Letter from my bishop re: voting

[phil19034]

MiserereMeiChristi:

I meant that the Bishop would be correct in that parishioners who support those things should refrain from receiving communion.

But he’s saying that parishioners who vote for candidates who support those things should refrain from receiving communion.

The Catholic position on voting is that there is a hierarchy of issues. Some issues are more important than others, just like some sins are worse than others.

The mortal sin of abortion carries with it an automatic excommunication. VERY FEW mortal sins have an automatic excommunication associated with it. Not even first degree murder.

That’s how grave a sin the Church considers abortion to be. It’s right up there with killing the Pope.

Therefore, if a candidate doesn’t believe that one of the most evil acts a person can do (killing a baby) is not a sin, that person cannot be trusted in regards to Christian morals. Period.

This is why, the Church only allows us to vote for a pro-abortion candidate if the other candidate is equally as bad. In other words, also a pro-abortion and/or pro-euthanasia candidate.

Other sins (even mortal ones) & issues do NOT outway (even combined) the abortion and euthanasia. Because again, anyone who thinks abortion and/or euthanasia is not evil is unfit to lead Christians and does not have a moral compass that can be trusted.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

When I returned to my Catholic faith, during my confession, I listed as one of my grave sins voting for pro-choice candidates.

My suggestion: confess it.

I can’t speak for your situation, but if she doesn’t feel it was a sin for her, because she did not choose to vote for them based on their position on pro-abortion but rather she based her vote on something else important that comported with Church teaching, then she didn’t sin and doesn’t have anything to confess.

I’ve regularly voted for candidates who disagree with the Church on some pro-life issue or other. If they agree with the Church on being against abortion, then they usually disagree with the Church on capital punishment, human rights, and/or disarmament, and vice versa. I am not a single-issue voter and I make an effort to choose the candidate I think best overall. I have also never voted for a candidate because s/he disagreed with the Church on abortion, capital punishment, or other issue of Church teaching; doing that would definitely be a sin.

I don’t consider myself as having committed any sin in my voting over my whole life, including when I was away from the Church (I never supported abortion or euthanasia or capital punishment and those issues are not why I was away from the Church), and I have therefore never confessed any sin related to voting.

 

[Cimachol]

As far as I’m aware, it’s not a sin to vote for a candidate who goes against Church teaching unless you are voting for him/her because of that.

I believe one also needs to have proportionate reason to vote for such a candidate, as per a memorandum entitled “Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles” written by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who became Pope Benedict XVI. One would have to believe that in voting for the candidate who supports such things, one is preventing an even greater evil from occurring.

In the case of abortion, I can’t imagine an issue that would be equivalent – we had 862,000 abortions in the United States in 2018. Nothing else is killing close to that many people in our country every year, and especially people who are completely innocent and have no pre-existing health conditions causing them to die. On the other hand, if you had two candidates who were pro-abortion, but one was also pro-euthanasia or pro-homosexual “marriage,” you could vote for the candidate who was pro-abortion but did not support those other evils. It it were a choice between a candidate who was pro-life and pro-homosexual “marriage” and a candidate who was pro-abortion but against homosexual “marriage,” I would absolutely vote for the pro-life candidate.

 

[phil19034]

phil19034:

When I returned to my Catholic faith, during my confession, I listed as one of my grave sins voting for pro-choice candidates.

My suggestion: confess it.

I can’t speak for your situation, but if she doesn’t feel it was a sin for her, because she did not choose to vote for them based on their position on abortion but rather on something else important, then she didn’t sin and doesn’t have anything to confess.

I’ve regularly voted for candidates who disagree with the Church on some pro-life issue or other. If they agree with the Church on being against abortion, then they usually disagree with the Church on capital punishment, human rights, and/or disarmament, and vice versa. I am not a single-issue voter and I make an effort to choose the candidate I think best overall. I have also never voted for a candidate because s/he disagreed with the Church on abortion, capital punishment, or other issue of Church teaching; doing that would definitely be a sin.

I don’t consider myself as having committed any sin in my voting over my whole life, including when I was away from the Church (I never supported abortion or euthanasia or capital punishment and those issues are not why I was away from the Church), and I have therefore never confessed any sin related to voting.

In today’s political environment, I personally consider it a mortal sin to vote for someone who is pro-abortion.

We have never been so close to over turning it & when one party is constantly campaigning on protecting abortion, that becomes a very troubling issue for me.

In the past, the abortion issue was not as much in the forefront as it is today. In the past, you had Democrats who would simply say “I’m personally against it, but I don’t feel I have the authority to overrule the Court” etc.

Today, on the other hand, you have candidates pledging to protect abortion and/or even expand it. So for me, it’s no longer the same thing.

Heck, yesterday, Joe Biden picked as his running mate the person who started the persecution of David Daleiden.

https://studentsforlife.org/2019/08/26/kamala-harris-persecuted-pro-life-activists-as-attorney-general/

California Atty. Gen Behind Raid of Pro-Life Activist's Apartment Actively Advocates for Planned Parenthood

California Attorney General Kamala Harris, who ordered the raid on the apartment belonging to the producer behind last year s undercover Planned Parenthood videos, is being accused of being in bed

www.christianpost.com

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/6/kamala-harris-california-ag-behind-daleiden-raid-s/

 

[Tis_Bearself]

In today’s political environment, I personally consider it a mortal sin to vote for someone who is pro-abortion.

I realize that you and many other Catholics feel this way. I disagree, as long as the reason you are voting for the person with the pro-abortion platform is NOT because of the pro-abortion issue.

I have also met many Catholics throughout my life and outside of this forum who feel it is a grave sin to vote for anyone who (in their opinion) does not support human rights, does not help the poor, and/or promotes war or bigotry. I also disagree with that on the same grounds.

I vote for the person who I feel, in good conscience, is the best person overall, considering all issues, to hold the office for which they are running. There’s no sin in that, and to my knowledge, the USCCB agrees.
(This is also how I was taught by my parents, both of whom refused to vote for Ronald Reagan despite pressure from other Catholics, because they did not agree with his domestic economic policies.)

You and others are free to vote how you like.
But you are not free to impose your views of “mortal sin” on me or on any other Catholic.

 

[phil19034]

But you are not free to impose your views of “mortal sin” on me or on any other Catholic.

Mortal sin requires conditions. For me, if I vote for a pro-abortion person (like Kamala), I will be 100% going against my conscience.

 

[otjm]

Ah, that is what I get for not reading every post since my prior comment.

At this point I am not sure exactly what the OP wants.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I think the advice that you and others gave for her to just read and follow the USCCB guidance is sufficient.

 

[Cimachol]

Therefore, if a candidate doesn’t believe that one of the most evil acts a person can do (killing a baby) is not a sin, that person cannot be trusted in regards to Christian morals. Period.

I would take that a step further – the Church not only teaches that abortion is a sin, but that the government has a positive moral obligation to defend the embryo’s right to life. A number of politicians will say that they acknowledge that abortion is a sin and think that they are in good standing with the Church, overlooking the fact that they reject the Church’s teaching that the embryo’s life must be defended. The Catechism states that “as a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child’s rights” (CCC 2273).

Therefore, politicians who say they are personally against abortion but don’t want to impose their opinion about abortion on others are not in keeping with Church teaching.

 

[Diaconia]

I vote for the person who I feel, in good conscience, is the best person overall, considering all issues, to hold the office for which they are running. There’s no sin in that, and to my knowledge, the USCCB agrees.

The trouble with this sort of reasoning (and I’m not saying you are guilty of it) is that many Catholics think that all of those issues have equal weighting, which is absolutely not the case. The number of reported abortions since Roe exceeds 65 million.

And, of course, logically, without the right to life no other rights matter. You can’t have any other civil rights (or infringement thereof) if you are killed in the womb.

There is no bishop in our country who would say that any other issue even approaches the quantity or quality of damage inflicted from abortion.

Deacon Christopher

PS: When I served Mass with Cardinal O’Connor at the Right to Life March in DC, he preached with the fervor of John the Forerunner and told all of us, “When people accuse you of being a single-issue voter, respond with ‘yes, and that single issue is LIFE.’”

Deacon Christopher

 

[nicholasG]

Therefore, politicians who say they are personally against abortion but don’t want to impose their opinion about abortion on others are not in keeping with Church teaching.

The entire country IS NOT catholic. It is composed of people of various beliefs. The Catholic Church has no right to impose its beliefs on non-Catholics.
Catholics believe abortion is a sin, fine, other religions don’t. All have a right to their beliefs.After al, this is a DEMOCRACY not a Theocracy.
Would you want a president who is a Muslim, Jewish, Mormon, Jehovah Witness, atheist, etc…imposing his/her beliefs on Catholics? I don’t think so.

 

[LilyM]

1ke:

It’s an opinion, not a juridic act on the part of your bishop. So, no

Thank you for your help. I will try to look into this a bit. Man, it’s kinda overwhelming that as a lay person I have to be familiar with canon law in order to figure something like this out. Being Catholic is so complicated sometimes!

Well you don’t 't really. Just remember that “should” is a very different thing from “must”. If a policeman tells you you should get out of your car it doesn’t necessarily mean you will be arrested or in trouble if you don’t.

 

[Anesti33]

Cimachol:

Therefore, politicians who say they are personally against abortion but don’t want to impose their opinion about abortion on others are not in keeping with Church teaching.

The entire country IS NOT catholic. It is composed of people of various beliefs. The Catholic Church has no right to impose its beliefs on non-Catholics.
Catholics believe abortion is a sin, fine, other religions don’t. All have a right to their beliefs.After al, this is a DEMOCRACY not a Theocracy.
Would you want a president who is a Muslim, Jewish, Mormon, Jehovah Witness, atheist, etc…imposing his/her beliefs on Catholics? I don’t think so.

Actually, if you are referring to these USA, it is a Republic, not a Democracy.

“Error has no rights”, therefore, nobody has the right to force immoral laws on us, particularly abortion, which, needless to say, abrogates the rights of the unborn, and silences their voices, after an agonizing final scream.

 

[nicholasG]

“Error has no rights”, therefore, nobody has the right to force immoral laws on us

Error from the Catholic perspective.
No one is forcing any Catholic to have abortions. Abortion rights may not be considered immoral by other religions. No religion has a right to force their religious definition of morality on other religions.

 

[Anesti33]

Anesti33:

“Error has no rights”, therefore, nobody has the right to force immoral laws on us

Error from the Catholic perspective.
No one is forcing any Catholic to have abortions. Abortion rights may not be considered immoral by other religions. No religion has a right to force their religious definition of morality on other religions.

Everyone must obey Divine Law, and yes, Divine Law is from a Catholic perspective, because the Catholic Church is the One True Church. And Catholic babies are being aborted every day, every hour, before they can even be baptized. That is profound injustice. Nobody has the right to force abortion on babies. Abortion is not a “right”, it is murder.

 

[Cimachol]

The entire country IS NOT catholic. It is composed of people of various beliefs. The Catholic Church has no right to impose its beliefs on non-Catholics.
Catholics believe abortion is a sin, fine, other religions don’t. All have a right to their beliefs.After al, this is a DEMOCRACY not a Theocracy.
Would you want a president who is a Muslim, Jewish, Mormon, Jehovah Witness, atheist, etc…imposing his/her beliefs on Catholics? I don’t think so.

Just as the right of a person not to be made a slave is not contingent upon the would-be slave owner’s recognition of that person’s human dignity, the right of the unborn child to live is not contingent upon an individual’s recognition of the child’s human dignity. Just as no one has a right to own a slave – regardless of one’s religious beliefs – no one has the right to have or participate in an abortion. Part of the reason we have civil laws is that individuals often fail to recognize and respect the rights of others.

The moral principles to which the bishops refer is binding on all people, not just Catholics. There is such a thing as right and wrong, and it is objectively morally wrong for a politician to ignore the rights of the unborn child.

 

[nicholasG]

Everyone must obey Divine Law, and yes, Divine Law is from a Catholic perspective, because the Catholic Church is the One True Church.

Not in this country. USA.

 

[phil19034]

Cimachol:

Therefore, politicians who say they are personally against abortion but don’t want to impose their opinion about abortion on others are not in keeping with Church teaching.

The entire country IS NOT catholic. It is composed of people of various beliefs. The Catholic Church has no right to impose its beliefs on non-Catholics.
Catholics believe abortion is a sin, fine, other religions don’t. All have a right to their beliefs.After al, this is a DEMOCRACY not a Theocracy.
Would you want a president who is a Muslim, Jewish, Mormon, Jehovah Witness, atheist, etc…imposing his/her beliefs on Catholics? I don’t think so.

Pushing for the outlawing of abortion is not a form of theocracy. Passing a law requiring everyone to be Catholic would be theocracy. We are not talking about things like birth control or Trinity.

We are talking about murder.

If you believe abortion is murder (like like the Catholic Church does) then you can’t put your head in the sand. 65 Million American have been murdered since Roe vs Wade.

Besides: we (as a society) already push values on other cultures. In America, honor killings are not allowed, even if a religion allows it. We don’t allow female circumcisions, even if someone feels their religion calls for it.

Schools require some shots to be taken in order to be enrolled, regardless of religious view of immunization.

Not to mention, the left has a tendency (when in power) to force Africa and non-abortion countries to accept abortion in order to receive aid. This is surely a way of forcing values (in this case the value of death) onto others.

Or what about the left trying to force CATHOLIC HOSPITALS to perform abortions and forcing the Little Sisters of the Poor to pay for birth control and abortion coverage.

This is not one sided.

 

[phil19034]

Anesti33:

Everyone must obey Divine Law, and yes, Divine Law is from a Catholic perspective, because the Catholic Church is the One True Church.

Not in this country. USA.

There is NO law that says Catholics (including Catholic members in congress) cannot vote their faith.

The “separation of church and state” is designed to protect churches from the govt by preventing a “state church.” It’s not designed to protect the govt from religious people.

 

[Cimachol]

No one is forcing any Catholic to have abortions.

No (for the most part), but people are forcing innocent babies to be aborted. No one forces anyone to abuse their children, but we have laws against child abuse. Also, as taxpayers, people who oppose abortions are forced to help pay for them.