Somebody help me...

[Tietjen]

What obligation do we have to adopt our bishop’s politics? It is the bishops, not the laity, that are out of bounds here; they have intruded into an area that by rights belongs to us, not to them.

Respectfully, lest I be again accused of something less… The individual to whom I was responding had referred to the USCCB as being socialist. Why? Because unlike many within and outside of the Church, the issue of state sovereignty trumps that of charity and basic Christian morality. This is evident in the fact that the individual will even go so far as to make the incorrect declaration that the organization (the USCCB), attempting to defend those who have little choice other than to break a territorial boundary law in order to help ensure that their families are fed, is demonized to the point of being referred to as socialistic (IE - God’s way is bad if it interferes with US law). Sorry… not buying that argument. I love the US but I won’t respect a law that makes it harder or criminalizes a man or woman who is attempting to feed their spouse and children in order to prevent them from starving.

The argument, in truth, revolves around the 10M illegal immigrants inside our boarders and seculars (within and outside of the Church) are angry that tax payer money, low paying jobs, and social services are being used by those whom they believe should not be able to use them. That’s all well and good however; neither the poster whom I was responding to nor the general population of this country seems to understand or admit to the fact that these “illegals” are human beings who have little choice and who are simply attempting to feed their families. While there is certainly a criminal element within those that cross our borders, the percentage of drug mules and others who come here for criminal reasons as opposed to those who are simply trying to earn enough money to send home to their families is miniscule. Do you doubt that? Gather up 10M Americans in ANY part of the US and do criminal background checks on them and see how many come back with drug charges, violent crimes, property crimes, etc. The media in our nation focuses on those who enter our country packing drugs on their backs, or the lunatic that kills someone. That is a separate issue from those that are here trying to prevent their families from dying in squalor.

If I or you or even the poster to whom I was speaking, were living in a country whose economy could not support and feed our families, I have little doubt that we would give a second thought about breaking a border law in order to enter a prosperous county’s work force for the purpose of earning the money needed to feed our children. I’d go so far as to say that any father who would use a border as an excuse to not feed their children is a monster!

Finally, if you go and read what the USCCB is actually wanting, you’ll find that what they call for (though not popular) is what Christ called them to do… “Feed my sheep.” What they are calling for is REFORM of the laws, NOT a “doing away with” them.

 

[Ender]

Finally, if you go and read what the USCCB is actually wanting, you’ll find that what they call for (though not popular) is what Christ called them to do… “Feed my sheep.” What they are calling for is REFORM of the laws, NOT a “doing away with” them.

You made a lot of claims about immigrants that I won’t bother to dispute, not because I agree with them (I don’t) but because they are irrelevant. The point I’m making is that we are dealing with different perspectives on what should be done to resolve a political issue - and, while one position will likely be more accurate than another - none of the competing positions are more moral than any other, including the solutions supported by the bishops.

If the USCCB was merely calling for a reform of the laws there wouldn’t be any problem: we have serious immigration issues that affect real people and those laws need to be improved. Where they go off the reservation, however, is in calling for the implementation of specific solutions. That is not simply beyond their competence it is outside of their proper domain and an inappropriate use of their moral authority. The immigration problems we face are not moral questions, they are entirely prudential and the bishops are wrong to dress their political views with a veneer of moral superiority.

Ender

 

[Tietjen]

You made a lot of claims about immigrants that I won’t bother to dispute, not because I agree with them (I don’t) but because they are irrelevant. The point I’m making is that we are dealing with different perspectives on what should be done to resolve a political issue - and, while one position will likely be more accurate than another - none of the competing positions are more moral than any other, including the solutions supported by the bishops.

I see… However, what you seem to be subscribing to is the idea that political issues should not rely on moral solutions. You’re correct when you say that we are addressing this political issue with differing perspectives. That’s because this issue isn’t just a political one. It is in fact a moral issue at its core. Further, I would suggest that EVERYTHING we do should be based on moral perspectives and not just the things we do at mass or a parish event. Morality MUST be included in politics. You cannot separate the two and expect justice nor can you expect God to smile down upon a government who refuses to recognize moral law. The Bishops (God bless them) are attempting to remind the people and the government of this; however, at the moment, they aren’t gaining much ground. Abortion went down the same road because “the moral” solution was ignored in favor of the popular one.

If the USCCB was merely calling for a reform of the laws there wouldn’t be any problem: we have serious immigration issues that affect real people and those laws need to be improved. Where they go off the reservation, however, is in calling for the implementation of specific solutions. That is not simply beyond their competence it is outside of their proper domain and an inappropriate use of their moral authority. The immigration problems we face are not moral questions, they are entirely prudential and the bishops are wrong to dress their political views with a veneer of moral superiority.

See, your last sentence seems to imply that the USCCB has some sort of political agenda and I simply don’t see that. You want the Bishops to stay away from matters of state; that Bishops over-step their authority by calling for a moral solution as opposed to a secular one. This concept suggests that Bishops should abstain from the free speech right that American Catholics enjoy. They are certainly able (both morally and constitutionally) to have a voice in how the government is run. Next, they (the Bishops) are obligated to correct immorality not just inside the walls of the Church building but throughout the entire world.

In closing, and then I’ll leave this thread because it’s been done over and over and I tire of hearing Catholics who will side with the secular majority over their own Bishops; we are called to be Catholic 24 hours a day 7 days a week. We don’t take off that mantle when we leave mass. We don’t cast Catholicism in the hamper and wrap ourselves in the cloak of secularism when political, economical, state sovereignty, or social issues arise. We are called to find solutions to these issues WHILE ensuring God’s moral law is upheld. The USCCB is not perfect and I do not pretend that it is. However, on this issue, the USCCB is doing exactly what they are supposed to do… they are calling for the laity and the government to remember that all of us are the children of God (not just US citizens) and to treat God’s children charitably.

 

[Ender]

It is in fact a moral issue at its core.

Only in the sense that it - like every other problem no matter how small - presents us with the opportunity to choose good or evil but there is nothing inherent in the nature of immigration that makes it a moral issue. On this subject, what makes ones choices good or evil is solely ones reasons for choosing; it is not the choices themselves.

Further, I would suggest that EVERYTHING we do should be based on moral perspectives and not just the things we do at mass or a parish event. Morality MUST be included in politics.

You see this problem as between consciously choosing good or evil when in fact it is between guessing about what is helpful or harmful. You can only say that my choice is immoral if you assume that my motivation is immoral and that is a judgment of me, not of the choice I have made.

The Bishops (God bless them) are attempting to remind the people and the government of this

The bishops, rather astonishingly, are judging people and their (rash) judgments are quite uncharitable. The fact that a bishop does it doesn’t justify it.

See, your last sentence seems to imply that the USCCB has some sort of political agenda and I simply don’t see that.

Let me clarify my position: the committees of the USCCB have been taken over by those who wish to use the moral authority of the Church to forward a political agenda.

You want the Bishops to stay away from matters of state; that Bishops over-step their authority by calling for a moral solution as opposed to a secular one.

There is a distinction here you still haven’t made. I have never suggested that morality be separated from politics or from any aspect of our lives, but the issues we struggle to resolve do not present us with moral problems but with prudential ones. It’s really no different than the problems parents face in deciding what’s best for their children. Wanting to do the right thing is no help in deciding what the right thing is.

This concept suggests that Bishops should abstain from the free speech right that American Catholics enjoy. They are certainly able (both morally and constitutionally) to have a voice in how the government is run.

This is a false complaint as well. Bishops have every right to speak out but they must also recognize that when they give their political opinions this comes across to many as a statement of moral obligation. We are required to assent to our bishop when he speaks on matters of faith and morals but not when he speaks on prudential matters and it is improper for him to imply that we have a moral obligation to accept his political views.

on this issue, the USCCB is doing exactly what they are supposed to do… they are calling for the laity and the government to remember that all of us are the children of God (not just US citizens) and to treat God’s children charitably.

No, this is not what they are doing. They have gone beyond this to support the specific recommendations that they think will best resolve the problems and they imply that we have a moral obligation to agree. This is simply untrue.

Ender

 

[Veronica7978]

I feel like I’m out of sync with the Church’s social teachings. I have been a staunch conservative Republican for years, and yet everything I’ve seen tells me I have to abandon those views to be in sync with Catholic social teaching; I have to support the welfare state, amnesty for illegal immigrants, government-run health care, and the like, so that I can be promoting the common good.

I don’t know what to do. Someone help me.

If you went to mass today, it was painfully obvious that to serve God is your only job. You don’t have to be a liberal nor a conservative to do the right thing. Be a servant of God, do what is right, serve the least of your brothers. It’s explicitly set out in the Bible by Jesus himself. There should be no confusion on this. Others will try to tell you why it’s good to serve mammon, they are leading you astray. You are to serve God alone. It’s rough for many to come to the conclusion that they do have to give up everything to serve God, they don’t want that so they insert many excuses as to why they need to keep their stocks diversified, and their taxes low, but in reality, none of that matters. In the end, your stuff ends up at the dump, others take your money, and you are to answer to Christ for what fruit you’ve produced. They have to answer that question, plus how they have lead others astray. Good luck to you, it looks like you’re on the right track.

 

[Veronica7978]

Let me clarify my position: the committees of the USCCB have been taken over by those who wish to use the moral authority of the Church to forward a political agenda.
Ender

This is wacky and scary at the same time. Are you insinuating that the gates of hell have prevailed against the Church? That cannot happen per the words of Our Lord. People know in their hearts what is right. Your accusations against our Church are wrong and based on material gain only. You give me the reason behind your accusations that does not include $$$ and personal gain.

Any person who looks at this will see the truth. Serve God alone.

 

[TheQuestioner]

I felt like my own views were out of sync because of the opinions of some who felt my views were inconsistent with the Catholic view of social justice.

I probably let my emotions get the better of me. It’s a cross.

You have to remember that Catholic does not equal republican. Yes, sometimes what the Church says will go against republican policies, and sometimes it will go against liberal policies. The Church doesn’t have a political party.

 

[Veronica7978]

You have to remember that Catholic does not equal republican. Yes, sometimes what the Church says will go against republican policies, and sometimes it will go against liberal policies. The Church doesn’t have a political party.

Amen.

 

[Ender]

This is wacky and scary at the same time. Are you insinuating that the gates of hell have prevailed against the Church?

Nope, I am claiming that people within the USCCB have gained control of her committees and are using their positions to push political agendas. Don’t equate the USCCB with the Church and don’t equate the abuses of some with the forces of hell.

Your accusations against our Church are wrong and based on material gain only. You give me the reason behind your accusations that does not include $$$ and personal gain.

What on earth makes you think that anything the USCCB does affects me directly? The politics they push affect me but I have no connection with those people any more than I have with you.

Ender

 

[Ender]

You have to remember that Catholic does not equal republican. Yes, sometimes what the Church says will go against republican policies, and sometimes it will go against liberal policies. The Church doesn’t have a political party.

It is certainly true that the Church has no political party. It is not true, however, that she opposes Republican policies as well as Democrat policies because the Church - as opposed to some outspoken bishops - takes no position on most issues. There is no Church position on global warming, immigration, health care, et al because all of these problems require prudential decisions as to what policies will actually work. On the handful of issues on which she does take a position she does so because they all deal with intrinsic evil: abortion, euthanasia, same sex “marriage”, human cloning, fetal stem cell research and support for these evils is entirely one sided between the parties.

We are so used to hearing the USCCB lay out a political agenda that we have come to believe that the Church actually specifies whether we should or should not support amnesty for illegals or nationalized health care, but this is not so. The Church specifies goals we should strive to achieve - feed the poor, care for the downtrodden, heal the sick - but she says nothing whatever about what specific policies will best achieve those goals. Those are properly left to the prudential opinions of the laity and while one opinion may be less helpful than another, neither is more or less moral.

Ender

 

[Veronica7978]

Nope, I am claiming that people within the USCCB have gained control of her committees and are using their positions to push political agendas. Don’t equate the USCCB with the Church and don’t equate the abuses of some with the forces of hell.
What on earth makes you think that anything the USCCB does affects me directly? The politics they push affect me but I have no connection with those people any more than I have with you.

Ender

So no reasons huh?

 

[edward_george]

I feel like I’m out of sync with the Church’s social teachings. I have been a staunch conservative Republican for years, and yet everything I’ve seen tells me I have to abandon those views to be in sync with Catholic social teaching; I have to support the welfare state, amnesty for illegal immigrants, government-run health care, and the like, so that I can be promoting the common good.

I don’t know what to do. Someone help me.

Then you need to see some other things, because none of those things are in line with Catholic teaching. Welfare state and government-run health care are forms of socialism, which is an offense against natural law (read practically anything Leo XIII wrote, especially Rerum Novarum, for more about this). As for amnesty for illegal immigrants, the USCCB has actually released documents in the not-so-distant past saying that immigration may be restricted so as to assure the common good of the country into which the immigrants are coming.

There are some issues, however, that the Republicans don’t quite have right. Some of their agenda points are not in line with Church teaching. Some Republicans favor abortion only in certain circumstances–abortion is never morally licit, no matter how limited the circumstances. Some Republicans have distressingly hasty views on when military power should be used, and have little regard for what constitutes a just war. These are things I had to sort of wrestle with as I was growing in my faith as well as my appreciation for politics. After a good long while, I realized that neither of the major parties in the US was 100% in line with what the Church taught. It’s better to say that you are a Catholic, and to evaluate things on a case-by-case basis from there, rather than aspiring to be a Republican or a Conservative or any other such political label. Be one who strives after truth, and let labels come as an afterthought.

-ACEGC

 

[Ender]

There are some issues, however, that the Republicans don’t quite have right. Some of their agenda points are not in line with Church teaching. Some Republicans favor abortion only in certain circumstances–abortion is never morally licit, no matter how limited the circumstances.

This is true, and those individuals hold a position the Church opposes - because she actually has a position on abortion.

Some Republicans have distressingly hasty views on when military power should be used, and have little regard for what constitutes a just war.

You may disagree with their position on support for the war in Iraq but the Church herself has no position on it; she has not declared it to be an unjust war so it is not correct to use this as an example of a case where the Republican party opposes Church teaching.

After a good long while, I realized that neither of the major parties in the US was 100% in line with what the Church taught.

The point being missed here is that the Church does not take positions on most political issues - e.g. health care, immigration, or even the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There could never be such a thing as a Catholic political party because, with very few exceptions, there is no Catholic position on political issues.

Ender

 

[Ender]

So no reasons huh?

No, there are no reasons of money or personal gain behind my low opinion of the USCCB nor would it matter if there were. My statement is either correct or incorrect and nothing about me personally or my motivation for making the charge has any effect on whether or not it is true.

Ender

 

[edward_george]

You may disagree with their position on support for the war in Iraq but the Church herself has no position on it; she has not declared it to be an unjust war so it is not correct to use this as an example of a case where the Republican party opposes Church teaching.

I didn’t specifically say the Iraq War or any other war. My point is that the Church defines certain parameters within which a war must be carried out if it is to be considered just, while for the most part most Republicans in public discourse today do not have such standards. And the Church most certainly did take a position on the War in Iraq: see catholicism.about.com/od/thechurchintheworld/f/popes_on_iraq.htm for more.

The point being missed here is that the Church does not take positions on most political issues - e.g. health care, immigration, or even the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There could never be such a thing as a Catholic political party because, with very few exceptions, there is no Catholic position on political issues.

By this logic, you could allow all manner of things that the Church and her leaders have not specifically ever spoken on. What I pointed out is that certain political issues can be evaluated in light of Catholic teaching, and a Catholic judgment could be made on such issues. I point out socialized health care as an example, because the Church has spoken against socialism. The extrapolation is not hard to make. There isn’t a big list of “Catholic positions on political issues,” but there are guiding principles by which we can form judgments on political matters. Check out the work of Pope Leo XIII, as well as the social encyclicals of subsequent Popes. Also, Archbishop Charles J. Chaput’s book Render Unto Caesar is worth a read.

Ender