Pope warns Catholic politicians who back abortion

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tom317
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
  1. I do not agree Kennedy and Pelosi can get real jobs.
I guess they’ll have to go on welfare, then.
  1. I do agree one cannot eliminate abortion by electing people who vote for abortion.
On the other hand:
  1. We can make a start that way.
  2. People in public office who claim to be Catholic and support abortion bring grave scandal on the Church.
  3. The Holy Father has a duty to call those who sin to account.
 
You’re just making that up. You have no way of knowing that.
Tom said Catholic pols who vote for abortion should be excommunicated. If that happened, it would be very difficult to self-identify as a Catholic. Hence, the ranks of self-identified Catholic legislators would shrink.

However, I do not want to be rash and underestimate these folks. I wouldn’t at all be surprised if excommunicated pols continued to say they were Catholic because they know in their heart they are Catholic. They could attempt to find votes from all the other self-identified Catholics who practice ABC and get remarried,
 
I think that many cradle Catholic are simply Catholic in name only and do not understand the importance of following the church’s teachings.

I am a cradle Catholic and was this way up until about 15 years ago.
I know for a fact that many high level politicians have been “visited” by Catholic clergy in an attempt to teach them of their wrong formation. Yet, to this day I know of no so-called Catholic politician who has changed their mind.

I really do not think we can say this is a case of ignorance, especially with the fact that soooo many orthodox Catholics scream to these people all the time…they know what they are doing.
 
The problem with your theory is that the politician would never say they are following the Pope. Instead, they would come out with a long, well crafted speech outlining why they are now strongly pro-life, and in that speech they would never say a word about their faith of the Pope.
Agree. The politician would rarely say he was following the pope’s orders. His opponents would say it.
 
I know for a fact that many high level politicians have been “visited” by Catholic clergy in an attempt to teach them of their wrong formation. Yet, to this day I know of no so-called Catholic politician who has changed their mind.

I really do not think we can say this is a case of ignorance, especially with the fact that soooo many orthodox Catholics scream to these people all the time…they know what they are doing.
If they will not act to save their own souls, at least let them forthrightly admit they are not Catholic and stop leading others astray.
 
Agree. The politician would rarely say he was following the pope’s orders. His opponents would say it.
Yes, and then his opponents would have to prove it because the politician would deny that all the way, It would become a he said he said situation.
 
It’s not simply because the Pope tells them to do so – it’s the consistent teaching of the Catholic faith since the early church fathers on the matter of abortion.

You keep painting this as if the Holy Father would have a hotline to a politician that is faithful and give him daily instructions. It’s a distorted and bigoted caricature.
Well, if the pope says change, and then the guy changes, it does look like a red phone on the desk.

The voters don’t care about Church fathers. They see a guy in Rome telling politicians what to do. Half of them can’t find Rome on a map. They see the pope on TV a few times a year, and watch news spots when he visits someplace. They wouldn’t know a Church father from the man in the moon. The pope is the public face of Catholicism.
 
Again, that’s your own view of what you think will sell to the electorate. Ronald Reagan was told that his pro-life stance would keep him from winning, and he won in two landslides.

Sometimes so-called pragmatist are merely self-defeating cowards.
  1. Of course it’s my own view. Since the events haven’t happened it’s all opinion.
  2. Note Reagan wasn’t labeled as taking orders from a foreign power.
  3. Some pragmatists probably are cowards. So what?
 
Yes, you would be right if the guy came out and said he changed because of the Pope, yet I doubt anyone would be that stupid.
Remember, the opponent makes the case the guy is following the pope’s orders. Can you imaging the South Park episode?
 
“Bode well,” how?

The point of being Catholic is to achieve salvation. I would say maintaining a pro-abortion position is what does not “bode well” – for anyone.
“Bode well” means getting reelected.
 
Yes, and then his opponents would have to prove it because the politician would deny that all the way, It would become a he said he said situation.
The opposition would show a time line. First they would show the politician vote in favor of abortion. Then they would show the popes directive. Then they would show the guy voting as the pope says. Then they would say the guy takes orders from the pope.

They don’t have to prove anything. All they have to do is get the vote.
 
And that takes priority over salvation? Christ created His Church to help politicians win office?
  1. The politician develops his own priorities.
  2. I have no reason to think Christ created the Church to elect politicians.
 
The democratic party has made it seem like it is not a life, but simply a part of a womans body that she can do with what she chooses.

Just not sure what you mean about speaking volumes about the republican party.

I do apologize for thinking that you argued that way because of partisanship.
I rely on God to end abortions not political parties. I endorse neither the republican or the democrat parties. I wonder if politics were invented for morality in the first place.
 
  1. The politician develops his own priorities.
And those who choose to support a horrible, grisly crime should not be supported by Catholics nor allowed to call themselves Catholic.
  1. I have no reason to think Christ created the Church to elect politicians.
Then what** is** your point? Why all this nonsense about how Catholic politicians who follow Catholic morality might not get elected or re-elected?
 
And those who choose to support a horrible, grisly crime should not be supported by Catholics nor allowed to call themselves Catholic.

Then what** is** your point? Why all this nonsense about how Catholic politicians who follow Catholic morality might not get elected or re-elected?
It’s an analysis of the potential results of the public perception that Catholic politicians are responding to papal directives. I see no reason such discussion and analysis is nonsense.

What are your thoughts on the election prospects of Catholic politicians who change positions after a papal directive? Do you think the pope can have any effect on legislators in the US? If he does, how will that be perceived by voters?
 
As oppossed to deliberatley dissobeying the Pope? You think that is better?
Any “Catholic” pro-abortion politician who wishes to chanve his stance to pro-life can consult me and have no worries. We will simply make a visit to an abortion clinic, so he can “see what it’s all about.”

At some point he will visit the restroom, I will slip him the flask of vegetable soup I have concealed under my jacket, he will take a huge mouthfull – and stagger out and spew it all in front of the cameras, saying, “Hack! Gag! I never had any idea it was like this! Gag! Puke!”😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top