Catholic Answer Column: How Should We Deal With Catholic Politicians Dissenting on Abortion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This says it all from the article:

“It is a red herring to claim the separation of Church and State as an excuse for failing to guide the public good by the private conscience. What other guide is there if both must be based on the natural law? In the film, The Man for All Seasons, Thomas More tells Cardinal Wolsey: ‘When statesmen forsake their private conscience for the sake of their public duty, they lead their country on a short root to chaos.’”
 
mdgspencer said:
This is at www.hprweb.com/2013/03/questions-answered-10/
Click to expand...
Were the bishops, as a whole and with unanimity, to treat dissenting politicians with the same efforts that they have spent lobbying those same politicians regarding the death penalty, the embarrassment of “pro choice” “Catholic” politicians would have disappeared many years ago.

The Church’s Canons provide sufficient remedies for treating the scandal of public dissent, but only a handful of bishops avail themselves of these medicinal treatments.

.
 
Since a huge majority of these politicians constituents also agree with their views on abortion, what is the answer (including most first world Catholics according to public opinion polls)? Should the Church just tell those members who don’t believe and actively fight against the RCC’s stance on mainly sexual ethics just be excommunicated?🤷
 
kozlosap said:
Since a huge majority of these politicians constituents also agree with their views on abortion, what is the answer (including most first world Catholics according to public opinion polls)?
Click to expand...
I do not see what their constituents’ views has to do with the question.

If their constituents all jumped off a bridge, should they also jump?
Should the Church just tell those members who don’t believe and actively fight against the RCC’s stance on mainly sexual ethics just be excommunicated?
Click to expand...
I am not sure what “mainly sexual ethics” means. However, a Catholic who actively fights the Church’s teaching on abortion should be excommunicated. The teaching is black and white and the sin cries to heaven for justice.

.
 
Excommunication. Catholic Politicians who Support Abortion have no place in the church.
 
SuperLuigi said:
This says it all from the article:

“It is a red herring to claim the separation of Church and State as an excuse for failing to guide the public good by the private conscience. What other guide is there if both must be based on the natural law? In the film, The Man for All Seasons, Thomas More tells Cardinal Wolsey: ‘When statesmen forsake their private conscience for the sake of their public duty, they lead their country on a short root to chaos.’”
Click to expand...
The natural law is the guide for the conscience. However, the conscience can be formed against the natural law because of sin.

I like the “red herring” argument.

This of course exacerbates the argument for the church and for politicians who practice their faith.
 
Rob_Arnzen said:
Were the bishops, as a whole and with unanimity, to treat dissenting politicians with the same efforts that they have spent lobbying those same politicians regarding the death penalty, the embarrassment of “pro choice” “Catholic” politicians would have disappeared many years ago.

The Church’s Canons provide sufficient remedies for treating the scandal of public dissent, but only a handful of bishops avail themselves of these medicinal treatments.

.
Click to expand...
Do the Canons provide for excommunication for scandal of public dissent?
 
Write them a letter telling them that you are not going to vote for them and why. Maybe they will think twice, but I doubt it. There are way too many Catholics who claim to be Catholic, but never read the bible or go to mass or even truly know the teachings of the Church. It’s very sad. Pray for them.
 
This whole thread just cries out to leaders like St. Louis, King of France.
 
Rob_Arnzen said:
I do not see what their constituents’ views has to do with the question.

If their constituents all jumped off a bridge, should they also jump?

I am not sure what “mainly sexual ethics” means. However, a Catholic who actively fights the Church’s teaching on abortion should be excommunicated. The teaching is black and white and the sin cries to heaven for justice.

.
Click to expand...
I mean that when you are elected you are there to represent your constituents, not the Church. Jack Kennedy explained the separation of Church and State exceedingly well during the 1960 campaign. If I ran for the Senate as a pro-life candidate and then changed my stand to pro-choice when I was in office, the people who elected me have a valid reason to be upset. In addition, it is the courts that are making the decisions that count at a LOCAL LEVEL, meaning the States, not the Feds. When, and if a case actually makes it to the USSC then it will still most likely end up being a States Rights issue and not a blanket repeal of Roe.🤷
 
kozlosap said:
I mean that when you are elected you are there to represent your constituents, not the Church.
Click to expand...
If they elect you to send the Jews to gas chambers, you should send Jews to gas chambers?

Where does morality fit into this? Are you arguing that getting elected trumps God’s law?
Jack Kennedy explained the separation of Church and State exceedingly well during the 1960 campaign.
Click to expand...
Jack Kennedy was fornicating then, fornicated as President, approved the murder of the Catholic head of the South Vietnamese government, and otherwise demonstrated that he was no Catholic. You can’t commit immoral acts under the guise of " separation of Church and State".
If I ran for the Senate as a pro-life candidate and then changed my stand to pro-choice when I was in office, the people who elected me have a valid reason to be upset.
Click to expand...
We’re discussing people who run as pro-choice while purporting to be Catholic.

.
 
Rob_Arnzen said:
If they elect you to send the Jews to gas chambers, you should send Jews to gas chambers?

Where does morality fit into this? Are you arguing that getting elected trumps God’s law?

Jack Kennedy was fornicating then, fornicated as President, approved the murder of the Catholic head of the South Vietnamese government, and otherwise demonstrated that he was no Catholic. You can’t commit immoral acts under the guise of " separation of Church and State".

We’re discussing people who run as pro-choice while purporting to be Catholic.

.
Click to expand...
Yes, hindsight is 20:20. You have nothing to complain about then since you know upfront that they are prochoice. I guess it all comes down to judging others on one single issue as to whether in your own private view they are Catholic enough. Thank the Lord that we will not be judged at those pearly gates by the lowly likes of you and I. Papa Francis does not strike me as a pastor and world leader that would love to set up tribunals to excommunicate those who don’t check their brains at the entrance to their parishes. Also, the Nazi argument is an old straw man that one of the very brilliant posters here on CAF wrote me needed to be used in a much more limited way, and after I thought about it, I totally agree. The very fact that the Holy Father asked for the survey on social issues that will be released in a few weeks shows the fact that the Church understands there is a vast difference in how those in the first world countries feel about hot button issues.:rolleyes:
 
kozlosap said:
You have nothing to complain about then since you know upfront that they are prochoice.
Click to expand...
You must participating in another conversation than this one with me.

The topic dealt with Catholic Politicians Dissenting on Abortion. Abortion is murder and no Catholic may support it. Therefore the statement that:
I guess it all comes down to judging others on one single issue as to whether in your own private view they are Catholic enough.
Click to expand...
is equivalent to saying “I guess it all comes down to judging others on their favoring genocide as to whether in your own private view they are Catholic enough”. You can substitute your own horrendous crime for “genocide”.
Papa Francis does not strike me as a pastor and world leader that would love to set up tribunals to excommunicate those who don’t check their brains at the entrance to their parishes.
Click to expand...
You’d have to check your brains at the entrance to the parish to favor abortion.
Also, the Nazi argument is an old straw man that one of the very brilliant posters here on CAF wrote me needed to be used in a much more limited way, and after I thought about it, I totally agree.
Click to expand...
No one made a Nazi argument.

.
 
Looks like it’s time tho post Tue excuses again:

EXCUSES FOR VOTING FOR PRO-ABORTION POLITICIANS
  1. National Republicans aren’t “really” pro-life, so it’s okay if I vote for the virulently pro-abortion party.
  2. Specific candidate isn’t “really” pro-life, or I don’t believe his supposed change of belief, so it’s okay if I vote for the virulently pro-abortion party.
  3. My deacon/priest/bishop/cardinal told me or wrote me a letter telling me it was okay to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  4. I’m not a one-issue voter, so I can ignore the Church’s teaching and vote for the virulently pro-abortion politician.
  5. Republicans (at any level) have not passed enough pro-life laws (as decided by me), so I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  6. Republicans (at any level) have not had enough success on pro-life issues (as decided by me), so I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  7. Roe vs. Wade is still the law of the land even though most Supreme Court justices were appointed by the Republicans, therefore Republicans aren’t serious about abortion, so I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  8. I found a Church document that mentioned proportionate reasons in voting, so I personally judged support for a higher minimum wage (or other social justice cause) was on equal footing with abortion, and I can vote for the political party that is virulently pro-abortion.
  9. I personally believe that Democratic policies will reduce abortions, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  10. We can’t do anything about abortion until we change the hearts and minds of the people, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  11. You can’t legislate morality, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  12. People will still have abortions even if you make them illegal, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  13. We can’t end abortion until we address the root causes, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  14. I can’t impose my beliefs on other people, so it is okay for me to vote for a virulently pro-abortion politician.
  15. There isn’t any difference between the parties, so it is okay for me to vote for the virulently pro-abortion party.
  16. The Pro-Life movement is in the tank for the Republican party (even though all pro-life legislation has had the overwhelming support of Republicans and overwhelming opposition from Democrats), so it’s okay for me to vote for the virulently pro-abortion party.
 
We really do not have a lot to do with what others think and do.
I guess we can not vote for these people.
We can campaign against them.
We can fight abortion at every opportunity.
We can pray for their conversion.
We can write them a letter giving our position.

🤷

Anything more substantial in dealing with such an individual is not really in our pay grade.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top