How can you be Democratic and also be Catholic?

[Ridgerunner]

The Church demands everyone vote their well-formed conscience,

Well-formed includes knowing and following the teachings of the Church. . . .

We know the bishops of the U.S. have said that abortion is the preeminent issue in this election for Catholics. Pope Benedict said we cannot vote for an abortion-supporting candidate without proportionate (equal in gravity) reason to do so.

Democrats never give us 'proportionate reasons" to support abortion because there aren’t any.

 

[Ridgerunner]

If hearts and minds are changed, more women will not want abortions, and so fewer abortions will be performed.

A democrat talking point designed to deceive Catholics into voting for abortion. No one should buy it, and I am surprised you do.

Specifically, what change in culture are you proposing? And is it realistic given the current political environment?

Everything the Dems support is in support of a corrupt culture. Following it even more is not the remedy for cultural depravity.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Constantine never made Christianity the state religion; he simply legalized it and forbade further persecution against Christians. Christianity becoming the religion of the Roman Empire occurred more than 40 years after his death in the Edict of Thessalonica.

I stand corrected then. It was still politically influenced, even 40 years later.

 

[StudentMI]

Well-formed includes knowing and following the teachings of the Church, not ignoring them or inventing rationalizations why we don’t follow them.

So now I’m ignoring or rationalizing? Nice.

And why bring up the Democrats? I didn’t say I was voting for them.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

If hearts and minds are changed, more women will not want abortions, and so fewer abortions will be performed.

A democrat talking point designed to deceive Catholics into voting for abortion. No one should buy it, and I am surprised you do.

Nevertheless, it is a true statement. You can’t deny it.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Nevertheless, it is a true statement. You can’t deny it.

It’s a tautology. “If more people decided against abortion, more people would decide against abortion”

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

Nevertheless, it is a true statement. You can’t deny it.

It’s a tautology. “If more people decided against abortion, more people would decide against abortion”

That’s right, which is why I was so surprised to hear you say

…until “hearts and minds” are changed. To what end? Without political capability hearts and minds can change nothing.

You are arguing against a tautology.

By the way, it would not be a tautology in China.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I’m not the one who keeps using that rationalization for supporting abortion.

 

[Shakuhachi]

Can one belong to any party without accepting all the planks?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Can one belong to any party without accepting all the planks?

Of course.

 

[Shakuhachi]

Then why not a Democrat?

 

[christofirst]

It’s settled then. We can vote Democratic and also be Catholic. There’s nothing left to say now but to close this thread and await the November election results (that’s wishful thinking on my part).

 

[Anrakyr]

I don’t know if it’s already been posted on this thread, but Fr. Altman discusses this very issue:

To me it sounds self affirming and grossly in violation of the seperation between church and state. Furthermore it completely disregards how politics actually work.

 

[TMC]

To me it sounds self affirming and grossly in violation of the seperation between church and state. Furthermore it completely disregards how politics actually work.

And also completely disregards the Church’s teaching on the topic.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

When one priest calls another priest a heretic, it makes you wonder about that first priest.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

When one priest calls another priest a heretic, you know something is seriously wrong with that first priest.

Yeah, having the courage to speak the truth is definitely a problem in the modern church.

No, priests who take it upon themselves to judge what only the Magisterium can judge is a problem in the Church.

 

[Buks]

Can one belong to any party without accepting all the planks?

One can belong and never vote for it in a general election. I’m probably not the only registered Democrat who finds the priorities and values of the party unsupportable, to say the least.

 

[whatistrue]

If a priest is a heretic, other priests should call him out on it

But whether someone is a heretic is not something that a single priest can authoritatively determine.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

JacobF:

If a priest is a heretic, other priests should call him out on it

But whether someone is a heretic is not something that a single priest can authoritatively determine.

In this case, why not listen to the priest who is being declared a heretic when he authoritatively determines he is not a heretic?

Say one priest was teaching that Mary was the 4th person in the Trinity. Other priests would definitely have the duty to call that out as heresy.

In that case there would be no need for some other priest to call that out as a heresy, because the Magesterium would do that immediately.

But the subtext in the video posted says that Fr. Altman is calling out the whole hierarchy. That is much worse than calling one priest a heretic. Fr. Altman is the one acting more like one would expect of a heretic than the priest he is accusing, who has not called out the whole hierarchy of the Church.

 

[whatistrue]

Granted, it’s not a formal declaration

That is entirely the point. If priest calls someone heretic some people will automatically give it weight when it is no more than personal opinion.

Say one priest was teaching that Mary was the 4th person in the Trinity. Other priests would definitely have the duty to call that out as heresy.

No. They could state that it is not correct teaching, but defining heresy is “above their pay grade”. And are you seriously equating such an error with a difference in political opinion?