Papal nuncio: Catholic division undermines religious freedom

[Tampa_Dave]

Exactly! But sadly, there are some who are so loyal to the (D) party…it would not matter if the warning was spoken by the Pope himself.

I personally think many pro-Obama Catholics on this forum truly know, deep down inside, that the message of the papal nuncio is 100% correct. They either believe social justice is more important, they don’t care what the Vatican says, or both.

 

[Al_Moritz]

Exactly! But sadly, there are some who are so loyal to the (D) party…it would not matter if the warning was spoken by the Pope himself.

For that, see my previous post.

 

[Al_Moritz]

I think Al is right.

Thank you.

 

[estesbob]

I personally think many pro-Obama Catholics on this forum truly know, deep down inside, that the message of the papal nuncio is 100% correct. They either believe social justice is more important, they don’t care what the Vatican says, or both.

I don’t think they are trying to convince us that supporting evil is OK -they are trying to convince themselves.

 

[_Abyssinia]

I personally think many pro-Obama Catholics on this forum truly know, deep down inside, that the message of the papal nuncio is 100% correct. They either believe social justice is more important, they don’t care what the Vatican says, or both.

Pro Obama Catholics should remember that the foundation of Catholic social teaching is sanctity of human life

 

[wynnejj]

Ok, I cannot let this one go. I repeat from a previous post, since you still have not read carefully:

Since you bring up Pope Benedict XVI, I’ll be happy to bring him up too. You will not mind me re-quoting him from the time when he was still Cardinal Ratzinger, the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (emphases added):

"[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of

the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]"

Link:
priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/04-07ratzingerommunion.htm

(We have discussed ‘proportionate reasons’ already.)

So yes, you can vote for a pro-choice candidate without supporting the intrinsic evil that he stands for. Says the Pope.

In law, this would be pleading insanity, as clearly with the litany of basic principles being promoted by that certain “major political party” which threatens the institutions of marriage & family and promote contraception & abortion as a “reproductive right”, one has to be out of their proportionate reasoning mind. It is one thing to be a sinner, it is another to promote sin in another. You are pushing the insanity defense, when it is well understood that this agenda is selling intrinsic evil.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Not completely true. The Church has something called excommunication.

I would also argue that they have already separated themselves.

An excommunication prevents one from receiving the sacraments, but they are still encouraged to stay in the Church, in hopes of becoming a Catholic in communion with the Church again.

Also, excommunication is not something within the authority of the laity to use against each other.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Ok, I cannot let this one go. I repeat from a previous post, since you still have not read carefully:

Since you bring up Pope Benedict XVI, I’ll be happy to bring him up too. You will not mind me re-quoting him from the time when he was still Cardinal Ratzinger, the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (emphases added):

"[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of

the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]"

Link:
priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/04-07ratzingerommunion.htm

(We have discussed ‘proportionate reasons’ already.)

So yes, you can vote for a pro-choice candidate without supporting the intrinsic evil that he stands for. Says the Pope.

Then Cardinal Ratzinger said in the context of proportionate reasons. Bishops have said what proportionate reasons are and are not and none of the common reasons I have seen Catholic Obama voters give, apply

Father Roger J Landry

When Cardinal Ratzinger’s comments are viewed within the general context of all his declarations, it’s clear that he thinks few justifications would suffice to outweigh participation in the evil of the politician’s pro-choice position and votes. In an address to European politicians on March 30th of this year, Pope Benedict stated, ‘As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable. Among these the following emerge clearly today: the protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family — as a union between one man and one woman based on marriage…; and the protection of the rights of parents to educate their children’

Arthur Hippler, PhD

This could not mean . . . that support for a pro-abortion . . . candidate could be justified by his support for economic proposals, whether of a ‘conservative’ or ‘liberal’ character. The protection of life is greater than the protection or redistribution of wealth [CCC #2197-2198]. Cardinal Ratzinger had already affirmed the priority of protecting innocent life when he stated that ‘not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia.

Cardinal Ratzinger’s remark would have to mean that support for a pro-abortion or pro-euthanasia candidate could only be licit where the alternative was more detrimental to the defense of innocent life. A candidate who supports legal abortion with a number of restrictions would be proportionately better than a candidate who supports abortion “on demand.”

my emphases

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Yes, the Nuncio is an envoy for the Pope and like all Catholics answers to the Pope. That does not address the points of ‘not very clear’ and ‘confusion’ surrounding the faith forming documents, according to authoritative men, also of the Church. Would you prefer that possibility not to exist so you can continue making the self righteous accusations, or would you prefer to seek a clarification to correct whoever is in error on the subject of voting before more elections? It’s really that simple. You can try to work this out together, or continue the condescending, coy, and antagonistic posts, which is understandably brushed off as for other reasons since it lacks charity required of all believers. Seriously people, some are latching on to what seems to be the next opportunity to denigrate another person. We understand what the nuncio is saying, and whether someone agrees or not does not give cause for people to drop all charity. Do you think the nuncio would approve of that activity between Catholics?

Failure to reach out and work together will assure history repeats itself, and both sides become complicit in the accusations some cast.

 

[Al_Moritz]

In law, this would be pleading insanity, as clearly with the litany of basic principles being promoted by that certain “major political party” which threatens the institutions of marriage & family and promote contraception & abortion as a “reproductive right”, one has to be out of their proportionate reasoning mind. It is one thing to be a sinner, it is another to promote sin in another. You are pushing the insanity defense, when it is well understood that this agenda is selling intrinsic evil.

You can impossibly be serious.

 

[Mickey]

So yes, you can vote for a pro-choice candidate without supporting the intrinsic evil that he stands for. Says the Pope.

Wrong.

1. You never listed the so-called proportionate reasons that you seem to think are equal to or greater than the evil of abortion.
2. The Papal Nuncio has spoken for the Pope…and it doesn’t jive with your odd interpretation.

 

[Mickey]

I personally think many pro-Obama Catholics on this forum truly know, deep down inside, that the message of the papal nuncio is 100% correct. They either believe social justice is more important, they don’t care what the Vatican says, or both.

Yes. I believe that also. This is why they cannot address the words of the Papal Nuncio.

 

[Mickey]

In law, this would be pleading insanity, as clearly with the litany of basic principles being promoted by that certain “major political party” which threatens the institutions of marriage & family and promote contraception & abortion as a “reproductive right”, one has to be out of their proportionate reasoning mind. It is one thing to be a sinner, it is another to promote sin in another. You are pushing the insanity defense, when it is well understood that this agenda is selling intrinsic evil.

Great post! Spot on!

 

[Al_Moritz]

Wrong.

Really? Read Cardinal Ratzinger again. It is quite obvious for those able to read what he actually says, instead of interpreting into his words what they want him to have said.

 

[Mickey]

Yes, the Nuncio is an envoy for the Pope and like all Catholics answers to the Pope. That does not address the points of ‘not very clear’ and ‘confusion’ surrounding the faith forming documents, according to authoritative men, also of the Church.

On the contrary. His words address the issue perfectly.

Would you prefer that possibility not to exist so you can continue making the self righteous accusations,

Your accusation…that people are making accusations…is false…and it is getting very old.

 

[Mickey]

Read Cardinal Ratzinger again.

I have read it many times…and you still do not list proprtionate reasons…and you still do not address the Papal Nuncio. As they say in the legal world…you do not have a leg to stand on.

 

[Al_Moritz]

I have read it many times…and you still do not list proprtionate reasons…and you still do not address the Papal Nuncio. As they say in the legal world…you do not have a leg to stand on.

I have addressed all these things. Apparently you haven’t carefully followed the thread. Others will have absorbed my arguments. And that you will never change your mind, that much is obvious.

I guess I am done here. Have a good day. May God bless you.

 

[Mickey]

I have addressed all these things.

You have not.

Apparently you haven’t carefully followed the thread.

Yes, I have. That is why I know that you have not offered anything in the way of “proportionate reasons”. And you have not addressed the Papal Nuncio’s comments.

Others will have absorbed my arguments.

Most here have rejected your interpretations…including the Papal Nuncio.

And that you will never change your mind

Only the Holy Spirit can change minds and hearts.

I guess I am done here. Have a good day.

Goodbye. :tiphat:

 

[Santi2]

An excommunication prevents one from receiving the sacraments, but they are still encouraged to stay in the Church, in hopes of becoming a Catholic in communion with the Church again.

And what do you suggest in the meantime when dissenters continue to remain in the Church and collude with secular agents that undermines our religious freedom to abide by Catholic teachings as the Papal Nuncio stated? Wait until other apples in the cart rot as well? Unlike the folks in your rural area, Catholic dissenters over here are very vocal and pro-active with dissent and are embedded in Catholic agencies and our schools.

catholicherald.co.uk/news/2012/09/20/archbishop-nichols-reminds-marriage-care-to-follow-church-teaching/

catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2012/11/01/the-new-prefect-of-the-cdf-intends-to-take-on-the-soho-masses-i-hope-he-does-that-would-get-archbishop-vincent-off-a-very-uncomfortable-hook/

thetablet.co.uk/article/14789

 

[InJesusItrust]

No, but I live in a rural area. If any of the people here are pro choice, pro gay marriage, or pro female priests, they’ve never voiced it. I haven’t noticed anyone on these forums promoting any of those ideas and identifying themselves as ‘Catholic’. I don’t know what you mean about surveys.

The Church is the place people can find correction. We are all sinners. We shouldn’t be calling for the removal of any from His Church. We have Catholics in good standing and Catholics who are not. They will not receive correction through separation, and the Church doesn’t teach that.

Matthew 5:29

And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.