Can you be both Catholic and liberal?

[soflochristmas]

Seriously, I have always wondered how one can be conservative AND be a Christian of any denomination.
CLIP

You are very confussed about what a conservative is and believes.

Ironically, I believe EVERYTHING you described as being “conservative” is really a modern “liberal”, progressive, leftist, Demcorat trait.

bigotry, hatred for people, indifference to people, hatred of religion, etc.

 

[soflochristmas]

argue with liberals/leftist/progressives/Demcorats and you will always wind up in the mud and the conversation will always end with one or more of several arguements…

1. an appeal to “dictionary” terms (which has nothing to do with the modern definition of terms). In fact, the terms mean the exact opposite today of what the dictionary terms mean (i.e., it is the conservatives that are free thinkers and progressives. Take a look at the debate going on now about health care. What is NEW or progressive about the Democrat approach to BIG government health care? NOTHING. It is always the conservatives in this day and age that has the “new” (aka liberal) ideas. School vouchers, privatizing social security, faith based initiatives, charter schools (originally opposed by liberals), missle defense, tax credits for families who help support their eldery family members, increased domestic oil production, sales tax holidays, student/school standards, merit pay, the list is endless). It’s always the liberals that think MONEY is the solution to all problems…especially SOMEONE ELSE’S money (ie., the taxpayers).
2. an appeal that the “prudential” judgements left to baptized Catholics by the Church should be “doctrine” but the actual “absolute” truths spoken cleary by the Church (abortion, euthanasia, etc.) are open for interpretation.
3. a regurgitation of the pablum the media feeds us. For example…that it is conservatives that are “angry” but when the left called for Bush’s assasination, Rush Limbaugh’s kidneys to fail, Sarah Palin’s daughter was rapped, yada yada yada…that’s not hateful.

Look out for one or more of each of these tactics…

 

[MariaTS]

A Catholic can be Liberal, Conservative, Anarchist, even Fascist. There is no limit as to what political view-points a Catholic can have. Every single Catholic is a different person.

 

[itinerant1]

A Catholic can be Liberal, Conservative, Anarchist, even Fascist. There is no limit as to what political view-points a Catholic can have. Every single Catholic is a different person.

Not so, MariaTS. Some political views are contrary to Catholic social teaching.

For instance, Pope Pius XI said, “No one can be at the same time a sincere Catholic and a true Socialist.” See Quadragesimo Anno; On the Reconstruction of the Social Order.

Fascism is a type of socialism and therefore contrary to Catholic social teaching. This applies to other forms of socialism and etatism such as Communism and the National Socialism of Germany’s Third Reich.

Anarchist’s beliefs are contrary to what Jesus and St. Paul said about the state.

One cannot say without qualification whether Liberal and Conservative is consistent with Catholicism because the terms are over-used and mis-used. Furthermore, their meanings are ambiguous and change over time and with places. The terms have to be specifically defined in a particular situation in order to be assessed properly in regard to their relation to Catholic teaching.

For example, in America, modern liberalism is very different than the classical liberalism of the Founding era. Is one a liberal in the classical sense or in the modern sense? If in the modern sense, then it must be asked what is meant by being a political liberal. In the early to mid 20th century, in America, the term “liberal” was adopted as a socially polite term for socialist.

In conclusion, there are political ideologies that are in contradiction to Catholic social teaching and it would be inconsistent for a Catholic to adhere to any such ideology.

 

[Bucky24]

Yeah, right:

liberal= pro-abortion
liberal= pro-gay marriage

And don’t give me this “liberals care more about the poor.” It’s a proven fact that conservatives donate more money to charity then liberals do.

Not only that, if being conservative means being for the status quo, he would have been the ultimate conservative. God doesn’t change. We do, and usually not for the better.

Jesus was for the status quo? You’re joking, right??

Giving to charity is a wonderful thing. However, it should not end there. Finding and fixing the underlying causes of poverty is what we’re truly called to do.

Bucky

 

[love2learn]

Hmm.

Personally, I don’t see how someone who follows the Sermon on the Mount and takes its teachings to heart could be anything other than a liberal.

OTOH, the Ten Commandments kinda point toward conservatism for me.

I guess it’s just a question of what you want to emphasize.

The point is Jesus exhorted his followers to live the beatitudes and obey the Commandements as INDIVIDUALS. He never once addressed his teaching to governments. Government is neither moral nor immoral. It is individual persons who have accountablitly for moral actions. Jesus wants us as individuals to live the Gospel. The problem with liberalism (socialism) is that it takes away the individual’s sense of personal responsibility to make good choices in life. Did Jesus say, “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and your work is done. Ceasar will take care of the poor.”? I think liberals believe that government redistribution of income is an acceptable substitute for charity. There is a heavily footnoted book Who Really Cares? by Arthur C. Brooks which fleshes out this theory with an abundance of studies and survey data.

 

[AHapka]

Jesus was for the status quo? You’re joking, right??

Giving to charity is a wonderful thing. However, it should not end there. Finding and fixing the underlying causes of poverty is what we’re truly called to do.

Bucky

Jesus never once changed His laws. He did not abolish his laws, he fulfilled them. Scripture is very clear that God does not change. Not changing is the definition of status quo. Pretty simple in my mind.

 

[AHapka]

, but liberal politically. I am both anti-abortion and pro-life absolutely.

How can you say such a thing when part of the definition of liberal is being pro-abortion?

There is no such thing.

 

[TEPO]

-IMO-

When you consider yourself either a “Republican” or a “Democrat” you are declaring your allegiance to a political party. Once you do this you become one of their subjects…
-You should not do this.

But to consider yourself either a “liberal” or a “Conservative”, you are merely declaring whether or not you are loose or tight with things.

Example: I am liberal when it applies to giving to the homeless, but conservative when it comes to giving Christmas gifts. ** -You see, I can be a good Catholic when being either or both…**

Example: I am liberal when adding sugar to my coffee, but due to my cholesterol, am conservative when using red meat. I can be both…

Identifying people, however, as liberal or conservative however is sinful… It is from Hell… I would like it if people would stop this nonsense. I will pray for its end. Perhaps people should use the words that apply to a particular circumstance rather than categorizing people into groups. It is like throwing the race card --It is completely polarizing… And the media loves to play into it. :tsktsk:

-IMO-

 

[TEPO]

Why are people afraid to say the words Democrat or Republican? That is what it is all about anyway isnt it?

The real question is --Why would anyone claim allegiance to a party instead of GOD and the Church?

 

[AHapka]

I can be both…

Hmmm…good point…

 

[itinerant1]

Jesus never once changed His laws. He did not abolish his laws, he fulfilled them. Scripture is very clear that God does not change. Not changing is the definition of status quo. Pretty simple in my mind.

*Status quo *is the existing order of things things that are capable of changing such as various political and social conditions, customs, and so on. Some people favor changes in some matters while others prefer the status quo. Since God is incapable of change, the term status quo cannot be properly applied to his unchangeable nature or unchanging law.

One can say, for instance, the status quo is in conformity with the natural moral law, which is of Divine origin, but we cannot, without doing violence to language apply status quo to God Himself for the reason previously given.

 

[itinerant1]

Jesus was for the status quo? You’re joking, right??

Giving to charity is a wonderful thing. However, it should not end there. Finding and fixing the underlying causes of poverty is what we’re truly called to do.

Bucky

Attempting to remedy the social, political, or economic conditions that contribute to poverty, depending on the nature of the problem, is a part of social justice. The Church has much to say about working for social justice as well as giving alms to the poor.

There are different opinions or views about the best way to deal with systemic problems. Liberals and statists often claim more government and more government progams are the answer. Currently this view predominates, which is seen by the number of modern states that are social-welfare states. This includes America in the 20th and 21st century so far.

I do not like the welfare state model for a thousand reasons. One reason is that it is a mixed economy, which we currently have – a Kensian-socialist-free-market economy – and it is, by its very nature, an unstable economy, one that will shift more towards socialism at one time and more towards free-market at another time. Inflation, recessions, and depressions are par for the course in mixed economies of this type.

 

[Bucky24]

Jesus never once changed His laws. He did not abolish his laws, he fulfilled them. Scripture is very clear that God does not change. Not changing is the definition of status quo. Pretty simple in my mind.

Jesus constantly challenged the laws of his time. He was even condemned for curing the sick on the sabbath. Besides, laws (other than the ten commandments) are from man - not from God.

In a democracy, if you feel that a law is unjust, you work to change it - not simply disobey it. No wonder our country is in such poor shape if people think they just have to accept things as they are and not work to change things that are wrong. We have a participatory form of government. Democracy: either live it or lose it!

Bucky:thumbsup:

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Hi all~

I know that you cannot be both Catholic and pro-choice due to what we believe and practice as Catholics, but is it possible to be a liberal and still be a good Catholic? A lot of my extended family is left-wing, yet claim to be Catholic. My immediate family is fully conservative, however, and I have never doubted that. Is it that I don’t fully understand the term “liberal” and think that you must automatically be conservative if you’re Catholic?

Please help me understand and excuse my political ignorance…

~Therese

The correct term is pro-ABORTION, and you’re right, you cannot be Catholic and in favor of abortion.

If by ‘liberal’ one also means pro-homosexual ‘marriage,’ pro-euthanasia and pro-socialism, the answer is also a resounding NO.

It really is that simple.

 

[holy_moly]

“Pro-life” and “Obama” cannot be in the same sentence. Surely you must be joking!

Sure they can: “Obama is not Pro Life!”

 

[cmastro01]

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!

 

[cmastro01]

I can’t tell you how refreshing it is to hear someone who doesn’t buy into the Right wing hype about Obama. I agree that the the new Fox conservatives have made it seem a sin to belief in helping the environment, being pro peace, or pro-life for those who have already been born. I am pro-life from conception to natural death. Natural death does not include casualties of war (especially war based in lies) nor does it include the death penalty, yet these are things that the conservatives are usually for. It concerned me that George Bush was voted into office a second time, using the pro-life platform. I also voted for Obama and would do so again in a heartbeat. I know that I am a good Christian and hope that this does not make me a bad Catholic. If, to be Catholic, I have to vote for people who promote fear and war, and aren’t concerned with social issues, then I will have to regrettably, after 50 years, look elsewhere for my spiritual support.

 

[ServoFides]

Hi all~

I know that you cannot be both Catholic and pro-choice due to what we believe and practice as Catholics, but is it possible to be a liberal and still be a good Catholic? A lot of my extended family is left-wing, yet claim to be Catholic. My immediate family is fully conservative, however, and I have never doubted that. Is it that I don’t fully understand the term “liberal” and think that you must automatically be conservative if you’re Catholic?

Please help me understand and excuse my political ignorance…

~Therese

This is a very good question. No party is entirely faithful to Catholic teaching. Know your faith, study the candidate’s positions, and make your own informed decisions. Abortion is not the only issue, but it is an extremely important one and no faithful Catholic can be pro-abortion (there are Democrats that are Pro-life and many, if not most, are Catholics).

The bishops published a guide that addresses Catholic voting decisions called “Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship”. This document is much maligned, but is very consistent with Catholic teaching. Let it be your guide and don’t be unduly influenced by people on the Left or the Right. A candidate is not always the best choice simply because he belongs to a particular party. Let your Catholic beliefs be your guide (support life, the poor, family values, social justice, morality, etc).

 

[TheWalsh]

Forgive me, for I comment only on occasion. I need more to read and learn than to declaim. The question puzzles me as well. I think, by prevailing standards, the Church is fundamentally conservative. Yet, the meaning of the relevant words changes through different times and places. An Eighteenth Century liberal can be viewed today as a conservative. Nineteenth Century Liberals, in certain parts of Europe, were quite anti-Catholic, and in the USA, many are today. A person can come to hold various prudential judgments in all good conscience. One may support his country in a just war, be for or against the death penalty for heinous crimes. One may work for social justice, without becoming a Communist. However, I think there is such thing as the Progressive movement. It has been a societal force for a century or so. It may not be a secret conspiratorial organization but it comprises many birds that flock together. In my opinion, it embodies many attributes of the Culture of Death. We should pray for discernment, that we not augment that agenda. It is very difficult to justify voting for a politician that supports abortion or euthanasia. Speaking for myself, I will not vote for a politician that favors central planning over subsidiarity. God made us free. It is unnatural and evil to make us become otherwise.