Account: bishop says "You can't be an authentic Catholic and pro-abortion." --As pro-abortion "Catholic" in U.S. takes the public eye

[Naga]

With respect to Catholic citizenship, the USCCB has posited that various issues are important. However, they have explicitly stated that:

The threat of abortion remains our preeminent priority because it directly attacks life
itself, because it takes place within the sanctuary of the family, and because of the number of
lives destroyed.

Source: http://www.usccb.org/about/leadersh...-citizenship-introductory-letter-20191112.pdf

Although this is not an infallible declaration, as bishops it is important that we give their words the consideration due to them.

I presume this topic is related to the upcoming United States Presidential election. With respect to deciding between Trump, whoever the Democratic nominee is, third party, or refraining from voting: Our own Tim Staples from Catholic Answers has some excellent points in his response beginning at about 1:10:42 in this video:

 

[AlNg]

With respect to deciding between Trump, whoever the Democratic nominee is, third party, or refraining from voting: Our own Tim Staples from Catholic Answers has some excellent points in his response beginning at about 1:10:42 in this video:

Yes. I thought he did a good job with his explanation.
As far as being an authentic Catholic, I have often heard Nancy Pelosi claim she was. But let’s look at it: Partial birth abortion - what is it? I don’t see where there can be any doubt about partial birth abortion being murder of an infant.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Don’t believe everything you read!

The OP is made to look like an official Catholic entity. They start by presenting a couple of legitimate quotes from a real bishop about abortion. But that’s where the legitimacy ends and the politics begins.

Notice that the actual quote from the bishop said nothing about voting for candidates who in turn support abortion. All he said was Catholics cannot support abortion. Period. Then the text goes on to try to twist his words to make it sound like he is saying Catholics can’t vote for Biden. The bishop never said that! Another giveaway is the citations of Breitbart. This article is starting to smell and should make every reader suspicious. Does anyone find it odd that the homepage of this website, pagadiandiocese.org, gives no indication of who owns or runs this website? Another big red flag.

And there is more. As we look at other articles on this same website we see gems like:

• Global Warming Unmasked (Michael Voris!)
• German Catholic archdiocese promotes fornication, abortion, to 15-year-old girls

The bottom line is that this article has a political axe to grind, and is grinding it deceptively. Take that into account as you consider the message. Always examine the source!

 

[EXdrinker]

And there is more. As we look at other articles on this same website we see gems like:

• Global Warming Unmasked (Michael Voris!)
• German Catholic archdiocese promotes fornication, abortion, to 15-year-old girls

The bottom line is that this article has a political axe to grind, and is grinding it deceptively. Take that into account as you consider the message. Always examine the source!

Yep, it is a deceptive article grinding the political axe of trying to save babies. Rediculously overly political for sure. How could anyone fall for these crazed people wanting to save babies?

Bias is not always wrong, sometimes it is just plain common sense.

 

[JerryZ]

I do not to opine on a topic that I do not fully understand so lets start at the beginning. Please define the pro-birth and pro-life positions.
How one would differentiate them from pro-abortion?
Peace!

 

[dscath]

See post 17, it will help you out

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

And there is more. As we look at other articles on this same website we see gems like:

• Global Warming Unmasked (Michael Voris!)
• German Catholic archdiocese promotes fornication, abortion, to 15-year-old girls

The bottom line is that this article has a political axe to grind, and is grinding it deceptively. Take that into account as you consider the message. Always examine the source!

Yep, it is a deceptive article grinding the political axe of trying to save babies.

That’s the thing. I’m not sure that is their motive. When they use deception I have to wonder if maybe what they really are trying to do is to get lower taxes, deregulation, suppression of climate change science, prevent universal health care, discourage labor unions, etc. This would be a sneaky way of getting those things, wouldn’t it?

 

[Emeraldlady]

I presume this topic is related to the upcoming United States Presidential election. With respect to deciding between Trump, whoever the Democratic nominee is, third party, or refraining from voting: Our own Tim Staples from Catholic Answers has some excellent points in his response

One thing I would like to put out there when Mr Staples ask the caller whether his dislike of Trump might me ‘emotionalism’. That may sway some but there are enough people even within the Republican party and it’s lifelong base whose reaction is sheer ‘gut instinct’. This person is not a conservative, has no instinct for non partisanship in times of crisis and can’t ‘walk in others shoes’ which is the virtue that nurtures a true national identity. Along with many other deficiencies contra indicative to natiional leadership.

Gut instinct is a real thing.

 

[VanitasVanitatum]

Of course he/she does. But to say that you can’t be pro-life unless you are okay with the government stealing from its citizens to provide that support is ludicrous.

Some reasonable alternative should be suggested then.

 

[pnewton]

The OP confuses me with the organization that was linked. It is a site in the Philippines, not Bishop Tobin’s diocese, and they link Breitbart and Church Militant. I wanted to put this out there in case anyone was fooled by where this article came from.

As for the United States, we take our guidance on voting from the bishops here. I have already linked the Voter’s Guide more times than I can recall when people start going beyond that to tell other Catholics how to vote, but the Philippines???

 

[Peeps]

Neither of the candidates on either ticket are pro life. So really abortion is a moot point in this election.

The church doesn’t say you cant vote for a candidate that is pro choice. They say you cant vote for one because they are pro choice.

There are many Catholics who are pro a lot of things which are against the church’s teachings including the clergy themselves. We are all sinners, and unless we are going to establish a sin scale which one has to be at a certain position on in order to call themselves Catholic not sure how we determine authentic Catholics.

I suggest checking out, when it becomes available, which Presidential candidate gets the endorsement of the various pro-life PACs and pro-life front line charitable organizations (e.g., the various pregnancy life care centers). These are the people on the front lines, with daily personal experience with abortion vs. life, and there is a mix of Catholic, Protestant, and other religions (and even people with no religion!) involve with these organizations.

At this time, these organizations are rating Pres. Trump highly for his pro-life policies. Pres. Obama received “zeros” for practically everything he did, and unless a miracle occurs, Vice Pres. Biden will, in all likelihood, receive “zeros” for his pro-life decisions that he will make if he should be elected to the Presidency.

 

[Peeps]

Your call. Seems you are at peace, and I’m glad you are.

Your mellowness is interfering with your cognition.

I seriously suggest that you discuss this subject with actual front line anti-abortion workers and with the PACs (for example, Right To Life, the Pro-Life Action League, Silent No More, etc.). Check out your State people active in these organizations if possible.

Also, I suggest making appointments with the people who are in charge of your local Pregnancy Life Care Center (it’s called different names in different cities).

Also check out local pro-life activists. You can probably figure out who these people are by reading their “Letters to the Editor,” or ask the people at the front-line organizations for names, although they may not give you the names if you come across as someone who may be capable of doing harm to these people; e.g., excoriating their articles in the local paper.

Finally, talk to your diocescan pro-life spokesperson, the person who actually works with your bishop (the apostle of the Lord Jesus Christ).

I think that these people will disturb your peace over your viewpoint.

 

[Wesrock]

David_Figueroa1:

dscath:

Of course you can’t…but neither can you be an authentic Catholic if you are only pro-birth and not pro-life…some Catholics don’t know the difference.

So I can’t be against murder without thinking that people should be forced to pay the victim’s mother?

dscath is referring to those who are only anti abortion but either reject or ar indifferent to the rest of the Church’s prolife teachings. ie abolishing the death penalty, compassion for refugees, the effect of environmental abuse on poverty in developing nations. The effect of corporate greed on the welfare of the poor and marginalised. Those are all issues the Church regards as part of being unconditionally prolife.

Politically I am against the death penalty, for giving more compassion to refugees, better welfare programs, better environmental protections etc…

But I must say that there is a difference between these and abortion. The former are largely
prudential matters or at least currently guided by modern circumstances, the latter has always been condemned as intrinsically evil under all conditions. Abortion is always wrong is on the level of moral dogma if there is such a thing.

 

[farronwolf]

I don’t need some organization to tell me what they think, when I have heard Trump say things that are not pro life.

Others may need to, but that is their call.

 

[Jimbo]

That’s a valid point. And honestly it took me away from both parties. I’m not comfortable with the way the Republicans tend to be so big business centric; and with some of their lack of social care.

On the other hand, I’m blown away by the ability of people to minimize the abortion industry; which I can’t see as anything but the systematic process of dehumanization of an entire class of human beings, so they can be killed to the tune of 900K/year. And the Democrats are not only ‘tolerant’ of it, it’s now a central tenant of their platform.

We live in trying times.

 

[Genesis315]

Exactly. How public authority approaches all these issues must be looked at from the perspective of the common good. Since none of us are omniscient, people of good will operating with the same principles may disagree about what (otherwise morally sound) measures should be taken given the circumstances to bring about the greatest common good. The whole point of politics is debating these issues–politics at its best should not be about good versus evil, but sifting ideas to determine the best way to achieve the most good given the circumstances.

The Church provides the elements of the common good as follows in the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1925 The common good consists of three essential elements: respect for and promotion of the fundamental rights of the person; prosperity, or the development of the spiritual and temporal goods of society; the peace and security of the group and of its members.

The issue with abortion is that it is always by its very nature an attack on the common good, since by definition it denies a large class of people the most fundamental right, definitively excludes them from the opportunity to share in society’s temporal and spiritual goods, and provides them with absolutely no security or protection (not to mention each act introduces a grave injustice into the societal order without any redress).

I’m not sure there is a single element of the common good even its toleration would aid (the usual argument is it supports the “prosperity” of the poor, but this is a very narrow, twisted, and un-Christian view of prosperity).

The right to immigrate can be limited or regulated according to the needs of the common good. Environmental measures must be weighed and balanced against human needs and rights. Even the use of the death penalty is pro-life, when applied justly, as the Church has always taught. The Church gives us the principles, and Popes and bishops also are free to and often do provide their own analysis of the circumstances and judgment as to what the best measures are. But at the end of the day, as the Catechism states, “The Church respects and encourages the political freedom and responsibility of the citizen.” (CCC 2245)

 

[LeafByNiggle]

But I must say that there is a difference between these and abortion. The former are largely
prudential matters or at least currently guided by modern circumstances, the latter has always been condemned as intrinsically evil under all conditions. Abortion is always wrong is on the level of moral dogma if there is such a thing.

While I agree that abortion itself is always wrong and not a matter of prudential judgement, the issue of voting for a person (not an issue) is still a matter of prudential judgement. The decision on how much effect the candidate’s views are likely to have on abortion is one such consideration. Deciding to vote for one person for reasons other than abortion is a matter for prudential judgement.

 

[farronwolf]

Why it is a tenant of their platform is beyond my comprehension. I know the reasons people give, but none of them are valid IMO.

On the other hand, and I have stated this numerous times previously, there is nothing any politician can do to overturn the current laws regarding abortion. An outright ban on it is not going to happen. States have tried and been shot down by the SCOTUS. With the current precedents it will remain part of our society.

The only way to change the law is through Constitutional Amendment. This won’t come from Congress. The states have the ability to amend the Constitution, but the numbers aren’t there yet. Hoping that politician X will appoint enough judges to miraculously rule against precedent is a pie in the sky. Again IMO.

So, based on that, I don’t look at abortion as a single issue when viewing a political candidate. I know that many do, and that some Catholics take what the USCCB says about abortion to mean that you can never vote for anyone who is pro choice, which they do not actually say. Truth be told, there are very, very few politicians who are 100% pro life based on the Church’s teachings.

I for one don’t minimize abortion, but it is kind of like banging my head against a stone wall hoping it will come down. At present it won’t and all I will have is a headache or trip to the hospital. Not much different than wanting to get rid of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. It just ain’t going to happen.

The only hope in making progress on the issue is to do whatever part we can to try to limit the number of abortions that take place.

More back to the topic of the thread though, I think the two party political system we have been under in this country has forced politicians on both sides to take positions that they are not necessarily comfortable with to be included in the party and get the monetary support which is required to either get into or stay in office. The greed and self serving attitudes that have developed over the decades in our country, and not just among politicians, is really the root of many of the ills which plague our society. How we fix that is the greater question IMO.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Kindly share the Catechism or Canon Law which defines an “authentic Catholic”. I am unaware of that as a teaching.

As both major parties in the US are pro-abortion, they each support abortion in cases of health, if the father is a criminal, if the child will be deformed, they both support IVF, then I guess a Catholic cannot vote for either major party.

Wait, except that the USCCB gives us wise guidance:

http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-act...onsciences-for-faithful-citizenship-title.cfm

 

[Peeps]

I don’t need some organization to tell me what they think, when I have heard Trump say things that are not pro life.

Others may need to, but that is their call.

Trump’s diarrhea of the mouth is not as important as his actions that make it possible for more women to choose to allow their child to be born.

Honestly, what would you rather have? Someone who is very polite and cultured, but is willing to let you die or suffer, or someone who is crass and a braggart who does what he/she can to help you live and enjoy your life?

Actions speak louder than words or postures or hair/skin color (orange).