Pro-life politicians: how should Church react?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GandalfTheWhite
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GandalfTheWhite

Guest
When Catholic politicians or holders of public office take a position at variance with church teaching on such issues as abortion, what should Catholic Bishops do? Answer the poll and explain your answers. Discussion is welcome.
 
Allowing a Catholic politician to promote abortion without rebuke is like telling the general population that it is ok.

I think a public rebuke is the only way to make the democratic party take notice and to reverse the erosion occuring in the republican party.

This is literally a life and death issue. You don’t whisper to someone to stop allowing killing of the most innocent.
 
Most politicians are not in favor of abortion. Rather they are in favor of allowing a person the freedom of his/her own conscience in the matter. The law allowing this provides a way for those determined to end a pregnancy in this way to do it in the safest manner possible. While I disagree with such a decission, I am in favor of allowing the person to make that decission privately.
I am in line with Church teaching on this in that it holds that we each form a conscience unique to ourselves. We are not to force the conscience of others. Teach the truth, but leave the individual his own conscience.

Matthew
 
It would be very interesting to watch the drama if a politician was excommunicated for abortion support and chose to make a public fight. One of the first things he might do is ask what Church teaching is on the exact timing of ensoulment. He could ask for the document that says a soul is present at conception.

If such a document were not forthcoming, he could ask about the ideas of Aquinas and Augustine on ensoulment. He could show those two giants of the Church said ensoulment occured considerably after conception. And he would point out that the Church has not corrected them. He would bring up Pope Gregory XIV and his ideas.

Then he might ask if an entity must have a soul to be human. And then the whole question becomes global…

And remember, this would be a public fight with all the media frothing to get the best soundbites and the most unflattering photos of everyone. Conflicting interviews, contradictions, talking head professors, apostate Catholics, poverty stricken mothers, etc. Jane Roe would be debating Norma McCorvey on CNN.

The Church would respond that ensoulment is not the question, since abortion is still contrary to doctrine. But by that time, the discussion would be headed in fifteen different directions.

The politicians are not helpless in this. They don’t have to bring a knife to a gunfight.
 
First course of action is always to talk to them in private about the problem. If that doesn’t work, gather a few friends and talk to them… last resort excommunicate!

Matthew 18:
15 But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.
16 And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. 17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. 18 Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.
 
Methinks most politicians try to stay away from the issue altogether. Which is probably a good thing since there’s not much they can do anyway, at least in the U.S. The Supreme Court has the ultimate power in the abortion issue and they are appointed by the president, who beforehand doesn’t know how they will judge. Don’t forget, Catholics in NY forced the Roe vs Wade issue and justices during a Republican administration decided that matter, so it’s not just the Democrats.
 
drafdog said:
Most politicians are not in favor of abortion. Rather they are in favor of allowing a person the freedom of his/her own conscience in the matter. The law allowing this provides a way for those determined to end a pregnancy in this way to do it in the safest manner possible. While I disagree with such a decission, I am in favor of allowing the person to make that decission privately.
I am in line with Church teaching on this in that it holds that we each form a conscience unique to ourselves. We are not to force the conscience of others. Teach the truth, but leave the individual his own conscience.

Matthew
Click to expand...
You are saying that the church teaches it is ok for people to form their own conscience on killing?
 
40.png
BlestOne:
First course of action is always to talk to them in private about the problem. If that doesn’t work, gather a few friends and talk to them… last resort excommunicate!

Matthew 18:
15 But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.
16 And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. 17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. 18 Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.
Click to expand...
An excellent answer! 🙂
 
drafdog said:
Most politicians are not in favor of abortion. Rather they are in favor of allowing a person the freedom of his/her own conscience in the matter. The law allowing this provides a way for those determined to end a pregnancy in this way to do it in the safest manner possible. While I disagree with such a decission, I am in favor of allowing the person to make that decission privately.
I am in line with Church teaching on this in that it holds that we each form a conscience unique to ourselves. We are not to force the conscience of others. Teach the truth, but leave the individual his own conscience.

Matthew
Click to expand...
Wrong on every count. The Church does not say we are to follow our conscience. if that was true there wuld be no need for a church.

catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0304qq.asp

**Q I’ve been told the only thing necessary for a Catholic to live a moral life is for him to follow his conscience. But what is your conscience tells you something that’s wrong is okay?

**
*A: In determining what is right and wrong, conscience doesn’t work by magic. You first have to form your conscience. This means learning about good and evil, and that’s the job for the intellect.

Many people mistakenly think that conscience is the faculty that tells us what is right and what is wrong. Conscience is better thought of as an alarm. With your intellect you learn what’s right and wrong, and then conscience “sounds off” when you are about to violate the standards your intellect has learned. If you have no standards, you’ll never hear the alarm.

But you need to make sure not just that your conscience is formed but that it is formed correctly. If it is, the moral judgments you make will be reliable. If your conscience is formed poorly, then your moral judgments won’t be trustworthy.

For example, if you’ve been taught that there’s nothing wrong with stealing—or if you’ve never been taught that stealing is wrong—you won’t have any inhibitions against stealing. Your conscience won’t bother you when you steal because it isn’t reliable when it comes to the immorality of stealing. In other words, it’s been formed—but formed incorrectly.

It’s true we have an obligation to follow our conscience, even a poorly formed or “erroneous” one, but we also have an obligation to form our consciences properly. For Catholics, this means following what Jesus teaches in Scripture and Tradition through the magisterium of the Church.*
So you are not in favor of sucking the brains out of a child but are perfectly willing to allow others to suck the brains out of their children And you think there is something admirable about this? Your consicence tells you this is OK???
 
GreenJeans said:
It would be very interesting to watch the drama if a politician was excommunicated for abortion support and chose to make a public fight. One of the first things he might do is ask what Church teaching is on the exact timing of ensoulment. He could ask for the document that says a soul is present at conception.
Click to expand...
He could ask but he might as well ask what the childs Astrolgical sign is-it has about as much relevance.
If such a document were not forthcoming, he could ask about the ideas of Aquinas and Augustine on ensoulment. He could show those two giants of the Church said ensoulment occured considerably after conception. And he would point out that the Church has not corrected them. He would bring up Pope Gregory XIV and his ideas.
Click to expand...
And if he dd this he would find that the Church’s teachings on abortion have been unchanged for 2,000 years.
Then he might ask if an entity must have a soul to be human. And then the whole question becomes global…

And remember, this would be a public fight with all the media frothing to get the best soundbites and the most unflattering photos of everyone. Conflicting interviews, contradictions, talking head professors, apostate Catholics, poverty stricken mothers, etc. Jane Roe would be debating Norma McCorvey on CNN.

The Church would respond that ensoulment is not the question, since abortion is still contrary to doctrine. But by that time, the discussion would be headed in fifteen different directions.

The politicians are not helpless in this. They don’t have to bring a knife to a gunfight.
Click to expand...
It would be a real hoot to watch a Catholic politican try this especally if they we as ill informed about Church teachings as you are.
 
estesbob said:
He could ask but he might as well ask what the childs Astrolgical sign is-it has about as much relevance.

And if he dd this he would find that the Church’s teachings on abortion have been unchanged for 2,000 years.

It would be a real hoot to watch a Catholic politican try this especally if they we as ill informed about Church teachings as you are.
Click to expand...
Have you looked into Pope Gregory XIV? Augustine? Aquinas? Jerome? Might be fun. Informed?
 
GreenJeans said:
Have you looked into Pope Gregory XIV? Augustine? Aquinas? Jerome? Might be fun. Informed?
Click to expand...
Yes i have. In detail . There is nothng in their writings that undermine or conflict with Church teachings on Abortion. A pro-abortion politician trying to use them for cover would be in trouble. Just for example the debate in Gregory’s time was not whether or not Abortion was a mortal sin but rather what the pennace should be and whether this mortal sin could be forgiven at the local level or had to be approved by the Vatican. Also don’t confuse Augustine & Aquinas’s discussion about ensoulment and the status of the child before the “quickening” with their views on the appropriatness of abortion.
 
Not a lot of responses so far, but if this poll is representative of the greater picture then the outrage of killing these innocent is going to be less and less heard. This is a Catholic forum. Exactly 1/2 of the posts on this thread are by Catholics. Not sure about 1, not listed on his profile.
1/2 of the Catholics on this thread are for leaving this to their conscience. I really did not realize the situation among informed Catholics had deteriorated to this point.
 
Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion
General Principles
by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
Click to expand...
Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia
Click to expand...
Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws),** his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist**.
Click to expand...
 
It’s difficult to see how one could be in communion with the faith while actively promoting a law or policy that runs contrary to it. If I were a bishop, I would privately counsel the political figure and advise that person to come back into communion with the faith. I’m not sure how much good a public brow-beating does especially in our culture that thinks with a humanistic mind versus a Christian mind. I wrote more about this on my blog.
 
Publicly condemn them but not deny them communion.

I’d qualify the response based upon intent of the politician to be determined by the Bishop. Giving unto Caesar takes many forms. If the laws of a nation are designed to allow for the personal free expression of it’s citizens; in order to maintain the peace and posterity in the nation, the public debate about such topics is warranted.

If the politician is a declared Catholic I would expect them to vote on moral matters in line with the Church’s position. And if I didn’t know what the Bishop knew I wouldn’t vote for them most likely. Social Justice is different because of the many cultures in the nation.
 
estesbob said:
Yes i have. In detail . There is nothng in their writings that undermine or conflict with Church teachings on Abortion. A pro-abortion politician trying to use them for cover would be in trouble. Just for example the debate in Gregory’s time was not whether or not Abortion was a mortal sin but rather what the pennace should be and whether this mortal sin could be forgiven at the local level or had to be approved by the Vatican. Also don’t confuse Augustine & Aquinas’s discussion about ensoulment and the status of the child before the “quickening” with their views on the appropriatness of abortion.
Click to expand...
Does a human have a soul? Jerome and homicide?
 
dmelosi said:
Not a lot of responses so far, but if this poll is representative of the greater picture then the outrage of killing these innocent is going to be less and less heard. This is a Catholic forum. Exactly 1/2 of the posts on this thread are by Catholics. Not sure about 1, not listed on his profile.
1/2 of the Catholics on this thread are for leaving this to their conscience. I really did not realize the situation among informed Catholics had deteriorated to this point.
Click to expand...
Very sad, is it not? It is very difficult to respond to a poster that you really disagree with when there is no info in their profile. You can’t tell whether they are very young and idealistic or if they are older with flawed (IMO) reasoning. But I digress. It seems to me that too many Catholics have gotten complacent about abortion, fetal stem cell research and euthansia. The idea of “leaving it to their conscience” again, IMO, is absurd. Their conscience must tell them that if they want to do it, it is okey. The tenets of the church may say otherwise, but no matter, this is what I want to do and I can pass it off as listening to my conscience. Very troubling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top