How can you be Democratic and also be Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter itstymyguy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
As for the principle of subsidiarity, I would remind everyone that this term appeared in an encyclical from 1931. Nazis. Fascists. Communists. It was directly against them and the idea that the state was more important than the individual.
 
40.png
TMC:
Except that the Church does take positions on these things. Its just that some Catholics choose to decide those teachings are “optional.”
Name one specific policy proposal the church has said or implied that we have a moral duty to support.
I know I asked this about 60 posts ago, but I’m still waiting for an answer. This is actually not an irrelevant point as the comment is frequently made that neither party fully satisfies church teaching in the positions they have chosen as if their failures were somehow comparable. While it may be true that neither could be considered a “Catholic” party it is not true that their shortcomings are equivalent.

It is often alleged that Republicans fail in social justice areas, but, since there are no church doctrines regarding what specific policies should be implemented, the worst that could be said of Republican policies is that they are mistaken, not that they are evil. The judgment that something is evil can only be said of policies that are contrary to the (few) explicit thou-shalt-not’s where church doctrines dictate what policies are and are not moral.

This is not to say that the church endorses the Republican party, but it true to say that, unlike the Democrat party, there are no policies that are in direct contradiction to church doctrines.
 
This is not to say that the church endorses the Republican party, but it true to say that, unlike the Democrat party, there are no policies that are in direct contradiction to church doctrines.
Show me where the Church has ever said this.
 
Show me where the Church has ever said this.
I see you have evaded my question again, that I asked in response to an assertion you made which, as I’ve pointed out, you cannot defend.

“The church” doesn’t make a habit of addressing the positions of national political parties, so I doubt that I could cite where “the church” has said certain Democrat policies are contrary to her doctrines let alone cite where she has said Republican policies are not.

That’s a conclusion the layman is capable of making. Does anyone really not understand that accepting abortion (euthanasia, same sex “marriage”…) is directly contrary to Catholic doctrines? My point is simply that there are in fact no Republican positions that are in contravention of church teaching.
 
I see you have evaded my question again, that I asked in response to an assertion you made which, as I’ve pointed out, you cannot defend.
To be fair, we have both made assertions that cannot be conclusively proven. I say that the teaching of the Church shows clearly that Catholics have a moral duty to support certain policies. You disagree. You say that the teachings of the Church say that the GOP is entirely in line with the Church. I disagree. The Church has not expressly made either point. I think my point is much more strongly supported by the Church’s teaching than yours, but neither of us will concede because the Church has not formally made either statement. I would invite anyone that wants to make their own decision to read the relevant Church documents and come to their own conclusion - but the answer is frankly pretty obvious.
 
There is a recurring idea that something that is prudent cannot be wrong, or evil. This is, of course, absurd. Child rearing is built on parental prudence, yet there is still an evil way to raise a child. He may be fed three meals a day, or two, or five; all meat, all vegan, all home-cooked, all fast food. However, if he is starved, it is still evil. If he is disciplined, it is a matter of prudence how it is done. If he is tortured, it is evil.

Likewise, there are many paths to social justice, yet to ignore the morality that mandate social justice can still allow the evil of racism, of injustice, of disregard for the poor and the stranger. I hope no on will buy the lie that just because Republicans do not support intrinsic evil, that their policies must be free from evil.
 
I say that the teaching of the Church shows clearly that Catholics have a moral duty to support certain policies.
This is what I dispute, and unless you can cite even one example of such a policy I don’t see how this could be true.
You say that the teachings of the Church say that the GOP is entirely in line with the Church.
What I said was that there is no teaching that is explicitly contradicted by GOP policies.
The Church has not expressly made either point.
Nor is it reasonable to assume she would ever do so. That is a conclusion we can reasonably draw from what is known about church teaching and what the parties platforms are.
I would invite anyone that wants to make their own decision to read the relevant Church documents and come to their own conclusion - but the answer is frankly pretty obvious.
I would say the conclusion is anything but obvious inasmuch as I think you’ve gotten it wrong. Here’s the point: there are specific doctrines the policies of the Dems directly contradict; the obvious ones are abortion, euthanasia, and gay “marriage”. Is there a single doctrine contradicted by a GOP policy? I have said there is not, and neither you nor anyone else has provided an example to contradict that claim.

Now, that is all I said; don’t assume I mean anything more by it. It’s a pretty basic assertion.
 
There is a recurring idea that something that is prudent cannot be wrong, or evil. This is, of course, absurd.
It is absurd, which is a pretty good explanation of why no one has actually made such a claim.
Likewise, there are many paths to social justice, yet to ignore the morality that mandate social justice can still allow the evil of racism, of injustice, of disregard for the poor and the stranger.
You make the obvious point that one can make immoral choices because ones intentions are immoral, what you have not done is even suggest an example of one such policy the GOP has proposed.

Let me also point out that if a policy does not deal with an intrinsic evil then it can only be evil if the intention behind it is immoral. That is, it is a intention of the person making the proposal that is wrong, and not the proposal itself. Again, where is the example of such a policy that is not simply a judgment of the person rather than his proposal?
 
Well, the Democratic Party does support same sex marriage and abortion. Especially abortion. The platform becomes more pro-abortion with every presidential election cycle.
 
This is what I dispute, and unless you can cite even one example of such a policy I don’t see how this could be true.
LOL, so I have to show where the Church has explicitly said what I have asserted, but you can just say that the Church does not allow folks to vote Dem without source?

I think that anyone can read what the Popes have said about care for the poor, immigration, the environment, racial justice, worker’s rights, income inequality, and lots of other issues and see pretty clearly how the parties line up on those issues.
 
To answer the topic title, you can, but only if you ignore some of the Church teaching, and it doesn’t just apply to Catholics either, but Christians in general.

Christian Democrat John DeBerry was kicked out of the party because of his pro-life stance. In this case even being an ethnic minority didn’t help him, his views were just too Christian for the party.

The likes of Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi might be Catholic, but they toe the party line on issues like abortion and gay marriage, so they’re okay.

Those are obviously key issues for the Democrats. It seems you can’t be a Catholic who says, I agree with most of what you stand for, I just disagree with you on abortion and the LGBT stuff. Nope sorry, not good enough. Out you go.
 
LOL, so I have to show where the Church has explicitly said what I have asserted, but you can just say that the Church does not allow folks to vote Dem without source?
I was careful to say not to read more into my comments than is there, but that apparently didn’t do any good. I have not made a single comment about voting so you clearly aren’t responding to what I’ve said. Nor have I challenged you to cite what the church has said about either party. I explicitly rejected that as a reasonable expectation. My challenge was to you, not the church. I asked you to cite a single example to support your contention that there are GOP policies that are contrary to church doctrine.
I think that anyone can read what the Popes have said about care for the poor, immigration, the environment, racial justice, worker’s rights, income inequality, and lots of other issues and see pretty clearly how the parties line up on those issues.
No, you can’t. And the reason you can’t is because while the church says things like “help the poor” she says nothing whatever about how that should be done, and it is the “how it should be done” question that distinguishes the two parties. You assume it is the policy proposals that separates those who care from those who don’t when actually the difference is caused by a difference of belief about what will accomplish the goals.

There is not a single specific policy proposed by the GOP that is directly contrary to church doctrine. As I pointed out before, not you nor anyone else has even made the attempt to identify one. How, then, is it possible to assert that the GOP is like the Dems in their failure to live up to Catholic ideals?
 
There is not a single specific policy proposed by the GOP that is directly contrary to church doctrine. As I pointed out before, not you nor anyone else has even made the attempt to identify one. How, then, is it possible to assert that the GOP is like the Dems in their failure to live up to Catholic ideals?
The GOP’s positions on all the things I mentioned are contrary to the Church’s teachings. That is why I mentioned those specific teachings.
 
Before Roe VS Wade Abortions the states determined if abortions would be allowed. Plus the federal government spend of GDP was much smaller. so no we dont have to give up the desire for smaller government and lower taxes.
 
My concluding analysis is that the Church would have us be independent, or more accurately, pro-Kingdom.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
How can one be an American and still be a Catholic? Because being a Catholic does not mean you bear the personal guilt for the corporate sins of others. I have never been a Democrat, so for me to join their party, or even support it in any way, would be a move into a group I want no part of. Those who are Democrats though, and try to stop their exclusion of any opinion or discussion on abortion will at least have my respect. The platform has taken an awful turn this last generation away from the foundation of democratic principles, selling out on this issue to the point of blindness that it is even an issue. Yet I can not longer be a Republican, nor will I support them. Whether Trump is the problem, or a symptom of the problem, I could not say. But I will never support what he is doing, or the party, until I deem it at least quasi-in line with morality.

So, yeah, I think independent is best for me. Maybe one party will move more to the middle again.
 
The GOP’s positions on all the things I mentioned are contrary to the Church’s teachings. That is why I mentioned those specific teachings.
You didn’t mention anything specific. You alluded to the general objectives and guidelines defined by church doctrines, but those are the objectives, the goals policies are meant to achieve.

Both sides have their own approach to achieving those goals, and often put forward proposals that are completely opposed to one another. The assumption is often made, and you appear to have made it, that those who oppose your positions do so not because they believe their approach is better, but simply because they don’t care, or even that they don’t want to help the poor (et al) at all. That is, you are judging their motivations instead of their proposals.

Take immigration. Numerous bishops have called this a moral issue (which strikes me as completely misguided) so identify a single specific practical alternative where church doctrine tells us what position to take. Build a wall? Deport illegals? Limit legal immigration? It is not enough to broadly say “Welcome the stranger”. What is necessary is to identify as a practical matter exactly what that means to us.

This is what no one has yet even attempted to do, and I would welcome (name removed by moderator)ut from anyone who thinks he can answer this question: what specific policy recommended or supported by the GOP is contrary to church doctrine?
 
Take immigration. Numerous bishops have called this a moral issue (which strikes me as completely misguided) so identify a single specific practical alternative where church doctrine tells us what position to take.
Well, there we have an example right there. You agree that the bishops take a stance on immigration that you disagree with. You know the Pope has directly criticized Trump’s immigration policies. But you choose to decide to ignore those things and therefore pretend the GOP’s positions are all consistent with the Church, when they clearly are not. That is just one example. I have pointed to others (whether you admit that or not).

Neither party is completely consistent with the Church. All Catholic voters have to consider that in making their voting decisions. But it is simply disingenuous for one side to pretend they have the stamp of approval from the Church. Not true.
 
Neither party is completely consistent with the Church. All Catholic voters have to consider that in making their voting decisions. But it is simply disingenuous for one side to pretend they have the stamp of approval from the Church. Not true.
That’s the reason I first posted in this thread, when I usually try to avoid the political fray. I don’t mind it when my fellow Catholics declare whoever it is they’re voting for. That’s their choice. But when they insist on getting other Catholics like me to vote their way, and especially when they try to use what I see as blackmail tactics, like declaring we’re risking our eternal salvation if we don’t vote their particular way, I cannot abide with that, not when the Church clearly teaches otherwise. How dare anyone assume that I or any one of us have not considered all the issues when it comes to voting? I put much thought and prayer into aligning my vote with what the Church allows, and what I know to be right, when I consider the position, qualifications and past record of each candidate.
 
The pope and some bishops have their opinions on it and even their opinions seem to run counter to church teaching in some aspects.
Again, this statement is really an admission. You admit that the Pope and the bishops disagree with the GOP’s policies, but you reject their view and decide that instead your opinion reflects Church teaching (despite the fact that they have teaching authority and you do not). If every Catholic gets to decide that his or her own opinion controls, then I suppose any Catholic can support anything. If we follow what the Church actually says, then its clear that neither party is consistent with Church teaching.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top