Bishop orders priests to read anti-Obama letter at Sunday sermons

[Robert_Bay]

Blog

 

[Al_Moritz]

Emphasis mine. Again, people focus on the permissibility of voting for a candidate that supports intrinsic evils, but ignore the proportionality requirement of such a choice.

What is more “truly grave” than the lives of innocent unborn children?

And the USCCB document says specifially “other morally grave reasons”. What part of “other” do you not understand?

 

[Suudy]

And the USCCB document says specifially “other morally grave reasons”. What part of “other” do you not understand?

Ok. What “other morally grave” reasons are there?

 

[JimG]

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimG
Exactly. It’s pretty simple. The Church opposes abortion,infanticide, contraception, abortion inducing drugs, same sex marriage, contraception. One party endorses all those things, and also proposes to force its view on Catholic institutions. Putting two and two together is pretty basic here.

Wouldn’t our Church as a whole be obligated to make a further ‘simple’ clarifications to correct the error if millions of people were in err from the last election?

No. The Church’s duty is to clarify moral issues, not to endorse candidates. It has clarified the moral issues quite well.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Ok. What “other morally grave” reasons are there?

Through conscience all things are weighed. A candidate’s perceived credibility can affect proportionate reasons. To err is human, and we do not have to accept a candidate as above that, especially if we feel the candidate is misleading on issues for the purposes of being elected.

Even if we do not agree with others, we cannot, or should not, force them against their conscience. That is also a Church teaching.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimG
Exactly. It’s pretty simple. The Church opposes abortion,infanticide, contraception, abortion inducing drugs, same sex marriage, contraception. One party endorses all those things, and also proposes to force its view on Catholic institutions. Putting two and two together is pretty basic here.

No. The Church’s duty is to clarify moral issues, not to endorse candidates. It has clarified the moral issues quite well.

I agree Jim.

I also believe the Church does not endorse one candidate over another because no one can see the intent in another person’s heart and the position it would have placed itself in if the candidate proved to be truly evil. Just as the Church does not want to find itself in such a position, it does not ask us to place ourselves in a similar position.

This is the reason I find it to be an incorrect statement for some to say, ‘to vote a certain way is a mortal sin,’ or ‘to vote a certain way endangers one’s eternal soul.’

We form our consciences, according to Church instruction, and we must act upon our consciences, according to Church instruction. We are not to force others against their consciences; again, according to Church instruction. This is, in affect, how the Church makes it’s decision.

 

[Mickey]

This is the reason I find it to be an incorrect statement for some to say, ‘to vote a certain way is a mortal sin,’ or ‘to vote a certain way endangers one’s eternal soul.’

Unless someone is under the influence of “invincible ignorance”…it is intinsically evil to support someone who champions abortion/infanticide, contraception, homosexual “marriage”, etc.

It is a danger to their eternal soul.

Christ will be the judge.

 

[Suudy]

Through conscience all things are weighed. A candidate’s perceived credibility can affect proportionate reasons. To err is human, and we do not have to accept a candidate as above that, especially if we feel the candidate is misleading on issues for the purposes of being elected.

Perhaps. But as I posted earlier.

At best, Obama will do nothing regarding abortion, gay “marriage”, embryonic stem-cell research, and other intrinsic evils.
At worst, Romney will do nothing regarding abortion, gay “marriage”, embryonic stem-cell research, and other intrinsic evils.

Even if one has doubts about Romney’s sincerity, do we expect the best or the worst from our political leaders? Even with such doubt, Romney is the superior choice on these issues. And if these issues are more important than other issues (as I think most orthodox Catholics would think they are), how is a vote for Obama justified by proportionate reasons?

Even if we do not agree with others, we cannot, or should not, force them against their conscience. That is also a Church teaching.

I’m not suggesting otherwise. The point of this discussion is to persuade, not coerce. Indeed, I have no idea who anybody here is in real life, so I can’t force them to act otherwise.

(And besides, I think it a metaphysical impossibility for people to act against their conscience. They can be forced to do things they disagree with, but the lack of consent by their conscience makes this an involuntary act. And involuntary acts are not acts that I think God will condemn us for.)

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Unless someone is under the influence of “invincible ignorance”…it is intinsically evil to support someone who champions abortion/infanticide, contraception, homosexual “marriage”, etc.

It is a danger to their eternal soul.

Christ will be the judge.

The Church as a whole, has not taught that it is intrinsically evil to support someone, but to support someone precisely because of their position on, and to promote, an intrinsic evil.

Christ will judge all, for their ‘intent’ in all things.

 

[Mickey]

The Church as a whole, has not taught that it is intrinsically evil to support someone, but to support someone precisely because of their position on, and to promote, an intrinsic evil.

Abortion is murder. If you vote for someone who supports the murder of children in the womb…you are voting for murder. There is no other issue which mitigates this truth. There is time to repent in this life…but not after that.

Christ will surely be our Judge.

 

[Suudy]

The Church as a whole, has not taught that it is intrinsically evil to support someone, but to support someone precisely because of their position on, and to promote, an intrinsic evil.

I think there is a bit more to it than just a vote for positions in spite of support for intrinsic evils. We are also called to oppose evil. If a person intentionally votes for someone that supports an evil when they know that evil can be curbed with a vote for another, that too is a consideration.

The way I see it, a vote for Obama is a vote to continue/expand evils. A vote for Romney is a vote to eliminate/curb evils. I think it far more important to work to limit intrinsic evils, especially when the other issues are matters of prudential judgement.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Even if one has doubts about Romney’s sincerity, do we expect the best or the worst from our political leaders? Even with such doubt, Romney is the superior choice on these issues. And if these issues are more important than other issues (as I think most orthodox Catholics would think they are), how is a vote for Obama justified by proportionate reasons?

Those answers are formed by individual consciences.

Cardinal Ratzinger wrote ‘proportionate reasons’, without any definition. I offered what I view to be a valid argument of a candidate’s credibility playing a major part in what could be a weighing factor to what becomes, and what does not, proportionate reasons to an individual’s conscience.

We have an apparent division among Catholics, that I take for their word to be orthodox. About half voted for Obama last election. We’ve heard the accusations of those being in err. Does the Church have no responsibility to speak clearly to address an error that half the Church is in?

 

[JimG]

I agree Jim.

I also believe the Church does not endorse one candidate over another because no one can see the intent in another person’s heart and the position it would have placed itself in if the candidate proved to be truly evil. Just as the Church does not want to find itself in such a position, it does not ask us to place ourselves in a similar position.

This is the reason I find it to be an incorrect statement for some to say, ‘to vote a certain way is a mortal sin,’ or ‘to vote a certain way endangers one’s eternal soul.’

We form our consciences, according to Church instruction, and we must act upon our consciences, according to Church instruction. We are not to force others against their consciences; again, according to Church instruction. This is, in affect, how the Church makes it’s decision.

The Church need not judge intent, except in the sacrament of confession. For public policy purposes, it only needs to judge the morality of policies, not persons. And it has done so.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Abortion is murder. If you vote for someone who supports the murder of children in the womb…you are voting for murder. There is no other issue which mitigates this truth. There is time to repent in this life…but not after that.

Christ will surely be our Judge.

Christ is our ONLY judge. We cannot judge each other.

There are several Church leaders that state it is not a sin to vote for a candidate, as long as you’re not voting to support that candidate’s support of an intrinsic evil. That means one is not voting for ‘murder’.

I’m sorry if my questions have upset you. They are genuine questions, and reason I see validity in other people’s arguments.

My conscience calls me to place my faith elsewhere and I will not be voting. That is not meant to sway another from what their conscience is leading them to do. Acting on one’s conscience is a must, according to Catholic teachings.

 

[Mickey]

Cardinal Ratzinger wrote ‘proportionate reasons’, without any definition.

Take careful note of those last two words: “proportionate reasons.” Cardinal Ratzinger, a careful moral theologian, is telling us that a faithful Catholic might vote for a candidate who supported abortion if there were another moral issue as grave and as clear as the abortion issue. But keep in mind that in the text above this footnote, the cardinal made it quite clear that there is no such commensurate issue.

**In a statement released on August 11, Bishop Rene Gracida clarified matters:
**
Since abortion and euthanasia have been defined by the Church as the most serious sins prevalent in our society, what kind of reasons could possibly be considered proportionate enough to justify a Catholic voting for a candidate who is known to be pro-abortion? None of the reasons commonly suggested could even begin to be proportionate enough to justify a Catholic voting for such a candidate. Reasons such as the candidate’s position on war, or taxes, or the death penalty, or immigration, or a national health plan, or social security, or aids, or homosexuality, or marriage, or any similar burning societal issues of our time are simply lacking in proportionality.
catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=32073&repos=4&subrepos= 1&searchid=568360

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The Church need not judge intent, except in the sacrament of confession. For public policy purposes, it only needs to judge the morality of policies, not persons. And it has done so.

It has judged acts as intrinsic evils.

We can see though these forums that people are saying that Catholics are in err for voting for Obama last election. The Church is our spiritual guide. The Church is obligated to keep His sheep. He taught the importance of going after one lost sheep. We are talking about millions of sheep being accused of being lost.

I don’t agree that the Church need not speak in that situation.

 

[Al_Moritz]

Christ will surely be our Judge.

Yes, He will. I am in peace with that. You on the other hand run around scaremongering on issues that you clearly misinterpret, as I and others (and in an excellent manner, Prodigal Son1, in the last few posts) have pointed out.

You got to chill out and worry more about and pray for souls that are indifferent or even hostile to Christ’s message, and less worry about sincere Catholics who differ in legitimate opinion about how to interpret certain Church documents. Prayers are welcome anyway, however, we can all benefit from them.

 

[Mickey]

Christ is our ONLY judge.

Indeed. And we will all stand before His fearsome judgment seat.

There are several Church leaders that state it is not a sin to vote for a candidate, as long as you’re not voting to support that candidate’s support of an intrinsic evil. That means one is not voting for ‘murder’.

If you vote for a champion of abortion…you are supporting part of that agenda…which is murder of pre-born babies. Nothing over rides that.

I’m sorry if my questions have upset you.

I am not upset at all.

My conscience calls me to place my faith elsewhere and I will not be voting.

You have free will to vote…or not vote.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Take careful note of those last two words: “proportionate reasons.” Cardinal Ratzinger, a careful moral theologian, is telling us that a faithful Catholic might vote for a candidate who supported abortion if there were another moral issue as grave and as clear as the abortion issue. But keep in mind that in the text above this footnote, the cardinal made it quite clear that there is no such commensurate issue.

**In a statement released on August 11, Bishop Rene Gracida clarified matters:
**
Since abortion and euthanasia have been defined by the Church as the most serious sins prevalent in our society, what kind of reasons could possibly be considered proportionate enough to justify a Catholic voting for a candidate who is known to be pro-abortion? None of the reasons commonly suggested could even begin to be proportionate enough to justify a Catholic voting for such a candidate. Reasons such as the candidate’s position on war, or taxes, or the death penalty, or immigration, or a national health plan, or social security, or aids, or homosexuality, or marriage, or any similar burning societal issues of our time are simply lacking in proportionality.
catholicculture.org/news/features/index.cfm?recnum=32073&repos=4&subrepos= 1&searchid=568360

I’m actually going to stop my participation in this discussion. I can produce the exact words of Caridnal Ratzinger, the Catholic voter’s guide, a US Bishop, and other clergy, that expressly does not limit a Catholic to a single choice. I don’t want to pitch authoritative men of the Church against each other in that fashion.

You should act on your conscience, and others should act on theirs.
**
If Catholics are to vote for one candidate only, why wouldn’t the Church plainly state so?** It is responsible for all His sheep.

 

[Mickey]

Yes, He will. I am in peace with that.

You have free will to vote as you please.

You on the other hand run around scaremongering on issues

Scare mongering? Oh pulleease! If you want to vote for someone who overwhelmingly supports abortion/infanticide, contraception, and gay “marriage”…and you are at peace with that…then no one is forcing you otherwise.

You got to chill out and worry more about and pray for souls that are indifferent or even hostile to Christ’s message

The murder of Christ’s most precious and innocent children…those without a voice…those without a choice…that is what I call hostile to Christ’s message.

I pray daily for those who get abortions, perform abortions, campaign for abortions, procure abortions, and vote for those who support abortions…that they may repent with copious tears in this life…because it is too late in the next.