Politics in the pulpit

  • Thread starter Thread starter on_the_hill
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No, you may let your conscience and Church teaching guide you. Though it does appear that he holds to more Catholic values than Biden. Voting third party is also an option. The Bishops have more authority than I do, so I would suggest following their instructions.
 
The morality of faithful citizenship is questionable material for a homily? Really? 🤔
Perhaps on the basis that a homily is meant to explain the Scriptures to us?

Of course, if the readings related to citizenship in some way it could work.

However, i myself wouldn’t get too upset if all a priest did was explain the USCCB guidance on voting. It’s when they go beyond that and appear to be strongly endorsing a candidate or party that I feel bugged about it.
 
I already don’t watch Fr Goring because of his end times obsession, and the title of the video you posted just confirms to me that his superior ought to rein him in.
 
Would love it if our priest addressed the issues that are going on and yes, without endorsing a candidate, talked about what the USCCB guidelines are for voting.

Sorry but sounds awesome and courageous to me.

We need our shepherds to shepherd us.
already don’t watch Fr Goring because of his end times obsession,
Thats too bad.

Haven’t heard much end times from him, some maybe. I think he does a very good job
 
Last edited:
That is not Church teaching

A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate because of their pro-choice position but a Catholic may in spite of that if they believe there are proportionate reasons to support their candidate

I believe there are proportionate reasons to support Biden over Trump
 
Sounds like the priest is guiding you in a way that you don’t want to consider.
Those of us that are conservative in theology and politics have had to deal with political homilies for decades.
The problem is people only recognize it as “politics” if they disagree. If you’re hearing stuff you agree with, you’re likely to go “well, that’s just good common sense.” It’s only when you disagree that it comes “priest was shoving his political agenda down my throat…”
 
I understand you feel that way but to state that it is a sin for a Catholic to vote for a Democrat is untrue
 
Besides that, the code of Canon Law also prohibits the clergy from promoting (or opposing) any political party/candidate so as to avoid causing division in the parish
Do yo know which canon? 280’s somewhere?
 
The OP mentions the priest referenced the guidance from the BISHOPS about voting, intimating that it was questionable to do so. Um, a homily that brings the congregation to awareness of the Bishops guidance? That’s not a political homily that’s just a homily. I don’t like the divisions that actual political homilies bring. But a homily about forming a Catholic conscience of voting? That seems quite prudent. The OP also mentions he is a temporary priest until a replacement is found. I don’t think this matters one bit and only serves to somehow discredit the priest.
 
it is a sin for a Catholic to vote for a Democrat is untrue
Not to vote Democrat, but to vote the democrats of today, yes it is wrong.

Unless you know a democratic who is in line with Church teaching and not promoting the culture of death, yes it is wrong.
 
The problem is people only recognize it as “politics” if they disagree. If you’re hearing stuff you agree with, you’re likely to go “well, that’s just good common sense.” It’s
How do you arrive at this? I can recognize politics whether I generally agree or not. I’m sure others can too.
 
Last edited:
When one party advocates the murder of babies I think it’s appropriate to all but name them.
The Church still deals with the stigma of not getting involved when there was a Second World War. (Even though it arguably did) the Church still bears the stigma of the cristeros and Latin American murder of the Church. The Church still is dealing with China nominating Bishops. The Pope has no problem opposing a geographical and political wall of a sovereign country. St. John Paul II with Regan defeated communism in the 80s. So, yeah, I think laying out that a party whose platform involves advocating mothers to murder their babies probably deserves some pulpit time…
 
How do you arrive at this? I can recognize politics whether I generally agree or not. I’m sure others can too.
Just something I’ve noticed talking to people. Your mileage may vary, but I’ve found that virtually everyone agrees that they don’t like “politics in the pulpit.” But if they’re hearing something they like, they don’t recognize it as “politics.” I’ve heard both liberals and conservatives do this, it’s not a partisan thing. I don’t even think most people do it consciously.
 
Last edited:
When one party advocates the murder of babies I think it’s appropriate to all but name them.
This is a very difficult point for most Catholics to understand but try please for a moment.

When someone advocates for a law they do it to keep their own political power. Regardless of the choice being good or bad the ending effect passes. even if they law is functional bad and allows for damage the law itself is not normally and election point later.

Abortion is legal, there is no fight on the pro-choice side of government. they have functionally moved on to the next thing the voter blocks want.

Is this a good thing? No but in the mean while Catholics are trying to stack the supreme court but with prolife but very morally bankrupt individuals (see Brett M. Kavanaugh) the damage in the mean time to other moral issues can be just as horrendous.

To date the US has engage the War on drugs, terror and now we have the Trump administration.
Millions of people are suffering and dying all over the world do to US actions from both parties but we have people not unlike yourself so hyper focused on abortion you forget that ever single law and motion passed can get people (and frequently do) killed.

IF abortion was on the ballot as a major election issue I’d understand but until then you are ignoring just as much genocide the world over just to solve one issue.

Which is exactly why non Catholics like myself would say to you:
“You only care about a child until its born.”

Because your voting method only seems to care about the unborn at the expense of the children in Gaza bombed with phosphorus, the refugees from counties the US bombs, and more importantly your own poor and disenfranchised.

I know you care about all of them but you can’t nor should you tunnel vision on one issue at the expense of everything else.
Especially when just as much blood is shed the world over.
 
I can’t follow your position. At all. Abortion is the main plank in the platform. I hate Godwin’s law but literally it could be more applicable. It’s a black and white issue. Period. Any justification of it spits on the bodies of the babies murdered.

For a moment let me humor your rhetoric. Let’s say that’s true. Let’s say I only care about the person until it’s born. So what!? Is that bad? Sure but at least I want IT TO BE BORN!
 
Last edited:
I’m not sure but it would appear the plank can be found in many voters eye.
 
Nope, it’s your opinion.

It would only be a sin if the Catholic voted Democrat because the candidate or party was pro-choice or was otherwise opposed to Church teaching on another issue.

Also, when you talk about “Several bishops”, remember that “several bishops” give Biden communion, “several bishops” are open to discussions on women priests, etc. You can find “Several bishops” who support all kinds of stuff.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top