Pope Francis drives a wedge between Catholic Church, GOP

[Path_Finder]

The so-called non-negotiables were crafted by a layman and the voting guide that was produced around them received approval from the USCCB. They were not identified by the Vatican. This is interesting reading: Pope’s Theologian Discusses the Distortion of Non-Negotiable Principles

When you say “crafted”, are you saying they have no basis in Church teaching?

“For example,” Fernández goes on to say, “the Pope stands firm in his opposition to abortion because if he does not defend the innocence of human life, we aren’t left with many other arguments with which to defend human rights. Of course this is* not negotiable*, but it doesn’t mean that certain moral principles are the source of all other truths of the Christian faith.

So the Theologian admits it is “not negotiable”.

 

[Son_of_Niall]

Pope Francis drives a wedge between the Catholic Church and the GOP

I absolutely LOVE our new Pope.

 

[gracepoole]

When you say “crafted”, are you saying they have no basis in Church teaching?

I’m saying these five “non-negotiables” were chosen while others most certainly exist:

The theologian concludes by saying that “if we look at each case individually, there are other aspects that are not negotiable: loving one’s neighbour, seeking justice for the oppressed, being honest in business dealings…”

I’d say Karl Rove and Hudson Deal have more to do with the identification of 5 non-negotiables to the exclusion of others than anything or anyone else.

 

[shelby_sun]

First off, I think we need to negate the premise that the Church tells us to vote for any party. I have never been in a Church where they tell you to vote for a party nor read any such articles.

After that, the Church does seem to counsel certain issues as to what is important. Then it is left up to our conscience.

So, back to your question, I vote as best in regards to the issues we are instructed on.

I agree!

 

[shelby_sun]

I absolutely LOVE our new Pope.

Absolutely agree!!!

 

[Path_Finder]

I’m saying these five “non-negotiables” were chosen while others most certainly exist:

I’d say Karl Rove and Hudson Deal have more to do with the identification of 5 non-negotiables to the exclusion of others than anything or anyone else.

Suggested reading, a prior Catholic Answers thread: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=746168

As to your assertion,

As to their promotion by conservatives, well, you can blame the Democratic Party for allowing this. If they did not so consistently and actively promote abortion, they would not have let themselves open to such a solid attack. - pnewton, jan. 17, 2013

True, a mere post by someone commenting here, but perhaps we could say

“I’d say Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton have more to do with the identification of 5 non-negotiables to the exclusion of others than anything or anyone else!”

You are merely taking the word of some Theologian from Argentina who may be a theologian for the present Pontiff and some how crafting his word to be authoritative.

 

[gracepoole]

You are merely taking the word of some Theologian from Argentina who may be a theologian for the present Pontiff and some how crafting his word to be authoritative.

I would definitely prefer to take the word of the Holy Father’s theologian than any lay person or political entity. I assume it’s obvious why.

Notice I’m not claiming that abortion shouldn’t be a non-negotiable. But the careful choosing of these five to the exclusion of others seems ridiculously politically motivated. Christ and His Church wouldn’t identify torture as a non-negotiable, for example? In fact, the Church *does *identify torture this way.

 

[Path_Finder]

The truth is though, that Vatican documents do address certain issues, it mentions them specifically:

This is the case with laws concerning abortion and euthanasia (not to be confused with the decision to forgo extraordinary treatments, which is morally legitimate).** Such laws must defend the basic right to life from conception to natural death.** In the same way, it is necessary to recall the duty to respect and protect the rights of the human embryo. Analogously, the family needs to be safeguarded and promoted, based on monogamous marriage between a man and a woman, and protected in its unity and stability in the face of modern laws on divorce: in no way can other forms of cohabitation be placed on the same level as marriage, nor can they receive legal recognition as such.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html

So obviously, this is a matter for a lot of study to dismiss flippantly others because someone is able to quote some South American Theologian who may have worked with a Pope who has only been in his position for a few years.

 

[Path_Finder]

I would definitely prefer to take the word of the Holy Father’s theologian than any lay person or political entity. I assume it’s obvious why.

Notice I’m not claiming that abortion shouldn’t be a non-negotiable. But the careful choosing of these five to the exclusion of others seems ridiculously politically motivated. Christ and His Church wouldn’t identify torture as a non-negotiable, for example? In fact, the Church *does *identify torture this way.

The Church specifically mentions it.

**
This is the case with laws concerning abortion and euthanasia (not to be confused with the decision to forgo extraordinary treatments, which is morally legitimate). Such laws must defend the basic right to life from conception to natural death. In the same way, it is necessary to recall the duty to respect and protect the rights of the human embryo. Analogously, the family needs to be safeguarded and promoted, based on monogamous marriage between a man and a woman,** and protected in its unity and stability in the face of modern laws on divorce: in no way can other forms of cohabitation be placed on the same level as marriage, nor can they receive legal recognition as such.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html

I will take the word of Vatican documents.

 

[Path_Finder]

I would definitely prefer to take the word of the Holy Father’s theologian than any lay person or political entity. I assume it’s obvious why.

Notice I’m not claiming that abortion shouldn’t be a non-negotiable. But the careful choosing of these five to the exclusion of others seems ridiculously politically motivated. Christ and His Church wouldn’t identify torture as a non-negotiable, for example? In fact, the Church *does *identify torture this way.

You insinuated that this was a political ploy over Vatican teaching. Fine, Vote your conscience. Vote for abortion.

 

[shelby_sun]

No i did not. I asked you a question you did not answer. I did not say whether you should vote or not in that situation; maybe you have very good justification and reasoning, but you didn’t give any even though I was interested to hear your thoughts because that is what it will probably come too. Whatever?

 

[Path_Finder]

No i did not. I asked you a question you did not answer. I did not say whether you should vote or not in that situation; maybe you have very good justification and reasoning, but you didn’t give any even though I was interested to hear your thoughts because that is what it will probably come too. Whatever?

The Church tells us to vote our conscience being informed on the issues.

The Church makes no mention of parties.

It should be noted, this is actually a sort of ploy to say the GOP is involved. They are not. Some have politicized this issue.

Karl Rose and Hudson whomever mentioned.

 

[Path_Finder]

SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH

DECLARATION ON PROCURED ABORTION

1. The first right of the human person is his life.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19741118_declaration-abortion_en.html

I will go again with Vatican documents that delineate these matters as if somehow, this had be reviewed by people.

Ditto: We are counseled regarding marriage as well: vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html

 

[shelby_sun]

The Church tells us to vote our conscience being informed on the issues.

The Church makes no mention of parties.

It should be noted, this is actually a sort of ploy to say the GOP is involved. They are not. Some have politicized this issue.

Karl Rose and Hudson whomever mentioned.

I never mentioned that the Church did mention US parties. If those parties are equal on their stance on abortion, I have to vote me moral conscience on other issues, correct.

 

[Path_Finder]

I never mentioned that the Church did mention US parties. If those parties are equal on their stance on abortion, I have to vote me moral conscience on other issues, correct.

We are to make an informed decision. That’s what the Church says.

 

[pnewton]

I agree but if I were given a dollar for every worldwide comment that I’ve read to the theme of “I’m not Catholic but I like this Pope,” I would be rich and expect charitable contributions to go through the roof from everyone.

When I here such statements, I reflect on how our human nature judges other people by the plumb that is ourselves. People state that they “like this Pope” because he says things that are in line with their own reason. This is what we should expect of non-Catholics. I am concerned that Catholics do the same thing too often. We judge the pope as wrong when he disagrees with us and right when he agrees with us. We forget that we are not the standard by which the Holy Father is to be judged as a good pope or a bad pope.

 

[gracepoole]

The Church specifically mentions it.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20021124_politica_en.html

I will take the word of Vatican documents.

And again, we don’t disagree on what the Vatican does say. But what She doesn’t say is that there are only five non-negotiables.

The Church tells us to vote our conscience being informed on the issues.

The Church makes no mention of parties.

It should be noted, this is actually a sort of ploy to say the GOP is involved. They are not. Some have politicized this issue.

Karl Rose and Hudson whomever mentioned.

Karl Rove and Hudson Deal. Just in case anyone needed a reminder. Google can provide much, much more on both. Of course the Church makes no mention of parties. The point is that parties can attempt to selectively use Church teachings to benefit their groups.

 

[pnewton]

I’m saying these five “non-negotiables” were chosen while others most certainly exist:

They were chose as the most current and black and white issues. It is a good list. However, as Pope Francis reminds us, all doctrine is equally non-negotiable, including Catholic teaching on just war, the death penalty, the environment and the whole of social doctrine. These doctrines are equally doctrine that is to be accepted by faith, though the application may be less clear. If I had any objection to the whole fab five list it is that it was too often misunderstood as some sort of fait complete.

 

[Path_Finder]

And again, we don’t disagree on what the Vatican does say. But what She doesn’t say is that there are only five non-negotiables.

But there are subjects the Church counsels us about.

.

Karl Rove and Hudson Deal. Just in case anyone needed a reminder. Google can provide much, much more on both. Of course the Church makes no mention of parties. The point is that parties can attempt to selectively use Church teachings to benefit their groups.

No, I don’t need to look them up, I’m not politicizing this. I am sorry that some care to attack pro-lifers over party affiliations, that somehow, abortion clinics closing in Wisconsin or Texas might be a bad thing because of those who enact legislation. Yes, Grace Poole, their defunding America’s biggest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, special interest of one party, is so shameful, is it not? How shameful and evil the GOP has done if there is one less abortion, one body saved. Your arguments are so convincing. Glad you have said before that you are against abortion, it is so clear.

Scott Walker, thumbs up, Rick Perry, thumbs up! The latter may have the death penalty in their state, that be wrong but it is not on the same level clearly as abortion. Need we hunt down the documents again, so we can see their shame Grace Poole??

I will continue to vote for those Shameful Pro-Lifers.

And shamefully pray pro-life rosaries and do other shameful pro-life acts!

God Bless your compassion!

 

[Path_Finder]

As shameful as it is, those “non-negotiables” still hold up, it is a semantics games the pro-lifers arguing against the lives saved by pro-life politicians, because hudson and karl rove said it.

I don’t even know if the history takes us to where Karl Rove devised this to get votes, that is a scandalous statement to say that, insulting as well to anyone who has ever SINCERELY been in the pro-life movement to protect the interests as the Federal Government and one party bankroll America’s Largest Abortion Provider to $400 or $500 million dollars a year.

Along with the “layman” whose name we don’t even know.

The Vatican documents are there, it is laid out, this is an argument for the apologetics section, I’m not tripping over some argument that tries to call the death penalty a non-negotiable when it is not clearly called that anywhere, nor torture, etc.