Rhode Island bishop regrets failure to stop same-sex "marriage"

[april32010]

Mason

. Klansman. Abortionist. Misogynist. Misanthropist. Communist.

Some of which have official documents or rules vitiating against some others in violation of love thy neighbor. the church has forbidden membership in these groups this group is anti-Catholic,so that would be odd for a Catholic to be a member . though the Bishop of new orleans did excommunicate segregationists these aren’t an organization haven’t seen any Papal encyclicals on the democrat party,are you a member of the Magisterium ?

 

[CrossofChrist]

It may be the Newtonian Law ***inverse ***of the old Irish saying:

“It is not a sin … not to be Irish. But it is a great pity.” :sad_yes: .

On another front is such reasoning valid and true? In all cases?

Substitute: **Mason. Klansman. Abortionist. Misogynist. Misanthropist. Communist. **
Some of which have official documents or rules vitiating against some others in violation of love thy neighbor.

Can we say without a doubt that “it is not a sin to belong to such organizations?”

It might be interesting to rank these in the order of which is doing the most actual sinful harm in the world right now. And officially committed to doing so. Though with artful justifications explaining why their doing so is a justified exception to the rule (if they bother to).

Then too, Jesus dined with sinners. He though was trying to convert them.

A good person might try to shine some light in even these dark places, and truly enough “not be sinning”.

But on the “lead us not into temptation” front. It might be wise not to hang in bad company.

Or be in places where one compromises with even intrinsic evils in order to “do other good things” the group claims to be doing.

I made the same move Bishop Tobin did. Possibly for the some of the same reasons.
It is not so much that my option to join another party was due to the ethereal virtues of ITS leadership … it is rather because it seems to be the best I can do morally and practically (in that order).

If an outstanding person for an office is the best person to represent me, I consider voting for that person even if he/she is not a member of my party. I’ve done this. But I’ve also sen “my candidate” from a third party FAR from “close to being elected” … while the worst choice IMO, got elected by a few votes. And my support for the runner up might have made a (little but better) difference.

I guess I took a long ride around the block to get to answer your one-liner with:

“Wait. It *might *be …”

- ***"Let me read that platform ONE more time " ***??!

The difference is that the Catholic Church has never had close relations or ties with any of those groups. It is different with the Democratic party (or the Labour party for those in England). If you become a Democrat or are registered Democratic for what the party stands for today, then there is definitely a serious problem. But if you are for other reasons, not so much.

 

[CaptFun]

The difference is that the Catholic Church has never had close relations or ties with any of those groups. It is different with the Democratic party (or the Labour party for those in England). If you become a Democrat or are registered Democratic for what the party stands for today, then there is definitely a serious problem. But if you are for other reasons, not so much.

Well in a Bishop’s case, I could also see how those busy fellows could make their political
affiliation the last thing on their agendas.

Back in 1960 when Kennedy ran there was no government sanctioned abortion to consider, let alone “same sex marriage” and the government mandating sinful things to be done by Catholic institutions. It was more of a perception that Democrats favored central government and spending more on social programs; Republicans favored local government and spending more on defense. All of that can be moral.

And there just might be a Bishop who votes every time but votes his party based on the old preferences … and would be surprised that one party (THEIR party) crusades for abortion by enshrining it as a “right” and (time after time) speaking out in its favor right in
their party Platform every 4 years.

Party affiliation does not dictate how a person actually votes either. Though as a matter of public record, this can come out. And as it becomes public, it can shake one’s faith in his local priest if he is found to belong to a group that seems to evangelize for an intrinsic evil.

 

[CrossofChrist]

Well in a Bishop’s case, I could also see how those busy fellows could make their political
affiliation the last thing on their agendas.

Back in 1960 when Kennedy ran there was no government sanctioned abortion to consider, let alone “same sex marriage” and the government mandating sinful things to be done by Catholic institutions. It was more of a perception that Democrats favored central government and spending more on social programs; Republicans favored local government and spending more on defense. All of that can be moral.

And there just might be a Bishop who votes every time but votes his party based on the old preferences … and would be surprised that one party (THEIR party) crusades for abortion by enshrining it as a “right” and (time after time) speaking out in its favor right in
their party Platform every 4 years.

Party affiliation does not dictate how a person actually votes either. Though as a matter of public record, this can come out. And as it becomes public, it can shake one’s faith in his local priest if he is found to belong to a group that seems to evangelize for an intrinsic evil.

Sounds about right.

Here’s another pov. Overall it seems pretty balanced.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I can agree with that statement but would add that the Republican Party is equal to blame for the shape of our country but is the lesser of two evils.

Two political parties running the country with one agenda, does not fair well for the people or the faithful of our country.

Heh. You could even take that a step further and say certain conservative-minded people.

Just look at the last election. Says a lot about this country.

 

[KEP1983]

90%

Yes, 90%. Abortion and “gay marriage” are central tenets of the Democratic party now.

One cannot honestly be a pro-life pro-traditional-marriage Democrat anymore. The party has made these issues absolutely central to their platform.

A Catholic cannot honestly support the Democratic party any more, and the Bishops are beginning to realize it and speak out about it. Liberal Catholics need to wake up and pick which side they’re on, because very very soon they won’t be able to straddle both sides of the fence anymore.

 

[carpenter383]

Many people don’t know about the 5 non negotiables of the catholic church.
These are things that Catholics CANNOT support when they enter the voting booth.
Read them and you’ll see it’s clear that a serious Catholic CANNOT support, or vote for a democrat.

politicalresponsibility.com/voterguide.htm

1. Abortion
   The Church teaches that, regarding a law permitting abortions, it is “never licit to obey it, or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or to vote for it” (EV 73). Abortion is the intentional and direct killing of an innocent human being, and therefore it is a form of homicide.

The unborn child is always an innocent party, and no law may permit the taking of his life. Even when a child is conceived through rape or incest, the fault is not the child’s, who should not suffer death for others’ sins.

1. Euthanasia
   Often disguised by the name “mercy killing,” euthanasia is also a form of homicide. No person has a right to take his own life, and no one has the right to take the life of any innocent person.

In euthanasia, the ill or elderly are killed, by action or omission, out of a misplaced sense of compassion, but true compassion cannot include intentionally doing something intrinsically evil to another person (cf. EV 73).

1. Embryonic Stem Cell Research
   Human embryos are human beings. “Respect for the dignity of the human being excludes all experimental manipulation or exploitation of the human embryo” (CRF 4b).

Recent scientific advances show that often medical treatments that researchers hope to develop from experimentation on embryonic stem cells can be developed by using adult stem cells instead. Adult stem cells can be obtained without doing harm to the adults from whom they come. Thus there is no valid medical argument in favor of using embryonic stem cells. And even if there were benefits to be had from such experiments, they would not justify destroying innocent embryonic humans.

1. Human Cloning
   “Attempts . . . for obtaining a human being without any connection with sexuality through ‘twin fission,’ cloning, or parthenogenesis are to be considered contrary to the moral law, since they are in opposition to the dignity both of human procreation and of the conjugal union” (RHL I:6).

Human cloning also involves abortion because the “rejected” or “unsuccessful” embryonic clones are destroyed, yet each clone is a human being.

1. Homosexual “Marriage”
   True marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Legal recognition of any other union as “marriage” undermines true marriage, and legal recognition of homosexual unions actually does homosexual persons a disfavor by encouraging them to persist in what is an objectively immoral arrangement.

“When legislation in favor of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time in a legislative assembly, the Catholic lawmaker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. To vote in favor of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral” (UHP 10).

 

[SuperLuigi]

The Church is playing this game 1000 times slower than the media and the left. You are hearing a lot of regret now for stuff that should have been said, done and taught when it mattered. It is a little late for Bishops to start talking about elections, ballot measures and Political party membership. They all ran scared during the last few elections. And now they wonder why things like the HHS mandate and gay marriage are being forced upon them. Go figure. In America, we speak out BEFORE the election not after. At least that is the way it used to be.

Well, I don’t think priests are in the business of telling people who to vote for, but these ballot measures on abortion and marriage speak for themselves.

Catholics need to stop making excuses and get with the program. You’re not going to fool God. Ever.

I criticized the USCCB for acting all surprised that the government was making them pay for other people’s contraception in the name of health care. It made me think they didn’t even read the bill.

BEFORE the Church, especially the USCCB, speaks out on anything, they would be wise to have read relevant legislation.

 

[Captain_America]

As an independent, I’ll still agree with that!

I agree.