Catholic politics causing division?

  • Thread starter Thread starter miriam5
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Iā€™m referring to his typical tweets & itā€™s just a purely coincidental that he decided to join the Gun Lobby organization after 17 dead kids.

This thread is political according to her therefore you can go after me as you like but Iā€™m still buying Michelle Obamaā€™s upcoming book.

Let me know when you write a book then Iā€™ll look at the reviews first to check if you plagiarize anything :+1:t2:
 
ā€¦?

I have no idea what you meanā€¦ I just find it annoying when threads get completely off course. I had no intention to attack youā€¦ shrug
 
I think we have too many Priests who ā€œtip toeā€ around the hard truths less their poularity and/or collection basket suffer. I like my Priest to make me uncomfortable. I am reminded. " to speak the truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act"
 
ā€œmiriam5 said:
.
Do most think we have an obligation to help the poor and needy?

Do any think we should stay out of politics?
Click to expand...
To the first question, absolutely-- otherwise weā€™d be violating much of what Jesus taught. Even to give up oneā€™s life to save another, much like Jesus did, is an honor theologically. Unfortunately, there are some Catholics who put money or inconvenience ahead of that, but I guess this is to be expected.

To the 2nd question, it is virtually impossible for the Church to stay out politics, so the real question is how closely entwined should we be, and there really is no simple answer or agreed upon answer to that question?

The Church, obviously including the Pope, teaches what it thinks is right, but it is up to you to determine your course of action. However, it asks you to learn what the church teaches and why it teaches as such, carefully contemplate that, and then make your choice. If in doubt, let me recommend you go with the Church.

BTW, good luck with your possible conversion as I did as such over 40 years ago.
 
Spyridon said:
When it comes down to certain other issues, especially financial, welfare, and justice (things like foodstamps, immigration, welfare, Social Security, Medicaid/Medicare, prison reform, opposition to capital punishment) the Democratic Party aligns better with Catholic principles.
Click to expand...
This could possibly be true if the church had a position on the solution to those problems, but she doesnā€™t. The church says we must address these problems with the intent of alleviating suffering, but she says nothing at all about the best way to achieve those goals. There is no justification for assuming that either party is more intent on fairly resolving the problems than the other. The fact that there is a huge difference between them in the approaches they take suggests nothing whatever about their goals being different.
 
St. Vincent de Paul knew that politics were so divisive that he forbid his priests from talking about them, Even in the early meetings of the Society, anything was up for discussion except politics. Today if a member chooses to go into politics, we wish them well, but we ask that they no longer associate themselves with St. Vincent de Paul.

It was when I was an active member of St.VdeP that I came to learn that if we want to social justice and to build a culture of life our greatest power doesnā€™t come from our vote, but the Church. Thatā€™s where we can exact the greatest change.

That said, there are two footsteps to social justice, one is the taking care of the physical needs of the poor and the other is to address the social, economic and political systems which cause those needs in the first place. This is why the Church asks us to fulfill our civic duty and place an informed vote. Itā€™s a tough choice for a lot of us.
 
But letā€™s say you were a conservative and the priest assigned to your parish was a liberal social justice warrior, against the death penalty, a promoter of government welfare, and in favor of restricting guns, all positions which can be legitimately be held by the faithful. Would you want to hear him preaching about these things week after week (assuming, of course, you were unable to just leave that parish and find a priest more to your liking)? No, I think it is better when priests use discretion, whatever their personal leanings might be.
 
christofirst said:
against the death penalty, a promoter of government welfare, and in favor of restricting guns, all positions
Click to expand...
Those are all things the Church herself advocates.

I suppose the Church is a social justice Army and I am a social justice warrior.

The Church is clear that She opposes the death penalty in the developed world, and she advocates to abolish it in places where it still exists in that developed world.

The Church is clear that Governments have a responsibility to take care of and meet the basic needs of their citizenry and not simply let them starve or wallow in poverty because theyā€™re ā€œlazy.ā€

The Church is clear that guns should be regulated and opposes proliferation of arms.

Why do you take so much issue with clear Church teachings?

Are you a Catholic first, and then a Republican or conservative?

Or are you a conservative or Republican first, and a Catholic second?
 
Last edited:
Iā€™m not one who takes issue with these things, but a visit to the World News forum here will reveal many who do. Youā€™re preaching to the choir with me.šŸ˜Š
 
Ah, my error, sorry.

But I do agree, and I also agree that Priests shouldnā€™t normally preach on these hot button political issues but instead should focus on teachings of faith and morals as they relate to the readings for the day.
 
Spyridon said:
The Church is clear that She opposes the death penalty in the developed world, and she advocates to abolish it in places where it still exists in that developed world.
Click to expand...
I donā€™t think this is as clear as you suppose:

ā€œYou ask about the correct interpretation of the teaching of the encyclical on the death penalty. Clearly, the Holy Father has not altered the doctrinal principles which pertain to this issue as they are presented in the Catechism, but has simply deepened the application of such principles in the context of present-day historical circumstances. Thus, where other means for the self-defense of society are possible and adequate, the death penalty may be permitted to disappear. (Ratzinger, 1995)

That the ā€œdeath penalty may be permitted to disappearā€ is not really the same thing as ā€œit is immoral to use it unless required for protection.ā€
The Church is clear that guns should be regulated and opposes proliferation of arms.
Click to expand...
Individual bishops may have expressed an opinion on the subject, but the church has no doctrines mandating any particular form of gun control.

ā€¦ if there be no law prohibiting the carrying of weapons, the carrying of weapons will be evil for him who is easily provoked to anger, and who has enemies whom he desires to kill; but it will not be evil for a peaceable man, who only desires to defend himselfā€¦ (St. Bellarmine)
Why do you take so much issue with clear Church teachings?
Click to expand...
The opposition is not to what the church has said but to your interpretation of what she has said.
 
Part of itā€™s going to depend on what you view as the responsibility of government. Some people believe that helping the poor means having a cradle to grave welfare state where no matter what someoneā€™s material needs are met even if they choose not to work.

Others, think the best way to help the poor is to offer only a minimal safety net to incentivize people to better themselves and create an economic atmosphere that fosters economic growth and potential.

I personally would never consider voting for a Democrat because their Progressive ideology and party platform is in my opinion a huge contributor to the moral decline, continued secularization, and overall erosion of limits on government power in the US.

That being said, the Republicans generally suck at actually doing anything other than being an opposition party at the federal level, but at the state level where I live in Kentucky theyā€™re doing great at rolling back business regulations and sorting out a pension problem that damn near bankrupted the state because the previous Democrat governor wouldnā€™t address the problem out of fear of angering the unions.

I wish it was more black and white of good guys vs bad guys but itā€™s not.

Iā€™m not sure who Steve Ray is so I canā€™t comment on him.
 
St. Anthony Mary Claret on politics:
  1. I have never wanted to get mixed up in politics, not even when I was a simple priest, let alone nowadays, although I have certainly been pressed in that direction. One of our leading politicians once asked me to recommend a certain policy to Her Majesty. ā€œMy dear sir,ā€ I answered, ā€œyou may as well know that I look upon present-day Spain as a gambling table; the players are the two political parties. Now, just as it would be utterly reprehensible for a mere onlooker to give the slightest help to one of the players in the game, it would be equally reprehensible for me, a mere spectator, to make any recommendation favoring one or the other political party to Her Majesty. In the long run, all political parties are nothing more than players who are out to win the pool, so that they can lord it over the others, or simply to fatten their own wallets. The real motive in politics and political parties is often no more than ambition, pride, and greed.ā€
Click to expand...
Cardinal Henri de Lubac on political differences replacing dogma and heresy:
If heretics no longer horrify us today, as they once did our forefathers, is it certain that it is because there is more charity in our hearts? Or would it not too often be, perhaps, without our daring to say so, because the bone of contention, that is to say, the very substance of our faith, no longer interests us? Men of too familiar and too passive a faith, perhaps for us dogmas are no longer the Mystery on which we live, the Mystery which is to be accomplished in us. Consequently then, heresy no longer shocks us; at least, it no longer convulses us like something trying to tear the soul of our souls away from usā€¦And that is why we have no trouble in being kind to heretics, and no repugnance in rubbing shoulders with them.

In reality, bias against ā€˜hereticsā€™ is felt today just as it used to be. Many give way to it as much as their forefathers used to do. Only, they have turned it against political adversaries. Those are the only ones with whom they refuse to mix. Sectarianism has only changed its object and taken other forms, because the vital interest has shifted. Should we dare to say that this shifting is progress? It is not always charity, alas, which has grown greater, or which has become more enlightened: it is often faith, the taste for the things of eternity, which has grown less.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
miriam5 said:
Steve Rayā€™s testimony has contributed much to my looking into the Catholic church šŸ™‚ but as I said, I was surprised later to see how strong and verbal are his political beliefs
Click to expand...
Political beliefs are not religious beliefs. Some people would be very surprised to hear someone who claims to be a Religious Sister be OK with legal abortion or support anti-Christian, New Age theology.

The Catholic Right believes strongly in the Catholic Principle of Subsidiarity. We believe that public services should be handled by the lowest possible level, closest to the need.
  • The first level is: Families, churches and non-profits
  • Second level is: towns and local community groups
  • third level is: county govt
  • forth level is: state, provincial, regional government
  • fifth level is: federal / national government
  • last level is: International governmental agencies (UN, EU, NATO, etc)
Where the devout Catholic Right (like Steve Ray) disagree with the devout Catholic Left*** is which level is the best level to solve social problems.

*** Iā€™m not including pro-choice Catholics in with the ā€œdevout Catholic Leftā€

The Catholic Right feels that local govt is the best option (if it must be govt) while the Catholic Left believes national govt is the best option.

Its not that both the left and right disagree that the poor need to be cared for, we disagree which taxes should be used to fund it.

As far as obedience to the Pope, we are left to prudential judgement. Some members of Catholic Right might greatly disagree with Pope Frances regarding climate change, but at the same time, there are a number of the Catholic Left who vocally disagree with Pope Paul VI on birth control and disagree with St. Pope John Paul II (and previous Popes) on female priests.

NOTE: I believe the main reason many on the Catholic Right disagree a little with Pope Frances regarding climate change is because rarely (if ever) do we see devout Catholic scientists backing up 100% man made climate change as fact. Most devout Catholic scientists that Iā€™m aware of view it as theory or that itā€™s a combination of BOTH man made and natural causes and that we donā€™t know the % of each.

Climate change is an issue that should NOT be political, but it has become political because a number of pro-environment groups also support abortion, euthanasia, open borders, etc; which cast doubt on valid environmental concerns. Many environmentalist (not all of them) want to see the number of humans on the planet diminish, which is a very anti-Christian, esp anti-Catholic position. Therefore, many people on the Catholic Right (religious right in general) are very suspect of their science because they are shrouded in population control ideology.

Therefore, itā€™s not anti-Catholic to be skeptical of science that is not following the scientific method or from biased sources. NOTE: this is no different when the left is skeptical of scientists who use science to call into question man made climate change.

God Bless.
 
Last edited:
Spyridon said:
40.png
TheLittleLady:
corporate parties and joined one that reflects Catholic Social Teaching
Click to expand...
IMO, the best of these Parties is the American Solidarity Party.

Their entire platform is based on Catholic teaching.

ā€œWe are a party that seeks the common good, on common ground, through common sense. We believe in the sanctity of human life, the necessity of social justice, our responsibility to care for the environment, and promotion of a more peaceful world. We cherish the individual rights and separation of government powers protected by the U.S. Constitution, and recognize the need for social supports and community cohesion. We seek to bridge the bitter partisan divide with principled and respectful policies and dialog.ā€

https://solidarity-party.org
Click to expand...
Iā€™ve reviewed their platform https://solidarity-party.org/platform/, and I donā€™t see anything in the platform that I disagree with. The only objection I have is granting a pathway to citizenship for undocumented parents of US Citizens until illegal immigration is under control.

Once illegal immigration is under control, then I have no issue with granting a pathway to citizenship. But the border must come under control first. But I do support giving ā€œdreamersā€ a pathway to citizenship.

The other issue I have with the Solidarity Party is that that they will always be a third party. They will never be able to replace the Republicans or Democrats and unless American changes into a Parliamentary System (which wonā€™t happen) - we will always be a two party system.

In my view: itā€™s better to reform the Republican Party into the ā€œSolidarity Partyā€ and/or into a ā€œChristian Democratic Partyā€ because turning the Democratic Party into a pro-Christian party again isnā€™t happening.

God Bless
 
Last edited:
miriam5 said:
I am so close to becoming a Catholic. In reading Steve Rayā€¦ I have seen the Pope calledā€¦ I am reading that many Catholics do not like the Popeā€¦So which is it? Is the Catholic church mostly GOP or mostly politically progressive or is the church fighting among themselves?
Click to expand...
Miriam,

I seriously urge you to ignore everything you read on the internet - including this forum - in coming to this critical decision. It can give you a very distorted picture of what is prominent and what is not. The best way to find out about the Church is to make personal contact with the Church. Talk to a priest. Talk to friends you can actually see and touch. That is the real Church. I personally find participation in this forum very stressful for me, and have at times considered the possibility that my participation is endangering my faith. This is from a life-long Catholic. For someone like yourself who is on the cusp of becoming Catholic, your faith may be way too fragile to withstand the barrage of discouraging posts - especially in the World News and Social Justice forums. If you do decide your faith can take it, at least prepare yourself mentally to be very skeptical that anything you read here is the least bit representative of the Catholic Church overall.
 
christofirst said:
We do have an obligation, as the Church has always taught and Pope Francis continues to reminds us, to help the poor and needy. How to best go about doing that, as individuals and as members of society, is open to debate and discussion.
Click to expand...
Yes, we have a responsibility to help the poor and the needy. The way that a conservative believes is the best help and the way a progressive believes is the best way to help are different. Are we helping or enabling? What is the role of government? If you ask a conservative, they would say, the government should be the last resort and it should only provide the absolute needs of the person. If you ask a progressive the government should try its best to provide equal outcomes.
 
Either way you describe, conservative or progressive, can be validly supported by a faithful Catholic. I think the balance we seek is between subsidiarity, which seems to appeal more to conservatives, and solidarity, which appeals more to progressives. I have to admit, if there cannot be a perfect balance, I am one who would tip the scales in favor of solidarity, all of us together seeking the common good for the least among us. If this means higher taxes and government programs, so be it. I know with this viewpoint I am in the minority among my fellow Catholics here at CAF, which is why I tend to shy away from the World News forum.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top