Should Catholic voters support Democrats?

[GMDino]

This was shared on Facebook by a gentleman that I went to high school with (He was a senior when I was a freshman but his brother and my sister graduated together).  He is also an ex-priest.

I realize it is almost two years old but I thought it was worth sharing as an opposing view to the oft proposed believe that no Catholic should vote for anyone who supports abortion rights.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/scottericalt/what-ratzinger-and-the-cdf-really-said-about-voting-for-pro-choice-candidates/?fbclid=IwAR2CpxKsxqwBkIxrMoEOL3PagKI36-soGCJ_SNksLDKPRDJpl_1JOlKcQ20

Quote:What Ratzinger and the CDF Really Said About Voting for Pro-Choice Candidates.
 OCTOBER 21, 2018 BY SCOTT ERIC ALT

It’s not what you may have heard. Death Site News is promoting the words of Fr. Mark Goring; he says that “The blood of these unborn children is on your hands if you vote for and support an aggressively pro-abortion politician.”

This is false. The Church nowhere teaches that a person who votes for a pro-choice Democrat incurs the guilt of abortion.

Now, in 2004, the CDF—with Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as its prefect—put out a document entitled “Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles.” In this document, the CDF says that Catholics may not:

• Propagandize in favor of abortion
• Support laws permitting abortion
  

In terms of voting for political candidates, the CDF says this:

Quote:

A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.

Nowhere does the CDF tells us what those “proportionate reasons” are. This means that the Church leaves it to the individual’s own prudential judgment; the Church leaves it to the individual’s own conscience before God.

Suppose, for example, that a person were to believe that a candidate’s policies would result in fewer women deciding to have an abortion than the opponent’s policies (irrespective of the legality of abortion). That might count as a “proportionate reason.”

Or suppose a person were to believe that an opposing candidate—the Republican, let us say—would not change anything relative to abortion. The issue cancels itself out and the voter makes a decision on the basis of issues apart from abortion.

Or suppose a person were to believe that the Trump administration and the Republican party presents a present danger proportionate to the evil of abortion. Suppose he or she votes for a Democrat candidate to mitigate that danger. That would also count as a “proportionate reason.”

A voter might very well be wrong in these personal judgments. But that does not of itself mean that they vote Democrat to advance pro-abortion policies; still less does it mean that they incur the guilt of abortion and have “blood on their hands.”

The USCCB, in Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship,” addresses another contingency in voting:

Quote:

When all candidates hold a position that promotes an intrinsically evil act, the conscientious voter faces a dilemma. The voter may decide to take the extraordinary step of not voting for any candidate or, after careful deliberation, may decide to vote for the candidate deemed less likely to advance such a morally flawed position and more likely to pursue other authentic human goods.

The Church leaves it to the voter’s own conscience and discernment when such a situation exists, and which candidate is “less likely to advance” moral evil and “pursue other authentic human goods.”

It may be, in one’s conscience, that it is the Democrat who will pursue those “goods.”

Don’t give in to the moral bullying that takes place every election year, that sinfully attempts to manipulate your conscience and your vote by raising the spectre of “blood on your hands” unless you vote Republican. Don’t believe it. This is not Catholic teaching.

Again this is just for people to read and form their own takes and opinions.  I did not write the article nor did I publish it originally.  It is just my opinion that it may spark conversation on the subject where both sides can express their thoughts.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(08-21-2020, 10:57 AM)GMDino Wrote: This was shared on Facebook by a gentleman that I went to high school with (He was a senior when I was a freshman but his brother and my sister graduated together).  He is also an ex-priest.

I realize it is almost two years old but I thought it was worth sharing as an opposing view to the oft proposed believe that no Catholic should vote for anyone who supports abortion rights.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/scottericalt/what-ratzinger-and-the-cdf-really-said-about-voting-for-pro-choice-candidates/?fbclid=IwAR2CpxKsxqwBkIxrMoEOL3PagKI36-soGCJ_SNksLDKPRDJpl_1JOlKcQ20




Again this is just for people to read and form their own takes and opinions.  I did not write the article nor did I publish it originally.  It is just my opinion that it may spark conversation on the subject where both sides can express their thoughts.

I'm a fairly devout Catholic and I would never in my life vote right wing. Ever.

As mentioned 50 times previously, we are taught IN CATHOLIC SCHOOL, from grades 8-12, to read the Bible contextually and derive the symbolism/meaning/reasoning behind certain declarations and statements, as opposed to following the Bible 1:1, like those who think Biden will, "hurt God."

Furthermore:

Quote:Nowhere does the CDF tells us what those “proportionate reasons” are. This means that the Church leaves it to the individual’s own prudential judgment; the Church leaves it to the individual’s own conscience before God.

Bingo, exactly what I was going to say; just because I vote for someone who is pro-choice, doesn't mean that I'm going to 100% abort if my wife gets pregnant, it's 2 different things. But if someone I know is forcibly raped and gets pregnant (God forbid that to happen to anyone close to me) and they came to me for advice, while I would tell them that the choice is theirs, I would be first in line to say that an abortion is absolutely not wrong in this case: I'd say that's a pretty morally-just way of looking at it.

This goes back to the whole, "everything is black and white," stance/viewpoint/attitude that the world (specifically, the US) has today, when in reality it is a grey, grey world and that will NEVER change.

[Yojimbo]

I really don’t like any line of thought that says a group of voters, be it religion, gender, ethnicity, should be a monolith. Unless we’re talking about The Borg.

[*michaelsean*]

I don’t think the Church has actually come out on this, but remember that if you are a devout follower of the Church, that doesn’t necessarily mean you are off the hook. Procuring or assisting in an abortion in any way is latae sententiae excommunicate. Politicians who run on supporting pro-choice or vote for laws in favor of abortion are not allowed to receive communion.

The good news is it is now much easier to be brought back into the Church if you are excommunicate due to abortion as it only takes a priest and not a bishop.

[samhain]

(08-21-2020, 03:15 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: I'm a fairly devout Catholic and I would never in my life vote right wing. Ever.

As mentioned 50 times previously, we are taught IN CATHOLIC SCHOOL, from grades 8-12, to read the Bible contextually and derive the symbolism/meaning/reasoning behind certain declarations and statements, as opposed to following the Bible 1:1, like those who think Biden will, "hurt God."

Furthermore:


Bingo, exactly what I was going to say; just because I vote for someone who is pro-choice, doesn't mean that I'm going to 100% abort if my wife gets pregnant, it's 2 different things. But if someone I know is forcibly raped and gets pregnant (God forbid that to happen to anyone close to me) and they came to me for advice, while I would tell them that the choice is theirs, I would be first in line to say that an abortion is absolutely not wrong in this case: I'd say that's a pretty morally-just way of looking at it.

This goes back to the whole, "everything is black and white," stance/viewpoint/attitude that the world (specifically, the US) has today, when in reality it is a grey, grey world and that will NEVER change.

I remember being taught contextualism in my Catholic school curriculum as well.  I'm frankly surprised that the hardcore Catholic Right hasn't tried to attack and root out that particular concept.  Looking at things contextually is death for any fundamentalist philosophy.  

As for what the church demands of me: LOL.  If I thought they had an ounce of moral authority at this point, I'd have gone back to them, and my son would be in Catholic school.  The church is a part of my heritage and it formed a lot of my outlook on life.  However, due to certain "stuff" and "things" I have a hard time granting them much sway over me these days.  Their malfeasance is so widespread and their indifference was the picture of dismissive arrogance, until it started to cost the money in lawsuits.  

Too bad we didn't have the mouth-breathing Q-morons to protect us back in the day.  I'm sure they'd be super upset about all of it.

[*PhilHos*]

I don't think a member of ANY group should support either party just because they're a member of said group. I think you have your beliefs and you should vote for the person who best represents you. If your group happens to agree with you and votes the same, so what?

[BigPapaKain]

I think if the church wants to endorse either party or any political stance, they should have their tax exempt status revoked.

[SunsetBengal]

(08-24-2020, 08:39 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: I think if the church wants to endorse either party or any political stance, they should have their tax exempt status revoked.

This^   Who the heck are they to tell anyone what to do, let alone how to vote, after hiding and protecting all of the pedophile Clergy for so many years?  

[*michaelsean*]

(08-24-2020, 08:39 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: I think if the church wants to endorse either party or any political stance, they should have their tax exempt status revoked.

They don’t. But while they haven’t, they are well within their rights to say it is a sin to vote for someone who actively supports abortion.

[BrownAssClown]

(08-25-2020, 03:40 AM)michaelsean Wrote: They don’t. But while they haven’t, they are well within their rights to say it is a sin to vote for someone who actively supports abortion.

Do you know of anybody that actively supports abortion? I'm not singling you out, but I hear people I know who say things like " If your for abortion, your for killing babies" or you can't "vote for a candidate or a party or individual that supports abortion" I was at a church outing one time, not really an official church function and people started talking politics, didn't bother me , but I mentioned to the group that I have voted for candidates from different parties, but I usually vote for democrats. A lady from the group, looked me straight in the eyes and without missing a beat said, " Your for killing innocent babies then!?!" I said , I'm for women making their own decisions, God gave man "free will", I hope a pregnant woman makes the right choice and has the baby, but ultimately it's her decision. The lady from the group said. "I'll pray for you, your soul needs salvation!" I really think she wanted to get an angry reaction out of me, I just looked at her and said, "Thank You, I could use all the help I could get." Never seen that woman at anymore group outings or even at church after that; but she gave me dagger eyes until the end of that outing.

Sorry for the rambling, the point I'm trying to make is, I don't think any American actively supports abortion, but they support a women's right to choose, at least that's the way I see it. BTW, your right that a church are well within their rights to say it's a sin to vote for someone who actively supports abortion, I just don't think those kind of people actually exist. I mean, who goes around and tell women they have to get an abortion or to terminate their pregnancies here in America. I've heard stories from places like China forcing abortions on their women to control their population, but never here.

[GMDino]

(08-25-2020, 03:40 AM)michaelsean Wrote: They don’t. But while they haven’t, they are well within their rights to say it is a sin to vote for someone who actively supports abortion.

This isn't direct at you specifically but it stirred up something I often wonder about the Evangelical support for Trump:

If the church or a religious group has a right to tell their followers that voting for someone who supports abortion rights is a sin (and that is debatable anyway) why don't they also say voting for someone who had an affair? Or stole? Or blasphemed? Or any of the other myriad of reasons we will suffer for eternity unless we do what that church/religion says we have to?

I have almost never seen a church support a Democratic candidate because of the abortion issue but I have also almost never seen them condemn a Republican for any other reason.

And as a Roman Catholic I personally do NOT think the church as a "right" to tell me voting one way or the other is a sin.  If a candidate is for helping the poor and children and has led a good life but has one view the church disagrees with they are wrong.  It would be MORE of a sin (in my eyes) to support the liar and the thief who says he is pro-life in one specific case (abortion) but also is pro war and pro death penalty.

[Belsnickel]

(08-25-2020, 03:40 AM)michaelsean Wrote: They don’t. But while they haven’t, they are well within their rights to say it is a sin to vote for someone who actively supports abortion.

This is the language I find interesting. I don't know of any politician that actively supports abortion. I know of those that actively support access to abortion, but that is distinctly different. Every single pro-choice individual I know would like to see abortion numbers go down and they support family planning measures being more widely available because those have been proven to reduce the number of abortions, but they think the decision on abortion should be up to the individual.

[Dill]

(08-25-2020, 04:34 AM)BrownAssClown Wrote: Do you know of anybody that actively supports abortion? I'm not singling you out, but I hear people I know who say things like " If your for abortion, your for killing babies" or you can't "vote for a candidate or a party or individual that supports abortion" I was at a church outing one time, not really an official church function and people started talking politics, didn't bother me , but I mentioned to the group that I have voted for candidates from different parties, but I usually vote for democrats. A lady from the group, looked me straight in the eyes and without missing a beat said, " Your for killing innocent babies then!?!"

It's not just about the babies. Dems are pro-crime too and pro opioids too.

Praying for you BrownAss.

[*michaelsean*]

It should be actively supports abortion rights. If the church declares that a sin, that isn't specific to a party or an individual. Obviously it leans heavy one way, but there crossovers. But either way they haven't arrived at that. you may not support a candidate for the sole reason that they advocate abortion rights, but if you vote for a person who also happens to support abortion rights then you are fine.

[*michaelsean*]

As an aside, I believe the Church ban on abortion is doctrine, so you are never going to see it changed as Church doctrine is seen to be infallible in cases of faith and morals.

[GMDino]

(08-25-2020, 11:04 AM)michaelsean Wrote: As an aside, I believe the Church ban on abortion is doctrine, so you are never going to see it changed as   Church doctrine is seen to be infallible in cases of faith and morals.

Again that would carry a lot more weight if it weren't for all those priests with side chicks who had babies and the ones with side chicks who had abortions.


But to your point I read this:

Quote:Sanctions[edit]

Catholics who procure a completed abortion are subject to a latae sententiae excommunication.[2] That means that the excommunication is not imposed by an authority or trial (as with a ferendae sententiae penalty); rather, being expressly established by canon law, it is incurred ipso facto when the delict is committed (a latae sententiae penalty).[69] Canon law states that in certain circumstances "the accused is not bound by a latae sententiae penalty"; among the ten circumstances listed are commission of a delict by someone not yet sixteen years old, or by someone who without negligence does not know of the existence of the penalty, or by someone "who was coerced by grave fear, even if only relatively grave, or due to necessity or grave inconvenience."[70][71]


According to a 2004 memorandum by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Catholic politicians who consistently campaign and vote for permissive abortion laws should be informed by their priest of the Church's teaching and warned to refrain from receiving the Eucharist or risk being denied it until they end such activity.[72] This position is based on Canon 915 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law and has also been supported, in a personal capacity, by Archbishop Raymond Leo Cardinal Burke, Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, the highest judicial authority in the Catholic Church after the pope himself.[73] Pope Francis reaffirmed this position in March 2013, when he stated that "[people] cannot receive Holy Communion and at the same time act with deeds or words against the commandments, particularly when abortion, euthanasia, and other grave crimes against life and family are encouraged. This responsibility weighs particularly over legislators, heads of governments, and health professionals."[74]
Forgiveness of women who abort[edit]


Apart from indicating in its canon law that automatic excommunication does not apply to women who abort because of grave fear or due to grave inconvenience, the Catholic Church, without making any such distinctions, assures the possibility of forgiveness for women who have had an abortion. Pope John Paul II wrote:

Quote:I would now like to say a special word to women who have had an abortion. The Church is aware of the many factors which may have influenced your decision, and she does not doubt that in many cases it was a painful and even shattering decision. The wound in your heart may not yet have healed. Certainly what happened was and remains terribly wrong. But do not give in to discouragement and do not lose hope. Try rather to understand what happened and face it honestly. If you have not already done so, give yourselves over with humility and trust to repentance. The Father of mercies is ready to give you his forgiveness and his peace in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.[75]

On the occasion of the Extraordinary Jubilee of Mercy in 2015, Pope Francis announced that all priests (during the Jubilee year – ending November 20, 2016) will be allowed in the Sacrament of Penance to remit the penalty of excommunication for abortion, which had been reserved to bishops and certain priests who were given such mandate by their bishop.[76] This policy was made permanent by an apostolic letter titled Misericordia et misera (Mercy and Misery), which was issued on November 21, 2016.[77][78]

[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_abortion#cite_note-80][/url]

[*michaelsean*]

(08-25-2020, 11:10 AM)GMDino Wrote: Again that would carry a lot more weight if it weren't for all those priests with side chicks who had babies and the ones with side chicks who had abortions.


But to your point I read this:


[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_abortion#cite_note-80][/url]

It's irrelevant. If you are a devout Catholic, then this comes from God.  Dogma is something you are required to believe, and Dogma says doctrine is infallible. Then you choose whether you want to be a Catholic or not. I certainly don't consider myself one anymore.

I mentioned earlier that priests can now remove excommuincation due to abortion.

Remember that excommunication is not considered a punishment, but rather a wake up call.

[samhain]

(08-24-2020, 09:05 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: This^   Who the heck are they to tell anyone what to do, let alone how to vote, after hiding and protecting all of the pedophile Clergy for so many years?  

My thoughts exactly.  I like the traditions and and most of the official doctrines of the church.  It's most of what I know of religion because it's how I was raised.  I'd go back if for no other reason but to re-connect with family history.  I just can't overlook the other thing.  It's way too pervasive and way too horrific.  When the diocese of Covington (NKY) released their list of credible abusers a couple of weeks ago, no less than four of them were at my church/school when I was a kid.  4.  And several more before and after. What person in their right mind would send their kid anywhere near a place with that kind of track record if religion weren't attached?  If you were at a Catholic institution as a child, it's not just possible that you were around predators, it's somewhere between highly likely and certain.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(08-25-2020, 11:29 AM)michaelsean Wrote: It's irrelevant. If you are a devout Catholic, then this comes from God.  Dogma is something you are required to believe, and Dogma says doctrine is infallible. Then you choose whether you want to be a Catholic or not. I certainly don't consider myself one anymore.

I mentioned earlier that priests can now remove excommuincation due to abortion.

Remember that excommunication is not considered a punishment, but rather a wake up call.

Yeah; those were all forms of, "control," to keep the population low and dumb, while the governing body of Europe (essentially the Western World for 1700+ years) could maintain their position atop the rest of the world (the Romans).

Reading things contextually and living with the knowledge and information that we have in the modern world, we know it to be true that the Earth is hundreds of millions of years old (disproving Adam and Eve). We know it be NOT true that Abraham lived to 300 years old or whatever (as no human can live more than the centenarian mark in the modern world). We know it to be true that Revelations did not happen (it was a depiction of the writer's vision of Judgement Day). Etc., etc.

Many people don't realise (especially the, "Christians," of the US) that these were just men who wrote about their experiences/visions/their version of events/etc. and that what is written, is not 100% true or could even be proven to be true; why are their accounts so cherished and held in such high regard, while others' depictions are not? Otherwise, I could write a 2000 page book tomorrow and talk about a new messiah, that trounced aliens and destroyed them by sending nuclear bombs back to their homeworld and reclaim the Earth, thus starting a new world as we know it today!

Oh, I see, L. Ron Hubbard already did that...

[SunsetBengal]

(08-25-2020, 02:57 PM)samhain Wrote: My thoughts exactly.  I like the traditions and and most of the official doctrines of the church.  It's most of what I know of religion because it's how I was raised.  I'd go back if for no other reason but to re-connect with family history.  I just can't overlook the other thing.  It's way too pervasive and way too horrific.  When the diocese of Covington (NKY) released their list of credible abusers a couple of weeks ago, no less than four of them were at my church/school when I was a kid.  4.  And several more before and after.  What person in their right mind would send their kid anywhere near a place with that kind of track record if religion weren't attached?  If you were at a Catholic institution as a child, it's not just possible that you were around predators, it's somewhere between highly likely and certain.

I was raised Catholic, and attended Catholic school for elementary.  I personally wasn't a victim of a predatory Priest;  However, I found out many years later, that a cousin of my same age was abused as an Altar Boy.  Like many of my generation, I wandered from the church as a young man.  I tried going back in my late 20s through early 30s, but the more revelations of evidence of abuse and cover ups by the church that came to light, I just finally decided that the hypocrisy was too much for me.