say that?) As a result, the Catholic Church forced him to recant his teachings regarding astronomy (at threat of death) and put him under house arrest for the rest of his life. Just do some research on the following: Galileo Galiei, Heliocentrim, and geocentrism.

Third: The ties between the Catholic Clergy were clear during WWI and WWII. They pushed young men in both sides of the war into killing each other because God wanted them to. They made accords with Hitler to destroy other religions in Germany that had teachings contrary to their own. They still do this today.

If you need anymore information, let me know, or just look it up in an encyclopaedia.

Second point:

Galileo was silenced for disobeying the Pope, not for saying the earth was not the center of the universe. Nobody was burned.

Third point:

Where's the evidence?

Point #2

Quote - "Galileo Galilei, in 1633, was denounced for his insistence on teaching a heliocentric universe, previously proposed by Nicolaus Copernicus, who was probably a priest. After numerous years of investigations, consultations with the Popes, promises kept and then broken by Galileo, and finally a trial by the Tribunal of the Roman and Universal Inquisition, Galileo was found "suspect of heresy" - not heresy, as is frequently misreported. Although the church includes all his books on the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, and Galileo was forced to recant his heliocentrism and spent the last years of his life under house arrest on orders of the Inquisition, Pope John Paul II, on 31 October 1992, publicly expressed regret for the actions of those Catholics who badly treated Galileo in that trial.

It does alot of good for Galileo to get an apology 300+ years after his death.

Jake,

Again, where do you get your information?

Galileo was exiled for disobeying the Pope.

All his funding was from the Vatican and he lived in luxury under house arrest.

Nice try.

This is all nonsense.

Mike Huckabee addresses anti-Catholicism accusations in this article:

http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=26312

http://youtube.com/watch?v=nviwzisBWqs

Watch that video Tito, not a lot of "substance" but pretty inspirational.

From what I have read Huckabee has no problem with Catholics, I think he did actually call Brownback a "brother in Christ" or something to that effect, and he is personal friends with the former Bishop of Little Rock.

Besides even if Mike Huckabee were anti-Catholic (which he isn't) there isn't a heck of a lot the president can do to hurt the Church, I mean this isn't Oliver Cromwell's England. I would vote for somone who had some major theological objections to Catholicism if I truly belived he could defend marriage and end abortion over a "Catholic" in the Ted Kennedy tradition any day.

Also, need I mention that many of Huckabee's top advisors are Catholic, and he has quoted Chesterton and Thomas More in his speeches.

Lastly, I agree with Jay, he SHOULD NOT release his sermons, it is unfair that Huckabee gets all the religious questions, like that one in the SC debate about women submitting to their husbands. I would LOVE to see somone asking John McCain how he feels about his pro-life possition placing him in opposition to his Episcopal Church, or I would love to see somone asking a democratic candidate if they think it is pandering to campaign in a black church and talk all about Jesus then spend their careers trying to knock off the unborn.

Andrew,

He didn't denounce Hagee, he just pleaded ignorance about Hagee's comments and even made an excuse for him but he never denounced him for his bigotry.

Remember, Huckabee is not the bigot, it is his associates that he refuses to distance himself from or denounce.

You can get the same information from that link you posted.

Quote from the Catholic Encyclopaedia:

"In these circumstances, Galileo, hearing that some had denounced his doctrine as anti-Scriptural, presented himself at Rome in December, 1615, and was courteously received. He was presently interrogated before the Inquisition, which after consultation declared the system he upheld to be scientifically false, and anti-Scriptural or heretical, and that he must renounce it. This he obediently did, promising to teach it no more. Then followed a decree of the Congregation of the Index dated 5 March 1616, prohibiting various heretical works to which were added any advocating the Copernican system."

Ok, now are you going to disagree with your own Religion's Encyclopaedia?

Don't get take me the wrong way. I'm not standing up for Huckabee, I think he is a hypocrit of the worst kind.

However, I think it is pretty bad to say that someone is a bigot because they disagree with your religion. Someone is a bigot only when they descriminate against you because of your religion.

By the way, I'm curious, since this Catholic Alert says to not support Huckabee, who does your Church want you to vote for?

Jake,

Thanks for your sighting of the encyclopedia. We both read it differently it seems.

I never said Mike Huckabee is a bigot. I said he associates with bigots.

The Church doesn't tell us how to vote. We vote with a clearly formed conscious as individual Catholics.

If you're asking me for an opinion, none of the candidates would make any Catholic comfortable with 100% in line with Christian moral teaching.

In Jesus, Mary, & Joseph,

Tito

FYI, Jake is of no relation to me, as far as I know :)

I remember when Bush spoke at anti-Catholic Bob Jones University, and after a few months, nobody cared about it. Huckabee's a policitian, and it was a calculated move.

But with regard to heliocentrism, one would do well to read Copernicus' famous dedication to Pope Paul III included in his well known publication, On the Revolutions of the Celestial Spheres. Pope Paul III largely made his research possible. This lengthy dedication managed to secure papal support in Rome while also allowing Copernicus to express his findings and heliocentric theories, which, believe it or not, actually gave him added credibility in the scientific world, which at the time largely discarded heliocentric notions. Copernicus was also a cleric (but not necessarily a priest) but probably a third order Dominican. How did Copernicus then differ with Galileo? That's your homework :)

Good question - "How did Copernicus differ from Galileo?"

One big difference was that Copernicus based much of his theory of heliocentrism on math and what could be observed by the naked eye.

Galileo used the telescope that he made to clearly show the celestial bodies, and proved, without a doubt that the Sun, not the Earth, was the center of the universe (remeber, that for them, the universe was basically our Solar System, not the univarse as we know it today).

And of course, the big difference was that Galileo was teaching this to other people. As was mentioned in the Catholic Encyclopaedia, the Catholic Church ruled that Galileo had to reject his teaching of heliocentrism because it went against their understanding of Bible scripture, that the earth was the center of the universe (geocentrism). Galileo agreed, but apparently later had a change of heart and began teaching heliocentrism again. This resulted in him being charged and put under house arrest.

So, I suppose, one could say that he was incarcerated because he disobeyed the Catholic Church. But, essentially, he refused to stop teaching a scientific finding that disagreed with the Church's incorrect understanding of Bible verse.

Let me know if there is something that I am missing.

Ok, I have another question.

If christians are supposed to give devotion to God and his Kingdom, then why do so many worship man made governments?

Granted, the secular authorities have been allowed by God, but they are certainly not in agreement with his Kingdom. We are instructed to obey the secular authorities unless obeying their commands would cause use to violate God's law. Based on scripture, who is it that really controls man's governments?

When Satan tempted Jesus, the last thing that he offered was to give him all the Kingdoms of the Earth. Could this really be considered a temptation if he, Satan, did not have ownership of man's governments?

So, in view of that, would it be showing rebellion against God's Kingdom for a christian to support such governments of man, or even worse, aspire to be a ruler of such a government?

Tito-
I am perplexed by your campaign of repeated attacks against Huckabee on this issue. This is not only nonsense, it is vicious nonsense. With no real basis you are calling into question the character of an apparently good man, and clearly the most pro-life candidate available. Do you seriously think that any candidate who needs the evangelical vote is going to denounce a prominent Christian leader at this point? Do you think that candidates do not routinely associate with anti-Catholics, and far worse than anti-Catholics, to get votes? It would be absurd to expect Huckabee to say more about his speech to the Cornerstone Church than he did in the interview linked above from Catholic Online:

"I am invited to speak at thousands of diverse venues each year. My willingness to address a group says nothing about whether or not I agree with every tenet, policy or belief espoused by a group ... I have enjoyed strong, personal relationships with many Catholics over the years and I would hate to think about my life without those relationships having been there. For more than a decade, I marched side-by-side with Catholic Bishops in Arkansas’ annual March for Life. Throughout my years as Lieutenant Governor and Governor, I enjoyed a very close relationship with leaders and members of the Catholic Church in Arkansas. My pro-life record is largely the result of this close working relationship. My relationships with Catholics predated my entry into politics. When I was pastoring a Baptist church in Texarkana, I had the opportunity to work closely with the Sisters of Charity of the Incarnate Word at the St. Michael Hospital near my church. I was always welcomed warmly by the sisters when I visited the sick. As a pastor, I held joint services with my neighboring Catholic congregation, was invited to speak in Catholic churches for special services, and had regular breakfast meetings with the Bishop of the Arkansas Diocese, Bishop Peter Sartain, now in Illinois. Those early years of ministry showed me the value of working with caring people whether or not every one of our religious tenets line up exactly ... many of my top-level staff and closest advisors are Catholic, including my national campaign manager, national campaign director, my policy advisor and my campaign’s chief operating officer."

FDarcy,

Thank you for your comments, but Governor Huckabee needs to be held accountable for his actions.

Just like Bush when he visited Bob Jones University, he eventually apologized.

You do realize that White hate groups were cricualting that against Mike Huckabee don't you

http://opinionatedcatholic.blogspot.com/2008/01/white-hate-groups-and-nazis-opposing.html

So Should I associate those people with people runnign against Huckabee? OF course not. THis is shameful Especially since McCain has a much more closer relationship to Hagee than Huckabee does.

Well is that precious headline on your news roundup?

James H,

It's a straw man argument on your first question.

Secondly, I like Huckabee and I want to vote for him. I really don't care for McCain. So in order for me (and I'm sure many more Catholics) to vote for Huckabee, he needs to distance himself from these bigots.

That is why I am posting this on my news roundup.

Things may change though.

Tito, to infer Mike Huckabee is a bigot, when he NEVER EVER said he agreed with Agee's anti-Catholic statements, is slander. Furthermore, it is not Catholic. Huck's stances on life issues are the closest to those espoused in the CCC and you know it. To take part of what Huckabee says out of context and mix it with lies is STILL a lie; in fact, the devil works in exactly the same way. Satan got Eve to fall for his evil words (and undoubtedly you will fool a few too), but he did not fool Christ. Still, to play the part of the tempter puts you on Satan's side, not God's.

St. Michael the Archangel defend us in battle ...

I did not infer anything.

What I am asking for is for Huckabee to denounce his bigoted 'friends'.

Tom,

it might be helpful if you identify the false statement made by Tito, or where he took the governors statement out of context.

I am a Huckabee supporter, and if push came to shove (ie. at the Texas primary) Tito would vote for him. That doesn't change the legitimate request that he distance himself from those who offend us.

God Bless,

Matt

Dear Matt (and Tito too!) -- You asked me to clarify my condemnatory e-mail response to your disturbingly slanderous "Mike Huckabee's Bigots" post on your allegedly "Defending the Faith" Catholic blog. First, as ... (continued here)

Tom,

I'll ignore your own slander on the nature of Tito's blog, and go right into refuting your argument, ok?

Factual Error: anyone who has passed a high school persuasive writing class can tell you that taking nine words, "one of the greatest Christian leaders of our nation," out of someone's speech or written statement is considered taking something out of context.


To quote out of context is to remove a passage from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its meaning.

So, taking nine words out of a speech is not defacto "quoting out of context" unless it is intended to distort the meaning.

An out of context accusation can only be sustained if it can be shown that the meaning is distorted as to create a "Straw Man" argument. Here's the quote: Huckabee said John Hagee is, "one of the greatest Christian leaders of our nation."

I believe the meaning that Tito intended to impute is that Huckabee thinks John Hagee is a one of the greates Christian leaders of our nation. Which part of that do you believe is distorted? What pray tell is the correct meaning of those words?

Furthermore, juxtaposing those words with another's words including, "Adolph Hitler," and "Nazism," is done to achieve a decidedly negative effect. Ironically, your piece then actually quotes Huckabee as saying he never characterized the Catholic Church as being pro-Nazi ... but THAT isn't good enough. It does not take a genius to understand that by splicing together these cheap shots, you are trying to get the reader to think that Huckabee agrees with everything Hagee has said (or at very least, is a hypocrite for preaching at his church and accepting his endorsement) when any on-record Huckabee statement disputes this.

It is intended to achieve a decidedly negative effect. But it's TRUE. Associating yourself and generally PRAISING with someone who does evil (by slandering the institution that you really ought to be defending), Huckabee has offended the Church. Tito has been careful, I believe, not to suggest Huckabee holds such slanderous views by quoting Huckabees clarification and citing his association with Catholics as well as anti-Catholic bigots.

So why does Huckabee accept their invitations to preach at their anti-Catholic churches—especially when he doesn't in many ways agree with them? First of all, it's important to remember that ALL conservative/fundamentalist Christian churches are anti-Catholic in some respect, or they wouldn't have split off from the Church to begin with. Indeed they still all HAVE to rely somewhat on the power of anti-Catholic propaganda or their members would simply become Catholic.

I think you're confusing theological dissagreement with "anti-Catholicism". I am not anti-jewish, but theologically I am in dissagreement with their position on the Messiah. I pray for the veil to be lifted from their eyes and that they rejoin their true Faith. In the same way I am not anti-protestant, but theologically I am in dissagreement with many of their positions. I pray also for the veil to be lifted from their eyes. I expect that the Jews and protestants (including Mike Huckabee) would have the same objective dissagreement and desire for us, but not that they would believe we are evil, or that that the Church does not teach what it claims to teach. That is the difference. I have no reason to believe that Huckabee holds the slanderous view, but I would be more comfortable if he would clarify it by not praising those who hold it.

Instead, he goes to these churches precisely for the same reason Jesus accepted invitations to sinners' houses—he went there with a hope to heal them.

Is this true? Surely you have a basis for this, I didn't see where Huckabee preached IN HAGEE's house that he was in serious error about his hatred for the Church. I suspect that Tito would be completely comfortable with Huckabee if that were true.... I don't believe it is.

But are these statements (of which Tito says he agrees with it all) lies? Again, one usually learns the difference between "fact" and "opinion" around the third or fourth grade, and I can't think of any of my teachers (or very few kids) who would identify the statement ("Instead of supporting a healthy expression of religion in the public square, Mike Huckabee has used his evangelical protestant faith as a wedge to divide the Republican Party and gain support from fellow evangelicals,") as "fact."

Correct, it is not a fact, however, it is a very reasonable premise, with much evidence. That Tito considers them facts does not mean they are "lies", even if you could demonstrate them to be incorrect... which you can not, thus the nature of "opinion".

Mike, in my opinion, associates with sinners to win them to a more catholic point of view

What a ridiculous statement, just because someone is pro-life does not make them catholic, or Catholic. What does Huckabee preach about contraception?

while you are trying to take would-be good Catholic voters away from the candidate who most closely models the Church's "life" teachings.

That is not the intent of Tito's post, it is precisely what he asks for: Governor Huckabee needs to denounce John Hagee and Tim LaHaye for their bigotry in order to win over the Catholic vote.

So now, having identified both context and falsehoods

As I have demonstrated above, you did neither.

I urge you to use your blog to publically endorse Huckabee, before the Super Tuesday primaries, for although I don't know if it will be enough to turn this Huckabee hatred around, God will certainly use it for the good, just as He uses everything for the good for those who believe—and love.

I'm sure if you can demonstrate that Huckabee preached AGAINST anti-Catholicism during his preaching in those churches, Tito will consider the request met. Please respond ASAP with your proof of that.

God Bless,

Matt

Here's the post Matt; I didn't realize you would want such a long post on your site.

“The Pharisees and their scribes complained to his disciples, saying, 'Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?' Jesus said to them in reply, 'Those who are healthy do not need a physician, but the sick do. I have not come to call the righteous to repentance but sinners'” (Luke 5:30-32)
“Whoever causes one of these little ones who believes in me to sin, it is better for him to have a great millstone around his neck and be drowned in the depths of the sea” (Matt. 18:6).
Dear Matt (and Tito too!) -- You asked me to clarify my condemnatory e-mail response to your disturbingly slanderous "Mike Huckabee's Bigots" post on your allegedly "Defending the Faith" Catholic blog. First, as far as "identifying which of the governor's statements was taken out of context," certainly anyone who has passed a high school persuasive writing class can tell you that taking nine words, "one of the greatest Christian leaders of our nation," out of someone's speech or written statement is considered taking something out of context. Furthermore, juxtaposing those words with another's words including, "Adolph Hitler," and "Nazism," is done to achieve a decidedly negative effect. Ironically, your piece then actually quotes Huckabee as saying he never characterized the Catholic Church as being pro-Nazi ... but THAT isn't good enough. It does not take a genius to understand that by splicing together these cheap shots, you are trying to get the reader to think that Huckabee agrees with everything Hagee has said (or at very least, is a hypocrite for preaching at his church and accepting his endorsement) when any on-record Huckabee statement disputes this.
So why does Huckabee accept their invitations to preach at their anti-Catholic churches—especially when he doesn't in many ways agree with them? First of all, it's important to remember that ALL conservative/fundamentalist Christian churches are anti-Catholic in some respect, or they wouldn't have split off from the Church to begin with. Indeed they still all HAVE to rely somewhat on the power of anti-Catholic propaganda or their members would simply become Catholic. As a non-Catholic, Huckabee can't be expected to understand this tragedy of history totally, but the fact that he went outside his own denomination to work with the Catholic Church on the pro-life movement (and in turn adopted the Church's abortion/euthanasia pro-life philosophy as his own), speaks volumes of his commitment. While there is certainly some Catholic doctrine/dogma Huckabee still disagrees with, his having adopted the Catholic pro-life world view proves how much more strongly he disagrees with outright Catholic or racial prejudice. Instead, he goes to these churches precisely for the same reason Jesus accepted invitations to sinners' houses—he went there with a hope to heal them. Also, Huckabee can't preach at Catholic churches because canon law won't allow it, so whereas these churches provide a ready opportunity for a Christian candidate (especially one with little funding) to get his message across, speaking in front of Catholic audiences is much more difficult to arrange.
But are these statements (of which Tito says he agrees with it all) lies? Again, one usually learns the difference between "fact" and "opinion" around the third or fourth grade, and I can't think of any of my teachers (or very few kids) who would identify the statement ("Instead of supporting a healthy expression of religion in the public square, Mike Huckabee has used his evangelical protestant faith as a wedge to divide the Republican Party and gain support from fellow evangelicals,") as "fact." True, you might hear this statement echoed by the talking heads on FOX News, but unless you believe Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh (whose stations, of course, are owned by a Romney conglomerate) are divinely inspired, you cannot honestly call a political opinion factual. Interestingly enough, the last book to use this "FACT" tactic successfully was none other than the DaVinci Code. Note that before the book started, it stated two "FACTS;" the first some drivel about the Priory of Zion, the second an attack on Opus Dei calling them "a deeply devout Catholic sect" involved in a "recent controversy" involving "brainwashing, coercion" and "mortification." Of course, besides a typically sensational article in the anti-Catholic newspaper the Catholic Reporter (of which you would probably agree is the Church's equivalent of the National Enquirer), most of the controversy was DaVinci author Brown's own creation, and in reality, Opus Dei is a "healthy expression" of the Catholic faith. Likewise, those who know Huckabee see him supporting, not condemning, religion in the public square.
And so, by promoting dubious characters who take speech out of context to dissuade by inference, and egomaniacs who call their opinions facts, you are guilty of exactly what you accuse Huckabee with—with a twist.
Mike, in my opinion, associates with sinners to win them to a more catholic point of view, while you are trying to take would-be good Catholic voters away from the candidate who most closely models the Church's "life" teachings. Say what you will, but this post can only serve to lead the not-yet-intellectually equipped away from Huck's pro-life hope to Romney's Mormonist money or McCain's vague Episcopalianism (or something democratically and decidedly worse), just as Brown's mix of anti-Catholic fiction and bigotry pried the naive away from the one true Church. So you not only led the intellectually children-like away, but in doing so, doomed many more of the unborn to future death by abortion as well. And the real irony in all of this is that the attack on Huck and his Catholic supporters is done by two (or at least one) who say they are Huckabee supporters!
So now, having identified both context and falsehoods, I urge you to use your blog to publically endorse Huckabee, before the Super Tuesday primaries, for although I don't know if it will be enough to turn this Huckabee hatred around, God will certainly use it for the good, just as He uses everything for the good for those who believe—and love.

-Tom O'Toole
Fighting Irish Thomas

Matt & Tito,

That you would agree that your guy writes opinions and calls them "Facts," but NOT think this is dishonest is just ... very strange. Safe to say, I cannot debate with someone who accepts opinions as facts, but let me try to explain it a different way.

You are asking Huck to be a Catholic apologist when he is not even Catholic. Mike can't be expected to adequately denounce Hagee's anti-Catholicism when two of the main weapons (papal authority/apostolic succession and the grace of the other sacraments beyond baptism) that aid us in our salvation, he doesn't believe in either. But Huck IS a good man, and I'm sure he would apologize to you for having offended you, if you ever met him personally and explained your beef.

So let's leave off with what (in my opinion) was your most important quote, "I am a Huckabee supporter, and if push came to shove (ie. at the Texas primary) Tito would vote for him."

God's grace & Mary's prayers,
Tom
Fighting Irish Thomas

P.S. I am not a "traffic whore" (by the way being called a whore of any kind offends me; do I get an apology?); in fact, it's quite the opposite; most blogs DON'T want me leaving long comments. But I am certainly not afraid to do so, as you can see.