Pro-choice Catholics

[Iowa_Mike]

Such a term can only be applied to those who have previously embraced that revealed truth, then willfully and knowingly departed from it in favor of an alternate belief. In this case, there is no evidence that there was EVER any adherance to the revealed truth.

Another very good summary of the affiliation of the subject.

Here we agree. The claim to ‘invincible ignorance’ can only be claimed by someone who has no knowldege of revealed truth. That’s pretty high bar for a Catholic no-matter how poorly fo rmed they are. Surely you are not suggesting that Fr. Drinan can claim ‘invincible ignorance’ regarding abortion. There is no question he knew and accepted the Church’s position when he was ordained his later willful and persistant disregard of this doctrine is heretical.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[PRmerger]

The claim to ‘invincible ignorance’ can only be claimed by someone who has no knowldege of revealed truth. That’s pretty high bar for a Catholic no-matter how poorly fo rmed they are. Surely you are not suggesting that Fr. Drinan can claim ‘invincible ignorance’ regarding abortion. There is no question he knew and accepted the Church’s position when he was ordained his later willful and persistant disregard of this doctrine is heretical.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

No Catholic here, Mike, is claiming that Fr. Drinan is in agreement with Catholic teaching.

The question is whether we can call him a heretic if the Church has not.

The answer is: we can not.

 

[guanophore]

Here we agree. The claim to ‘invincible ignorance’ can only be claimed by someone who has no knowldege of revealed truth. That’s pretty high bar for a Catholic no-matter how poorly fo rmed they are. Surely you are not suggesting that Fr. Drinan can claim ‘invincible ignorance’ regarding abortion. There is no question he knew and accepted the Church’s position when he was ordained his later willful and persistant disregard of this doctrine is heretical.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

No, I am suggesting that your insistence that you can judge whether or not he is heretical is hopefully a product of ignorance, and therefore, you can be excused, since you have been improperly catechized.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

I have no quarrel with the definition of heresy. My quarrel is with your self claimed ability to judge the heart, mind, and soul of another individual.

The Apostles taught that we should not even do this for ourselves. It is usurping God’s job.

We can identify heresies, and identify problematic behavior, but it is beyond our purview to label others as heretics.

I understand that this is your opinion, and that you believe this. However, not only is it not your place to judge this, but a bad witness about Catholicism to do so.

I read it. I don’t think this was about whether or not he excommunicated himself…

No question at all.

It is risky to “condem”, but I do agree that we can identify certain immoral activities as being wrong. What we cannot do is condemn a person as heretical just because they appear to engage in behaviors we consider heretical.

I apologize if I came across judging you. I am taking issue with your behavior.

I am assuming you are misbehaving because you don’t know any better, and one cannot be judged on the basis of ignorance.

Since you lost the previous argument on it’s merits perhaps you might now expain where my behavior has gone astray. You seem to weild you opinion as if it were fact. You are making a big deal out of my judgment of Fr. Drinan for his obvious departure from Catholic teaching while in the next sentence you judge me for doing so.

You apparently haven’t read the references provided earlier about Latae Sententiae etc. I think it makes it clear that those who publicly and persistantly deny/reject a doctrine of the faith excommunicate themselves. There is no doubt that Fr. Drinan did so as it relates to abortion, you can check the record for yourself.

We all must make judgements as we go through life. When someone is obviously outside of Catholic teaching there is nothing wrong in rejecting their views (judging them) and, and as a matter of fact we Catholics are called to charitable correction. That’s is essentially what this thread is all about. Catholic teaching on abortion is crystal clear and those people who do not accept it…as you and I both have pointed out in other posts…have placed themsleves outside the Church. We have made judgment of their views. There is nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade. Please point out where my views are outside Church teaching and provide citations rather simple opinion.

The fact that abortion is a non-negotiable Catholic doctrine and the fact that Fr. Drinan persistently rejected it doesn’t make calling him a heretic rocket science. As always the final arbiter is God and he will ultimately determine Fr. Drinan’s eternal fate. But on earth I completely reject his views on abortion and condemn the disgrace he brought to the priesthood.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[Iowa_Mike]

No, I am suggesting that your insistence that you can judge whether or not he is heretical is hopefully a product of ignorance, and therefore, you can be excused, since you have been improperly catechized.

There is nothing wrong with making such a judgement…if the person meets the definition of heretic and their public actions are heretical…there is nothing wrong with labeling them heretics.

People who were raised Catholics and reject the Church’s teaching on abortion are heretics and so it goes.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[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.

Hello CMatt. Thank you for your kind words - all is well. But, you are completely dodging my question aren’t you? You say we can’t impose our religious values such as anti-abortion rights on the rest of society - that’s a “theocracy” but then you turn around and say “Jesus said help the poor in the bible so I want govt welfare programs for the poor”. You can’t have it both ways. I truly wish you’d answer the question, or atleast explain how you’re not contradicting yourself.

Ishii

 

[PRmerger]

There is nothing wrong with making such a judgement…if the person meets the definition of heretic and their public actions are heretical…there is nothing wrong with labeling them heretics.

People who were raised Catholics and reject the Church’s teaching on abortion are heretics and so it goes.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

Do you think it’s significant that when one does a search for the word heretic in the Catechism, this is what is found:

ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=heretic&xsubmit=Search&s=SS

 

[ishii]

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.

But a person who murders a pregnant woman can be tried for double murder can’t they?

Ishii

 

[PRmerger]

As always the final arbiter is God and he will ultimately determine Fr. Drinan’s eternal fate. But on earth I completely reject his views on abortion and condemn the disgrace he brought to the priesthood.

But we do not condemn Fr. Drinan. Only his views.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Do you think it’s significant that when one does a search for the word heretic in the Catechism, this is what is found:

ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=heretic&xsubmit=Search&s=SS

Try heresy, CCC 2089.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[Iowa_Mike]

But we do not condemn Fr. Drinan. Only his views.

Only God can make the final judgement…

 

[PRmerger]

Try heresy, CCC 2089.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

Exactly.

We are opposed to heresy, but do not define heretics.

 

[PRmerger]

Only God can make the final judgement…

Indeed.

So it seems curious that you are so adamant about labeling a man a heretic.

Is it not enough to condemn his views but not the man.

Heresy, not heretic.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

No, I am suggesting that your insistence that you can judge whether or not he is heretical is hopefully a product of ignorance, and therefore, you can be excused, since you have been improperly catechized.

As I requested in an earlier post…please provide your citations that I have been improperly catechized? It seems you are the one who is being judmental. If you want to start a thread to discuss the catechism as it relates to judgment or any other subject I’ll be happy to give you some instruction. However this thread is about Pro-Choice Catholics.

My position on this matter is clear…In my judgment people who make pro-choice arguments are wrong. If they are Catholics they cannot hide from the Church’s loud and clear instruction on this matter. If they choose to persistently reject the Church’s teachings…they are heretics. What is your judgment as it regards the issue?

If you want to talk about any other subject…PM me and I’ll be happy to discuss it with you.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[catharina]

As I requested in an earlier post…please provide your citations that I have been improperly catechized? It seems you are the one who is being judmental. If you want to start a thread to discuss the catechism as it relates to judgment or any other subject I’ll be happy to give you some instruction. However this thread is about Pro-Choice Catholics.

My position on this matter is clear…In my judgment people who make pro-choice arguments are wrong. If they are Catholics they cannot hide from the Church’s loud and clear instruction on this matter. If they choose to persistently reject the Church’s teachings…they are heretics. What is your judgment as it regards the issue?

If you want to talk about any other subject…PM me and I’ll be happy to discuss it with you.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

Do me a favor?
Tell all of us why you think you have
the right to call anyone a heretic?

You don’t have that right - and neither do I.
Grasp that fact.

 

[guanophore]

Since you lost the previous argument on it’s merits perhaps you might now expain where my behavior has gone astray.

I think you have me confused with another member, Mike. I never had another arguement.

It has also been explained to you by myself and other members where your behavior has gone astray. It is off topic in this thread, so I think it would be more prudent to just leave it.

You seem to weild you opinion as if it were fact.

I guess we have one thing in common.

You are making a big deal out of my judgment of Fr. Drinan for his obvious departure from Catholic teaching while in the next sentence you judge me for doing so.

No, I did not, Mike. It is appropriate and incumbent upon you to point out any obvious departure from Catholic Teaching.

In the process, we do not have the perogative to judge them heretics.

You apparently haven’t read the references provided earlier about Latae Sententiae etc. I think it makes it clear that those who publicly and persistantly deny/reject a doctrine of the faith excommunicate themselves.

Yes, I read them. Being excommunicated does not necessarily make one a heretic.

There is no doubt that Fr. Drinan did so as it relates to abortion, you can check the record for yourself.

I never said he didn’t.

We all must make judgements as we go through life. When someone is obviously outside of Catholic teaching there is nothing wrong in rejecting their views (judging them)

This is the crux of your problem, Mike. Yes, we must make judgements daily, and yes, when someone is outside the faith, especially one who claims to be Catholic, we must not only reject their views but make it clear that they have departed. This can (and should) be done without judging the person. We judge the actions, not the person.

and, and as a matter of fact we Catholics are called to charitable correction. That’s is essentially what this thread is all about. Catholic teaching on abortion is crystal clear and those people who do not accept it…as you and I both have pointed out in other posts…have placed themsleves outside the Church. We have made judgment of their views. There is nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade.

Definitely, but judging a view is NOT equivalent to judging a person.

Please point out where my views are outside Church teaching and provide citations rather simple opinion.

As I said, that topic is beyond the scope of this thread. If you want to defend your right to classify others as heretics, you should probably start a new thread.

The fact that abortion is a non-negotiable Catholic doctrine and the fact that Fr. Drinan persistently rejected it doesn’t make calling him a heretic rocket science.

No. Just disobedient to the Church.

As always the final arbiter is God and he will ultimately determine Fr. Drinan’s eternal fate. But on earth I completely reject his views on abortion and condemn the disgrace he brought to the priesthood.

I am glad you reject his views, and I also condemn the disgrace he has brought. However, we cannot see his heart, and although we object to his actions, we cannot judge his soul.

 

[Iowa_Mike]

Do me a favor?
Tell all of us why you think you have
the right to call anyone a heretic?

You don’t have that right - and neither do I.
Grasp that fact.

CCC 2089 defines heresy as follows:

2089 “Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”

The definition of heretic is:

her·e·tic   /n. ˈhɛrɪtɪk; adj. ˈhɛrɪtɪk, həˈrɛtɪk/ Show Spelled
[n. her-i-tik; adj. her-i-tik, huh-ret-ik] Show IPA

–noun

1. a professed believer who maintains religious opinions contrary to those accepted by his or her church or rejects doctrines prescribed by that church.
2. Roman Catholic Church . a baptized Roman Catholic who willfully and persistently rejects any article of faith.
3. anyone who does not conform to an established attitude, doctrine, or principle.

Fr. Drian publicly, persistantly and in spit of being a priest supported abortion in direct conflict with Church doctrine. He was mandated to give up his political career by Pope John Paul II…He fits the definition of heresy in the CCC and the defnition of heretic in the dictiionary.

Gob Bless,

Iowa Mike

 

[guanophore]

There is nothing wrong with making such a judgement…if the person meets the definition of heretic and their public actions are heretical…there is nothing wrong with labeling them heretics.

People who were raised Catholics and reject the Church’s teaching on abortion are heretics and so it goes.

God Bless,

Iowa Mike

Ok Mike. I can see that you are not willing to recieve the Teaching of the Church in this matter. I commend you to your judgmental righteousness.

 

[JimG]

Just to clarify, the U.S. Supreme Court in its Roe and Doe decisions did not legalize abortion only through the first trimester. The joint result of these two 1973 decisions, which have not been overturned, allowed abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, even up to the point of birth.

In theory, a state could prohibit abortion in the second or third trimester, but only if there were exceptions for the mother’s life or health. And* Doe v Bolton* gave such an expansive definition of ‘health’ that an abortionist could freely perform an abortion for any reason at any time. (Health of the mother includes “all factors—physical, emotional, psychological, familial, and the woman’s age.” (per Doe v Bolton) If an abortionist can’t come up with one of those factors, he’s just unimaginative.

Kansas had, still has, a law which prohibited abortion after viability unless necessary “to preserve the life of the pregnant woman” or to prevent her from suffering “substantial and irreversible impairment of a major bodily function.” That sounds pretty restrictive. And yet it did nothing to keep the state from becoming an abortion destination for late term abortions. All the abortionist needed was the concurrence of a second abortionist. And yes, the courts ruled, though the legislature didn’t state, that “major bodily function” must include mental health.

So while the pro-life community has chipped away at virtual abortion on demand—which is what Roe and Doe gave us—no restriction can “impose an undue burden” on a woman’s right to abortion. (Planned Parenthood vs Casey, 1992)

I haven’t seen anyone on the pro-choice side making the argument that Roe & Doe are way too expansive, and that abortion should be strictly prohibited after 22 weeks. That will never happen. The U.S. has the most expansive abortion law in the world.

History of Abortion Decisions

 

[catharina]

CCC 2089 defines heresy as follows:

Fr. Drian publicly, persistantly and in spit of being a priest supported abortion. He was madated to give up his political career by Pope John Paul II…He fits the definition of heresy in the CCC and the defnition of heretic in the dictiionary.

Gob Bless,

Iowa Mike

Add the CCC to a Webster’s and you get to do what YOU want?
Label this one or that one a “heretic?”

NO - and at least three posters are telling you that.
Can’t you see the objection is to your labelling of people as heretics???

Heresy: terribly sinful to spread it.
Heretic: not ours to name another soul as this.