Can you be both Catholic and liberal?

[jjdrury81]

It’s pretty hard keeping track of what qualifies as “liberal” and “conservative.” In the 1960s and 1970s, liberals were opposed to the Vietnam War, discrimination against racial minorities and women, and in favor of environmental protection and social welfare, for example. Many, if not most Catholics thought of themselves as liberal in those days, I think, because of the Church’s supportive stance on peace and social justice issues.

Since then, pro-life issues have become the dominant political issue for Catholics. Since the Republican Party has taken pro-life positions, many more Catholics vote Republican. As the Republican Party becomes more and more conservative, many political moderates are now considered “liberal” by Republicans. If you get your news and political commentary from the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Glen Beck, for example, those who once were considered moderates are now viewed as commie, fascist, socialist, Nazi, America-hating liberals. I think Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck are complete nut jobs, but that’s just me.

For those Catholics who are pro-life and also concerned about social justice and the environment, for example, they are stuck between parties. The best spokesman for such Catholics was probably the late Cardinal Bernadin of Chicago who spoke of the Catholic position on abortion and social justice isses as a “seamless web.” Some bishops have argued that no Catholic should vote for a candidate who is not pro-life (i.e., anti-abortion), which would make Catholics a single-issue voting bloc that would likely vote for Republican candidates. Other bishops view this as only one of many important issues that Catholic voters should consider.

I am politically progressive but pro-life. I proudly voted for Obama and I’d do it again in a heartbeat. A lot of very conservative, very Republican Catholics post on the Catholic Answer Forums, so I take a lot of flak. I comfort myself with the thought that these forums aren’t the whole Church. Deo gratia!

Great Post

 

[AHapka]

I am not and have not called you or suggested you are either stupid or a moron.

I’m not sure what you don’t understand? The fact that the U.S. Bishops do not require Catholics do belong to a certain political party? That they don’t bar anyone from belonging to a certain political party? Thanks for any clarification.

Oh I wasn’t accusing you of calling me anything…it was me calling myself that…

I understand the US Bishops position, and I’m not knocking that.

I guess I’ll ask you of what your definition of a democrat and a republican is? Perhaps that will help.

 

[gearhead]

Umm…how you you be a democrat without being in favor of abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and ABC.

Either you are not a democrat or lying when you say that you are. Those items are definitions of democrats and the democratic party. If you don’t believe them, then you really have no business calling yourself a democrat. And it’s as simple as that.

No, it’s not that simple. Voting for a candidate or even being a member of a political party doesn’t have to mean absolute agreement with every detail of the party platform; it just means that, on the whole, you think that party’s platform is better than the alternatives.

And those things are all contrary to Catholic moral teaching.

The death penalty is not a violation of Catholic moral teaching. War is not a violation of Catholic moral teaching by the just war doctrine.

The Vatican has strongly condemned the death penalty as it’s implemented in the US, and it specifically declared that the Iraq War was not a “just war”. There are plenty of things that disagree with Catholic teaching in both parties. Unless you’re going to not vote at all, you’re going to have to make a compromise based on which of the available imperfect options is better.

 

[AHapka]

The Vatican has strongly condemned the death penalty as it’s implemented in the US, and it specifically declared that the Iraq War was not a “just war”. There are plenty of things that disagree with Catholic teaching in both parties. Unless you’re going to not vote at all, you’re going to have to make a compromise based on which of the available imperfect options is better.

You have a point. And I don’t agree with the death penalty for three reasons, too:

1. Innocent people have been on death row,
2. Keeping people alive longer gives them time to repent if guilty,
3. It’s too expensive.

 

[athansor]

I consider myself an economic liberal. I’m pro-life, anti-death penalty, and pretty close to socialist on economic issues. I’m also in the process of returning to the Catholic faith.

 

[diggerdomer]

Oh I wasn’t accusing you of calling me anything…it was me calling myself that…

I understand the US Bishops position, and I’m not knocking that.

I guess I’ll ask you of what your definition of a democrat and a republican is? Perhaps that will help.

If you’re registered with one party, or tend to vote with one party, then you’re a democrat or republican (or green, or independent, or whatever).

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Thank you for “responding” to my post.

it seem you use the term “discuss” loosely

Well, it seems to me you have twisted Church Doctrine by saying this:

They are in the same boat 99% of the time, and catholics are called to truth

Yes, this is quite a laughing matter.

What actions ? Or is “MarkInOregon” supposed to answer? What about earlier catechism post does it still apply?

It shows in their actions because they voted for Obama…and say, “hey, I’m Catholic…I’m pro-life - I just support someone who isn’t.” :banghead:

and I’m sure MarkInOregon could give a good answer, yes!

Now, since I prefer to rise above immaturity, here’s where you are very much mistaken in, well, most of your posts:

The Church’s view of abortion and the presidents are quite different, ask anyone. We believe abortion is wrong…Obama - not so much. I would go more in depth with this, but you know, something tells me you’re just trying to ruffle feathers, and I shouldn’t waste my breath.

America, bless God!

 

[lil_flower_luv]

I consider myself an economic liberal. I’m pro-life, anti-death penalty, and pretty close to socialist on economic issues. I’m also in the process of returning to the Catholic faith.

I’ll be praying for you are your journey!! It’s always such great news to hear someone returning to the Faith!!

Now ~ can you elaborate on “socialist on economic issues”?
Thanks!

Therese

 

[lil_flower_luv]

The point is, be Catholic. If you do that, imho whether you regard yourself as liberal or conservative (or whatever) is secondary.

I like this part!

…

But then you said this:

No, one can be pro-life and still vote for a candidate who does not meet the Catholic pro-life criteria. No presidential candidate that I know of met the Catholic definition of pro-life, yet as Catholics we are still allowed (and many would say encouraged) to vote.

“Be Catholic” you said. Not, “Just A little Catholic,” or “Somewhat Catholic”…but, “be Catholic.” We don’t just say we’re Catholic…we live as Catholics. It isn’t my opinion, but it is our Church’s belief to live out exactly what we believe…to fight for it! And we stand up and say that we are a people of life. Life, the greatest thing our Lord gives us, and the biggest issue today, is what we stand for. To say we firmly believe life is sacred and life must be defended, but support a man who believes every human being in America deserves an equal chance, except the unborn, makes us a liar! *** It is the same as hating your neighbor and saying you love God is a lie. This is not the time to let other issues take the place of life.*** Who do you think was more pro-life in the election this year - Obama or McCain? Friend, even if voting for a pro-life president doesn’t put a dent in our pro-life movement - we must profess what we believe in every aspect of our lives - and just, “be Catholic.”

America, bless God!

 

[diggerdomer]

I like this part!

…

But then you said this:

“Be Catholic” you said. Not, “Just A little Catholic,” or “Somewhat Catholic”…but, “be Catholic.” We don’t just say we’re Catholic…we live as Catholics. It isn’t my opinion, but it is our Church’s belief to live out exactly what we believe…to fight for it! And we stand up and say that we are a people of life. Life, the greatest thing our Lord gives us, and the biggest issue today, is what we stand for. To say we firmly believe life is sacred and life must be defended, but support a man who believes every human being in America deserves an equal chance, except the unborn, makes usis a liar! *** It is the same as hating your neighbor and saying you love God is a lie. This is not the time to let other issues take the place of life.*** Even if voting for a pro-life president doesn’t put a dent in it - we must profess what we believe in every aspect of our lives - and just, “be Catholic.”

America, bless God!

Being pro-life, as I understand it, covers many issues. My point is, no candidate I know of (at least, for President) adheres to every pro-life position of the Catholic Church (as I do).

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Being pro-life, as I understand it, covers many issues. My point is, no candidate I know of (at least, for President) adheres to every pro-life position of the Catholic Church (as I do).

I was just telling someone the other day to put the most important things first. Urgent things before, well, not so urgent things. Yes, there are other life issues that concern us. But if a student has a test the next day and instead of studying, starts a report due in two months, that student is making the choice of putting an urgent thing last when it should be first. Abortion is the biggest threat to human life. It takes more lives that any war. It condemns many to death without a choice in the matter. Don’t you think it should be considered first when you step into that voting booth?

 

[diggerdomer]

I was just telling someone the other day to put the most important things first. Urgent things before, well, not so urgent things. Yes, there are other life issues that concern us. But if a student has a test the next day and instead of studying, starts a report due in two months, that student is making the choice of putting an urgent thing last when it should be first. Abortion is the biggest threat to human life. It takes more lives that any war. It condemns many to death without a choice in the matter. Don’t you think it should be considered first when you step into that voting booth?

All issues regarding the sanctity of human life should be considered first. That’s my opinion.

 

[lil_flower_luv]

All issues regarding the sanctity of human life should be considered first. That’s my opinion.

"Among important issues involving the dignity of human life with which the Church is concerned, abortion necessarily plays a central role. Abortion, the direct killing of an innocent human being, is always gravely immoral (The Gospel of Life, no. 57); its victims are the most vulnerable and defenseless members of the human family. It is imperative that those who are called to serve the least among us give urgent attention and priority to this issue of justice." ~U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

 

[diggerdomer]

"Among important issues involving the dignity of human life with which the Church is concerned, abortion necessarily plays a central role. Abortion, the direct killing of an innocent human being, is always gravely immoral (The Gospel of Life, no. 57); its victims are the most vulnerable and defenseless members of the human family. It is imperative that those who are called to serve the least among us give urgent attention and priority to this issue of justice." ~U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops

Well of course!

 

[lil_flower_luv]

Well of course!

So why support a candidate who promotes it?? Is that giving “urgent attention and priority to this issue of justice.”?

 

[diggerdomer]

So why support a candidate who promotes it?? Is that giving “urgent attention and priority to this issue of justice.”?

I live in the U.S. As the U.S. Bishops teach, we are not single issue voters. Also, neither party (Republican or Democrat) has done anything nationally, that I know of, to address this issue in a practical way.

Also, of course, voting for a given candidate does not mean one supports or advocates every part of that candidate’s platform or beliefs.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

So why support a candidate who promotes it?? Is that giving “urgent attention and priority to this issue of justice.”?

Among those who have broden their understanding on voting. They realize how many candidates have been elected to office since 1974. So how does your logic tell you that abortions remains legal? That is why abortion has become a morally neutral voting issue in the USA, you pick between keep it legal and keep it legal. Some republicans are trying to claim catholics are now captives of the republican party, it is not working against well educated catholics

 

[rtconstant]

To be honest, I wish there was a Catholic Party. I have not seen a candidate that I feel I can vote for in good conscience in years (at the Presidential level anyway). Neither the GOP or Democratic Party are offering us much. I really can’t support much of anything on the Republican platform other than the fact they claim to be pro-life. Of course its basically only lip service to the movement. As they are the party that confirmed Roe vs Wade, and despite having had strong control of government several times really haven’t done much to deter abortion. The reason is obvious, this one plank gains them a large voting block, and as long as they say they’re pro-life they will keep them. If abortion were made illegal and that plank disappeared they’d be in trouble.

Democrats on the other hand while getting it right on many issues, are hypocritically “pro-choice” and that pretty much blows their bully pulpit out of the water. So voters are left with the choice of voting against social justice for a candidate that is insincerely “pro-life”, or voting for a candidate who at best is just going to let the killing continue, but supports many other good things. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

I friend of mine from California summed it up really well i think: “You can be a pro-life, pro-gas chamber hypocrite, or a save an owl, kill a baby hypocrite.”

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Thank you for “responding” to my post.

Well, it seems to me you have twisted Church Doctrine by saying this:

What actions ? Or is “MarkInOregon” supposed to answer? What about earlier catechism post does it still apply?

The contridiction is unbelieveable and a complete dismissal of the catechism, did your relatives really say “I just support someone who isn’t”?

and I’m sure MarkInOregon could give a good answer, yes!

I am betting he cannot

Now, since I prefer to rise above immaturity, here’s where you are very much mistaken in, well, most of your posts:

The Church’s view of abortion and the presidents are quite different, ask anyone. We believe abortion is wrong…Obama - not so much. I would go more in depth with this, but you know, something tells me you’re just trying to ruffle feathers, and I shouldn’t waste my breath.

America, bless God!

One issue of difference I know of; the Church prefers abortion be restricted to therapy which is not intented to create an abortion, while Obama see’s that restriction should not be government enforced. So that leaves about 99.99% for other issues which ones are you proposing separate Obama and the Church?

 

[lil_flower_luv]

I live in the U.S. As the U.S. Bishops teach, we are not single issue voters. Also, neither party (Republican or Democrat) has done anything nationally, that I know of, to address this issue in a practical way.

Also, of course, voting for a given candidate does not mean one supports or advocates every part of that candidate’s platform or beliefs.

Don’t try to sugar coat it. If you vote for a pro-choice candidate, you are supporting abortion. Period.