W
wynnejj
Guest
You should float that interpretation by a first grade Holy Communion class. I said “yes” to a guy who allow another to kill because he has such other great ideas.
- Status
E
estesbob
Guest
We judge people by their actions A vote for Obama was either a knowing rejection of Church teaching or willfull ignorance of themYou mean the side of the issue that [anonymous poster] was in favor of before he was against it?But seriously, estesbob, which sentence is in “direct rejection of the teachings of the church”? “We are real Catholics”? “We love our faith”? Which sentence? One more question: where did I **say ** that I support abortion? I do not mean “Here’s how I interpret NeedsMercy’s vote.” I want “NeedsMercy says she supports abortion in post #_____.”
Allahu Akbar!
W
wynnejj
Guest
in the presence of proportionate reasons.]"
Go give your proportionate reasons the first grade Holy Communion class litmus test.
E
estesbob
Guest
in the presence of proportionate reasons.]"
This is a footnote to a longer letter where he said, among other things.:
The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorize or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is a “grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. …] In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to 'take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law or vote for it’” (no. 73). Christians have a "grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. …]* This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it" (no. 74).**
- Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.*
The truth is Bishop after Bishop and several Cardinals have explicitly stated the only proportionate reasons would be if a candidates opponent was more pro-abortion than they are. For example:
"You may in some circumstances where you don’t have any candidate who is proposing to eliminate all abortion, choose the candidate who will most limit this grave evil in our country, but you could never justify voting for a candidate who not only does not want to limit abortion but believes that it should be available to everyone,
Cardinal Burke
What is a “proportionate” reason when it comes to the abortion issue? It’s the kind of reason we will be able to explain, with a clean heart, to the victims of abortion when we meet them face to face in the next life–which we most certainly will. If we’re confident that these victims will accept our motives as something more than an alibi, then we can proceed.
Read more: blog.beliefnet.com/pontifications/2008/08/while-cardinal-george-the-pres.html#ixzz2DRW3gPKo
Archbishop Chaput
Chaput in the above letter, BTW, makes it clear that differences on the War, immigration, and the economy are NOT proportionate reasons.
M
Mickey
Guest
in the presence of proportionate reasons.]"It is astounding how you continue to post this footnote knowing that there are not proportionate reasons that rise to the level of the intrinsic evil of abortion.
S
scipio337
Guest
in the presence of proportionate reasons.]"
“Proportionate reasons” = anything they want it to mean for Obama supporters.
“Romney isn’t REALLY pro life (but I would still never vote for Gingrich or Santurum)! PROPORTIONATE!!”
“Obama will continue to fund the National Endowment for the Arts” PROPORTIONATE!!!.
Again I say, if there are those who find any “proportionate reasons” to support a candidate who openly supports 3 intrinsic evils, while persecuting those of conscience, and openly attacking the Church, there is nothing the Pope, bishops, or USCCB can say to dissuade them.
It’s really that simple.
M
Mickey
Guest
R
Rence
Guest
It is astounding how you continue to post that any reasons Al or I come up with (or anyone else for that matter) are not proportionate enough for you. It’s that endless loop thing. You and some others demand proportionate reasons, and others provide them, and the loop continues simply because you don’t like the answers provided to the questions. Thank God we don’t need anyone’s permission to vote with our conscience. Which means, it really doesn’t matter if you like the answers or not because we all (you, me, Al, everyone) will do what we are called to do despite what anyone else thinks.
R
Rence
Guest
That fact is, the Pope and US Bishops collectively didn’t list proportionate reasons, and they did not list reasons that were not proportionate enough. Just like they don’t provide an NFP guidebook with a list of ‘serious/grave’ reasons and list of what is not considered ‘grave/serious’ enough. However, the USCCB did collectively agree on a whole list of topics to consider when voting. Now, that’s really that simple.
E
estesbob
Guest
It is astounding to me how Obama catholics want us to accept their personal opinion of what proportionate reasons are and ignore the multitude of direct quotes from church officials contradicting what they say
R
Rence
Guest
Show me that list, from the Vatican, or even the US Bishops collectively, of proportionate reasons, and not proportionate reasons. An individual Bishop, though highly regarded, and whose opinion should be considered carefully, does not speak for the Church.
And by the way, you don’t have to accept anything discerned by anyone else but yourself. However, that doesn’t make someone who doesn’t agree with you ‘wrong’ either.
W
wynnejj
Guest
I’m just imagining myself in front of a court of first grade Holy Communion kids making my appeal for the denial of Holy Communion to those who vote habitually for the Pro-Choice candidate.
My case would be something like …
These so-called “Faithful Catholic Democrats” defend & support 100% “Protect-Child-Abuse-and-Murder-in-the-Womb” for supposed Other Proportionate Reasons and claim full compliance with the best practices of the Bishop’s Guidelines for Forming Conscience for Faithful Citizenship.
Every time the Defence for Democrats would arise, I would chime in with …
I object to the testimony on the grounds that it is Indecipherable, Ambiguous, and Unsuccessful according to the best practice of the cure for Social Justice.
And the Defence would counter with their arcane, erudite and learned responses, and our arguments & counter-arguments would rage on for forty years.
In the final analysis, though, the kids would simply say …
Huh? We can’t understand any of this. All we care about is what happened to the babies.
My case would be something like …
These so-called “Faithful Catholic Democrats” defend & support 100% “Protect-Child-Abuse-and-Murder-in-the-Womb” for supposed Other Proportionate Reasons and claim full compliance with the best practices of the Bishop’s Guidelines for Forming Conscience for Faithful Citizenship.
Every time the Defence for Democrats would arise, I would chime in with …
I object to the testimony on the grounds that it is Indecipherable, Ambiguous, and Unsuccessful according to the best practice of the cure for Social Justice.
And the Defence would counter with their arcane, erudite and learned responses, and our arguments & counter-arguments would rage on for forty years.
In the final analysis, though, the kids would simply say …
Huh? We can’t understand any of this. All we care about is what happened to the babies.
R
Rence
Guest
If that the way it should be, then it would be done. But it’s not. Neither the Vatican, nor the US Bishops collectively, said any of that. In fact, our now Pope wrote on “Worthiness to Receive Communion” and rather than say the words you would like to hear, he wrote:
A
Al_Moritz
Guest
No, you do not have to agree with our opinion of what proportionate reasons are. What we do demand is that you concede that we have legitimate reasons for the choices of conscience that we make, just like you have legitimate reasons for your choices. We respect your conscience and that of other hardliners here – when your choices are the ones that leave you personally in peace with God that’s great. Yet in turn we expect that you and others respect our consciences as well – I personally could never with any good conscience vote GOP, but that’s me, obviously not you. So far you have not demonstrated that respect of conscience, but accuse everyone of sin who just follows the USCCB guide and Cardinal Ratzinger, the current Pope.
M
Mickey
Guest
I’ll make it simple for you. Name one “proportionate” reason that rises to the level of the intrinsic evil of abortion.
There is no endless loop. There are no proportionate reasons that rise to the level of the intrinsic evil of abortion. Period.
No one has ever provided one.
There is no loop.
You have not provided an answer.
Each will answer for their works in this life.
A
Al_Moritz
Guest
The babies about which the GOP does nothing, at least not on the federal level.
M
Mickey
Guest
Indeed.
E
estesbob
Guest
Show me even one member of the magesterium that supports your personal interpretation of proportionate reasons. What greater insight do you have that the Pope or Cardinal Burke or archbishop Chaput? Why cant we find any members of the magesterium who support your view?
Surely you can offer more support to your position that a one line footnote to a letter that dismisses every issue mentioned by Obama catholics as not being proportionate
R
Rence
Guest
That’s right. Each will answer for their works in this life. This is my answer: The ability of citizens to feed, clothe, obtain healthcare, and house themselves (especially those citizens who are old, young, disabled or sick) is just as important. It really doesn’t matter if you agree or not, because in the end, you’ll vote with your conscience and I will vote for mine.
Ok, let’s start the endless loop again: you don’t think my reasons are proportionate enough. That doesn’t mean I didn’t answer you. That just means you don’t agree with my answer. Denying me won’t change my mind. My answers are still my answers, regardless of whether you agree or not. In the end, does it matter? Nope. Because you will vote with your conscience and I will vote for mine.
E
estesbob
Guest
What the GOP does or does not do has no relevance on whether a catholic can vote for a candidate who supports unrestricted abortion on demand.
- Status