White House posts about the Virgin Mary and includes a prayer

[Anonymous]

I just can’t imagine Mary being sanguine about this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The amount of things I have seen about women submitting to their husbands in the past year has been startling. Charlie Kirk, for one. Hegseth, and then other random posts from the NYt article questioning women in the workplace to People in highlighting a tradwife discussing her submission to her husband with many posts supporting this.

I do not like my daughter growing up in this conservative vision.

Hard economic times always lead to a backlash toward progressive “elites”

Not in the 1930s, which gave us the New Deal, or 2008, which gave us Occupy Wall Street. It’s more accurate to say that hard economic times create a backlash against greed. The backlash against women comes from a place of perceived loss of privilege.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Get the government out of my religion.

OP. Exactly!!!

[Anonymous]

Trump loves raping virgins. Too bad Mary's was a mistranslation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am a Protestant and do not pray to Mary. However, the first paragraph makes it clear that it is honoring those

He has also noted Ramadan, Yom Kippur, Lunar New Year, Diwali.......

And thanksgiving:

"A very Happy Thanksgiving salutation to all of our Great American Citizens and Patriots who have been so nice in allowing our Country to be divided, disrupted, carved up, murdered, beaten, mugged, and laughed at, along with certain other foolish countries throughout the World, for being 'Politically Correct,' and just plain STUPID, when it comes to Immigration"

[Anonymous]

Do they always have mass at the WH? Monday was day of obligation, so if religious services are offered, then it makes sense. Odd to publish a photo, but also nice to see WH staff aren't required to hide their faith.

Reflection isn't a bad thing during the day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The amount of things I have seen about women submitting to their husbands in the past year has been startling. Charlie Kirk, for one. Hegseth, and then other random posts from the NYt article questioning women in the workplace to People in highlighting a tradwife discussing her submission to her husband with many posts supporting this.

I do not like my daughter growing up in this conservative vision.

Hard economic times always lead to a backlash toward progressive “elites”

No that didn’t happen in 2008.

yeah and Obama was our president.....

Didn't he become president in January 2009?

[Anonymous]

Fake righteousness. We all know what they really wanna do to the Virgin Mary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The amount of things I have seen about women submitting to their husbands in the past year has been startling. Charlie Kirk, for one. Hegseth, and then other random posts from the NYt article questioning women in the workplace to People in highlighting a tradwife discussing her submission to her husband with many posts supporting this.

I do not like my daughter growing up in this conservative vision.

Hard economic times always lead to a backlash toward progressive “elites”

No that didn’t happen in 2008.

yeah and Obama was our president.....

Didn't he become president in January 2009?

yes elected in 2008 and took over the republicans mess

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am Catholic and I find this really inappropriate to be coming from the White House.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2025/12/presidential-message-on-the-feast-of-the-immaculate-conception/

A lot of Catholics must have voted for Trump.

[Anonymous]

So, it starts out by describing “Holy Scripture “ as “recorded history, with an accompanying quote. Does whoever wrote this think that “recorded history” was either contemporary, in English, or both?

Also, I don’t recognize the quote, so I’m pretty sure it’s not the King James Version, which is one more detail that makes me wonder who he’s trying to appeal to here. Is this version one that white Evangelicals use? I’m sort of startled that this is in the Political Discussion forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am Catholic and I find this really inappropriate to be coming from the White House.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2025/12/presidential-message-on-the-feast-of-the-immaculate-conception/

I am convinced that Trump has been given a medical prognosis of very little time to live. This is a man who has rarely, if ever, been to church. He is trying to make a deal with God so that he won't go straight to Hell.
It doesn't work that way trumpy boy. There is forgiveness of sins but nowhere does it say we don't have to face the responsibility of our sins of both commission and omission.

Judging by Trump's life as we know it the chain he bears is ten times longer and heavier than the combined chains of Marley and Scrooge!

If there is a hell which catholics believe in.....dumpy has a one way ticket.

To misquote Curtis Mayfield: “If there’s a hell below, he’s sure gonna go….”

[Anonymous]

Trump is attempting to bargain with God to keep his immortal but both amoral and immoral black soul out of Hell permanently.

[Anonymous]

Trump's Achilles Heel is his absolute horror of death and he is scared $hitless.

I suspect that second annual physical was bad news of a terminal nature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, it starts out by describing “Holy Scripture “ as “recorded history, with an accompanying quote. Does whoever wrote this think that “recorded history” was either contemporary, in English, or both?

Also, I don’t recognize the quote, so I’m pretty sure it’s not the King James Version, which is one more detail that makes me wonder who he’s trying to appeal to here. Is this version one that white Evangelicals use? I’m sort of startled that this is in the Political Discussion forum.

It is quoting the version of the Bible the Catholic Church uses, which is not the King James. AI says Catholc Church doens't use it: "primarily because it's a Protestant translation lacking deuterocanonical books (like Tobit, Judith) found in Catholic Bibles, contains translation choices favoring Protestant theology (e.g., "highly favored" vs. "full of grace"), and reflects an older English style less in line with modern Catholic scholarship and liturgy. While it's not forbidden for personal study, the Catholic Church recommends translations with an imprimatur, like the New American Bible Revised Edition (NABRE) or Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSV-CE)."

The quote comes from the Gospel of Luke, which as to the "recorded history" comment, begins by saying:

1 Since many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the events that have been fulfilled among us,
2 just as those who were eyewitnesses from the beginning and ministers of the word have handed them down to us,
3 I too have decided, after investigating everything accurately anew, to write it down in an orderly sequence for you, most excellent Theophilus,
4 so that you may realize the certainty of the teachings you have received.

The footnote to this section in the online version from the USCCB says:

"The Gospel according to Luke is the only one of the synoptic gospels to begin with a literary prologue. Making use of a formal, literary construction and vocabulary, the author writes the prologue in imitation of Hellenistic Greek writers and, in so doing, relates his story about Jesus to contemporaneous Greek and Roman literature. Luke is not only interested in the words and deeds of Jesus, but also in the larger context of the birth, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus as the fulfillment of the promises of God in the Old Testament. As a second- or third-generation Christian, Luke acknowledges his debt to earlier eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, but claims that his contribution to this developing tradition is a complete and accurate account, told in an orderly manner, and intended to provide Theophilus (“friend of God,” literally) and other readers with certainty about earlier teachings they have received."

https://bible.usccb.org/bible/luke/1