And we can’t trust our own faith formed consciences; we have to depend on another to tell us when it’s right or wrong? Sorry, I disagree.
The problem comes in when people try to take the above and tell others that they must vote for a particular person or their conscience is improperly formed. Whether your conscience is correctly formed is a matter between you and your Confessor.
I didn’t say that. If you have taken the time and effort to properly form your conscience, then you certainly should follow it. I apologize if I gave a different impression, that was not my intention.
I believe the Church does teach that we have a civic duty to vote. I think someone cited the CCC above but perhaps I am remembering it incorrectly.
As I noted above, I did not make that statement based on Church teaching, I made it based on practical reality where votes sometimes come down to very narrow margins. In both the Clinton-Bush election and the Bush-Gore election there is wide acknowledgement that higher than usual voting for third party candidates may have altered the outcome of the election.
I disagree but respect your opinion.
I agree. The Church does make strong suggestions about who we should not vote for, but I have not seen anything about who we should vote for. I don’t think the article I linked above about Archbishop Lori actually uses the word “Can’t” but rather “shouldn’t”. The title of the article misquotes the archbishop.
I agree providing one has a good confessor who knows the ins and outs of the campaign issues and policies being promoted by those running for office. I am not suggesting that your priest does not, merely suggesting its importance.
I’ll stick with Cardinal Dolan’s statement about this:
Good question.
We do have a civic duty to vote; as long as there are candidates worthy of our faith formed consciences. A write in candidate is acceptable. If there are none in a particular race, you can exercise your duty in other races.
I think particularly this year it will be easy to find good Priests who are well versed in the issues. I’ve never had a problem before and I’ve been at a few different parishes over my voting life.
Probably true.
The Electoral College was exactly what the founders envisioned. They certainly didn’t trust direct democracy. That’s why they gave us a representative republic.
Well, I prefer the USCCB to EWTNs opinions. “Helping others” can very well make the difference between those “others”'s life or death, you know. People have to eat, they have to have shelter, they have to have clothing, they have to have at least basic health care. It is completely immoral, IMO, to focus solely on fighting abortion and ignore the needs of these people once born–as if to say “Hey there, newborn infant–I got you here by voting pro life–now you’re on your own because I plan to hold on to my hard earned cash! Don’t come crying to me when you are affected by poverty, prejudice, hunger, disease, war, homelessness, etc!”
They are citing the Catechism and and Blessed John Paul II in Evangelium Vitae for most of what they say. However, I am not suggesting ignoring the USCCB’s document at all, though I think most would admit, even them considering their reissuing of its opening this year, that the USCCB document is far from clear.
No one is suggesting ignoring people once they are born. As noted above, the budget proposed by Ryan which Romney has adopted does not reduce spending on welfare programs, it simply does not increase them. Answer me this please, how much money being spent through the federal government is enough? Is it working, at all? A line by line budget analysis of the money spent on programs to help persons below the poverty line in the USA in 2011 shows that approx. $300,000 was spent, per person. I’m pretty sure it isn’t an issue of money.
Agreed. So what about the principle of subsidiarity? Should we ignore that? CCC 1883: Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative. The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which “a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order…
At the same time, stacking social programs on one side of the scale of justice does not balance out the bloody infant corpses on the other.
No, this isn’t true. Not at all.
Many Bishops have said that the pro abortion views of a politician exclude them from a Catholic’s consideration. Bishop Gracida. Bishop Vasa said pro abortion candidates are disqualified
I trust Fr Stpehen Torraco who says that if you vote for a pro abortion politician when you know there is pro life alternative you become moral accomplice in abortion