Pro-choice Catholics

[Newbie2]

So ok. If that’s teaching then it’s teaching. I could have read that btw without huge bold letters in red.

It’s a “shouting point” rather than a “talking point”.

 

[guanophore]

Perhaps dealing with balancing rights, when personhood with legal rights is determined, and so forth.  The end result may not be perfect or satisfy us all, but society on the whole in a democracy of plural beliefs does it's best to come up with some law for the land.

The Catholic Church believes and teaches that “personhood” begins at the moment of conception. Catholics have a moral obligation to be light and salt in the culture and to do whatever they can to bring the law fo the land into conformity with what has been revealed by God to the Church.

Watering down the truth is not an option for a Catholic.

 

[CMatt25]

So in other words you think its ok to impose your religious values on others - have govt. implement them, etc. because you believe them to be true? And that’s not a theocracy in your book? You always say in response to pro-life voters, “we live in a pluralistic democracy and we can’t impose our religion on others because we don’t live in a theocracy” etc. Yet you’re imposing your religious values aren’t you? Just because you believe Jesus spoke of them in the bible doesn’t make them non religious values does it? A lot of people believe the bible condemns homosexuality. Do you agree with laws restricting gay marriage,etc? If not, on what basis? Please explain.

Ishii

Ishii my friend you seem to follow me around like clockwork. I do truly hope all has been well with you. We can both strive to see our values implemented. That’s what it means to be part of a democracy. Any of these issues may have religious connotations to some but they also have non religious ones as well totally outside the realm of religious faith. And I look at the abortion issue and gay rights issue as far as that goes as somethng different and far more complex than some of the other issues. This is not a thread however on homosexuality. The abortion issue also deals with women’s rights to privacy for instance. So at some point a society derives a settled law for its land whether you and I like potential outcomes under that law or not. But as I’ve repeatedly said it appears the debate shall go on toward infinity. Peace to those who will accept my offering of it and may God bless us all along our journeys.

 

[CountrySinger]

**For Catholics who are faithful to the consistent teachings of the Church, It has already been decided; there is and can be no debate. For other Catholics, as titled in this thread, they are in grave dissent. **

So, if a Catholic is pro-choice, they should leave the Church? Is that also true for any other teachings of the Church? If someone doesn’t beleive 100 % of the Church’s teachings, they are ex- Catholics? As a someone who is questioning my beliefs, that is VERY interesting… Nice to know that the Church is “open to questions” from its members. Shut Up and Believe seems to be the motto of the Catholic Church.

 

[catharina]

So, if a Catholic is pro-choice, they should leave the Church? Is that also true for any other teachings of the Church? If someone doesn’t beleive 100 % of the Church’s teachings, they are ex- Catholics? As a someone who is questioning my beliefs, that is VERY interesting… Nice to know that the Church is “open to questions” from its members. Shut Up and Believe seems to be the motto of the Catholic Church.

You call yourself “doubting Catholic” and that’s an entirely different thing from one who OPPOSES the teaching of the Church on a matter so intrinsic to our faith. Can I tell a Catholic to leave the Church? Of course not. Would I tell a Catholic to leave the Church. No. However I would ask any Catholic who supports the “choice to abort” to refrain from doing so while pretending to be a faithful Catholic. As someone said: “Pro-choice Catholic” is an oxymoron; the words can not stand together in truth.

 

[guanophore]

If a pregnant woman is driving her car in a car pool lane (designated for two or more people) and she gets pulled over by a traffic officer, she’s going to get a ticket.

The question was not about responsibilites, but about rights.

Does the unborn child have inalienable rights, or not?

 

[Tigg]

Moral relativism in its truest sense would be when one denies a one truth. .

Sorry, no…the denial of one revealed truth is called heresy.

I am just realistic enough and honest enough with myself to understand none of us know with absolute 100%certainty what we may believe the one truth to be except by faith. So if “moral relativism” is supposed to somehow making me feel bad or lesser of a person, it doesn’t. We walk by faith not by sight. God bless you along your walk and peace

Moral relativism denies, just as you do, that there can be any certainty of truth, and is variable, depending upon persons and circumstances. It has been condemned by every pope since the emergence of moderism.

It denies that Christ is truth and sent His Holy Spirit to preseve that truth which leads all men to their salvation. Without objective truth, we can all wander around sprouting our own theories and the foundation of our very faith is lost amid the debate.

 

[guanophore]

In an earlier post I sensed you were perplexed that society as a whole did not view “born” and “pre-born” the same way. I was providing an example of where societal rules do in fact differentiate between born and unborn, and you seem to be okay with that.

Societal “rules” are not equivalent to the rights of persons. Granted, they are to emanate from those rights, but different rules apply to different persons in different circumstances. Do they all have the same rights?

The “rule” of paying a higher tax percentage governs those who make more income, while those who are at or below the poverty line are more likely to get a refund. Are they all equal persons? Don’t they all have the same rights as human beings?

 

[guanophore]

I understand your arrived at position of anti choice.

Catholics who are pro-life are note “anti-choice”. We just recognize that our God given freedom of choice has parameters. He did not set us free from sin so that we could commit more sins. The taking of innocent life is a sin, so all of our choices must be made within that God given parameter.

   I do not identify as a Catholic and by no means do I proclaim to speak for the Church on the forum.

If I have not told you lately how grateful I am for that, let me do so now!

It is very misleading for persons to identify themselves as Catholic,then publicly defy the Teachings of the Church.

 

[catharina]

Catholics who are pro-life are not “anti-choice”. We just recognize that our God given freedom of choice has parameters. He did not set us free from sin so that we could commit more sins. The taking of innocent life is a sin, so all of our choices must be made within that God given parameter.

If I have not told you lately how grateful I am for that, let me do so now!

It is very misleading for persons to identify themselves as Catholic,then publicly defy the Teachings of the Church.

In fact, the notion of CHOICE was hijacked by the pro-abortion faction!

 

[Iowa_Mike]

I goofed in post #316. I thought I lifted all of the information to compliment TIGG on his answer but it didn’t work out that way as TIGG’s identity slipped through the crack when I copied and pasted the information…my bad.

The bangin’ great answer I referred to in that post belonged to TIGG not me. My only part was to congratulate TIGG on the response.

For this break iin protocol I apologize to TIGG and to the forum.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[Tigg]

MIKE…

not your bad…I appreciate your contributions here as well.

Blessings!

 

[guanophore]

Hey Paul – you have every right to your feelings. I know lots of people who voted for Obama and they probably are pro-life. As for me, I served on the election committee (you know when people come out to vote, not for any particular candidate) and I did not vote (my CHOICE) because I could not in good conscience vote for McCain and because Obama was pro-choice I just couldn’t compromise. Was that the right thing to do? Who knows? I’m still wondering. The fact is, Obama doesn’t really make the decision - in the end it is the american people who make the decision. I believe one day it will be amended. anyway, thank you for your post in (name removed by moderator)ut. God bless you.

It is against the forum rules to mention political candidates by name.

 

[Tigg]

CMatt25;7505289:

I do not identify as a Catholic and by no means do I proclaim to speak for the Church on the forum.

If I have not told you lately how grateful I am for that, let me do so now!

It is very misleading for persons to identify themselves as Catholic,then publicly defy the Teachings of the Church.

I feel especially sorry for new Catholics coming on board who are often on this forum to learn. How confused must they be?

 

[Eric_Peter]

Since the title is focused on “Pro-choice Catholics”, it’s easier to talk seems all Catholics agree there is a God, Heaven and Hell.

I think one only will agree with Catholic position only if they see this.

1. God is a sole author of all life.
2. He gives and takes life whenever He wants.
3. Humans have an obligation to protect any another human beings life, and have no right to take away any human life, except for;
   a) self-defending in hostile situation such as in the battlefield of war, or a person is trying to kill you and you have no where to escape.
   b) the life of someone who is threatening the life of the society (only government has the right to do this if permitted by the governing law.)
   c) protecting your family or friends at hostile situation. (e.g. someone is stabbing your daughter with a knife and you are there at the moment)
4. Human life begins at the moment of conception.
5. A baptized Catholic soul who believes there is a God, and knows most of His Words, that is not in the state of grace, risk a very high chance entering Hell after death, and Hell is for eternity.

Provided all those are agreed by Catholics, we will agree killing someone other than the situation given in a, b or c can lead someone to mortal sin if they committed freely and know it’s ex-communicable.

As for the women’s right to choose, or women’s right to privacy, or whatever right…
A right to choose whatever life she wants, leads, etc, or for whatever reason she chooses abortion…

maybe she was sacred to death that her parents might be very very angry,
maybe she is not mentally ready to become a mother,
maybe she is not financially ready,
maybe she scare the child will not receive the best like a normal kid from traditional family,
maybe her boyfriend suddenly leave her and she has no one or no where to find support,
maybe she can’t face it, because the world will look down at her. even with adoption, the world will know that she’s carrying an unwed child.
and maybe it’s a lot whole more complicated than this, or is a mixture of above.

her life might never be the same again. she has a career to chase, or she might still be just studying and has 1.5 year to complete her university degree. Now she’s suddenly a mother, and everyone might look down at her for her ‘shameful’ deed.

or maybe even it’s not her fault at all that her life was ruin. She was living a holy life, went to every single Mass, pray everyday, and has been very hardworking. She’s a top student. And she’s from a poor family, she had barely enough money to spare for herself. Suddenly out of nowhere, a stranger came and rape her, and suddenly she’s a mother without her doing anything.

to escape the whole misery and intolerable amount of pressure, abortion might be the solution. A solution for her next 50 - 60 years of life.

But the Catholic Church, which is led by the Holy Spirit, doesn’t just see her life context within next 50-60 years. The Catholic Church cares about your soul for the next 100 years, 1000 years, 5000 years, 100 000 years, until eternity.
Catholic Church tells you what not to do for your own salvation.

So pro-choice, choose. Choose ‘happiness’ for only next 50-80 years, or choose
happiness for eternity. It’s a choice, really.

 

[guanophore]

Apparently though from this thread there are existing Catholics who are pro choice. Their degree of obedience is not for me to delve into.

No, but it is incumbent upon faithful Catholics to point out within our Church those who are in a state of rebellion against the Teachings of the Church, and have therefore separated themselves from communion with her. It is not loving to withhold the Truth from members of your own Body.

Pro abortion “Catholics” exist in a state of poor catechesis at best, and mortal sin at worst.

And perhaps even their personal convictions and what they believe about the law of the land on this issue are 2 different things.

Well, they should not be. If this is the case, then they are in a state of hypocrisy or disintegrity. Our duty as Catholics is to influence society for the Good, and Good is revealed by God to us. I know, you have stated many times in many threads that you don’t beleive we can “know”. However, the Catholic faith teaches the opposite. We know all that has been delivered to the Church for our salvation. One of those eternal truths is that we are to be as a city set on a hill, and that we are not to hide our light under a bushel.

So I will now only say choice vs anti choice is an issue that often goes circular and is something that may be debated until heaven and earth pass is all is fulfilled.

Indeed, since we live in a culture of death, those who are captured in that culture will always espouse the error that man is free so he can choose evil.

 

[guanophore]

What more evidence do you need? Fr. Drinan views and actions fit the definition of ‘heresy’ to a ‘T’.

There is no evidence that he actually ever espoused the Church’s teaching. We are making assumptions that he did, because he was a Catholic Jesuit, but in order to qualify as a heretic, he would have had to hold this belief at one time.

He may not qualify as an apostate, either, for the same reason.

One of the reasons we are instructed not to judge these things, is that we cannot see the heart of a person, or know the thoughts of their inner mind. Only God knows.

What we can judge is when a person’s behavior is disobedient, or inconsistent with the teaching of the Church.

 

[guanophore]

Lay people are not banned from an opionion of who is or who is not a heretic.

Of course not. The Church cannot ban an opinion!

What we are not to do is make statements and judgements with regard to persons about which we may have opinions. We can pray for them, educate them, admonish them (all works of mercy), but we are not in a position to make a determination about the status of their heart, mind, or soul.

While the Church did not label Drinan a heretic, nor has the Church labeled Hans Kung or other clerics who publicly dissent from Catholic dogma heretics for reasons I do not know or probably not understand, they fit the definition of a heretic to a ‘T’.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

It is not our place to determine whether they fit that defnintion. It is beyond our purview. Wasting energy slinging judgments about that could be better spent praying for them.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

So, if a Catholic is pro-choice, they should leave the Church? Is that also true for any other teachings of the Church? If someone doesn’t beleive 100 % of the Church’s teachings, they are ex- Catholics? As a someone who is questioning my beliefs, that is VERY interesting… Nice to know that the Church is “open to questions” from its members. Shut Up and Believe seems to be the motto of the Catholic Church.

I certainly can’t speak for Catharina but I read her remarks very differently than you. I believe she was simply pointing out that to be a Catholic in good standing you must accept the tenants of the faith. If a Catholic persistently dissents or refuses to accept a tenant of the faith they put themselves outside the Church via Latae Sententiae. Richard L Conte authored an article on his blog (Catholic Planet) titled, “Abortion and Excommunication”. The following excerpts are appropriate to the discussion:

Any Catholic who deliberately and knowingly obtains a procured abortion commits a mortal sin and is also automatically excommunicated, under canon 1398.

Under the laws of secular society, if one person commits a crime, then anyone who deliberately and knowingly provides essential or substantial means for that person to commit that crime is called an accessory to that crime and is also subject to the penalties of law. Similarly, any Catholic who deliberately and knowingly provides essential or substantial means for any woman to procure an abortion also commits a mortal sin and also incurs the same sentence of excommunication.

Any Catholic who substantially assists another in the deliberate sin of abortion is also guilty of serious sin and also incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.

Believing in Abortion

Any Catholic who obstinately denies that abortion is always gravely immoral commits the sin of heresy. The sin of heresy also incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.

Unfortunately, some Catholics obstinately deny that abortion is always immoral, and some Catholics claim that abortion can, at times, be a morally-acceptable choice, and some Catholics claim that a person can, in good conscience, choose abortion. Under the Code of Canon Law of the Roman Catholic Church, canons 751 and 1364, all such Catholics are automatically excommunicated for the sin of heresy.

This sentence of latae sententiae excommunication applies to any Catholic who denies that abortion is gravely immoral, regardless of whether they keep this denial hidden or publicly reveal it.

So no one is inviting a pro-abortion Catholic to leave the Catholic Church since they have automatically done so through their belief (contrary the infallible teaching of the Church) that a procured abortion under any circumstances is acceptable.

As for your statement

Shut Up and Believe seems to be the motto of the Catholic Church.

it is not too far from the truth. As I mentioned on another post in this thread, Vatican I (a doctrinal council) declared in Chapter 3, On Faith, paragraph 8 all that a Catholic must believe to be a Catholic: It reads:

Wherefore, by divine and catholic faith all those things are to be believed which are contained in the word of God as found in scripture and tradition, and which are proposed by the church as matters to be believed as divinely revealed, whether by her solemn judgment or in her ordinary and universal magisterium.

So the Catholic Church, the Body of Christ, has given us the tenants by which Christ wants us to live. It’s up to us to accept His teachings or use our free will to take the road to destruction.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[guanophore]

Ah but you miss my point. While I don’t understand why the Church has not acted more forcefully doesn’t in any way diminish the Fr. Drinan’s views or the fact they conflict with Catholic doctrine.

This much is appropriate for us to observe, and to note. In fact, it is our responsibility to do so.

Since he persistantly has supported abortion he meets the definition of a heretic and in my opinion he is one.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

He might meet yours, since you seem to feel free to determine this apart from having the full facts of the matter. But as a Catholic, it is inappropriate for you to pander this opinion about as if it were an appropriate action to do so.

Our opinions in such matters are to be focused on our intertecessory petitions.