The seamless garment doesn’t introduce any new issues to the Church’s social vision, it just speaks to the connectedness of all of the issues. So its seems it is Minerva who is damning a part of the church’s social vision as “socialist”. This leads me to more suspicion of her faithfulness than of Cardinal Bernardin’s.
Catholics who vote for many pro-life Republicans should feel gulity. I am not saying they should not vote as their conscience dictates. But if they are voting for people who do not support the entirity of the Church’s social vision, they should feel some gulit, particularly if they have not made their candidate know of their reservations on certain issues or otherwise worked to mitigate their support for a canddiate not behind the whole.
That wasn’t the Vatican. That was layman Karl Keating after he tested the phrase through polling and focus groups. (Did Christ use focus groups for His message?).
Catholics are not free to advoate injustice to the poor or workers.
Actually, the seamless garment movement is the best thing that could happen to the pro-life movement. A good number of Americans are troubled and confused about abortion and are alienated from a pro-life movement that seems to be nothing but a faithfull and impotent junior partner to the right wing.
Its interesting that you, like many others, insist we 1) must vote for pro-life candidates, 2) can have different opinions about other issues, even in contradiction from the Church, and 3) Bash the seamless garment.
It seems to me your are terrified of th epossibility of seamless garments success because then you would faced with candidates who are pro-life AND pro-social justice, for which you have no intention of supporting despite your claim that Catholcis MUST vote a certain way.
