G
GodIsGracious
Guest
I think I mentioned it … how it can appear that someone is a one issue voter because the “abortion issue” is almost ALWAYS brought up.
- Status
G
GodIsGracious
Guest
And some of us who are pro-choice ARE NOT pro-abortion. We are NOT. That is said to confuse the issue and attempts at making someone feel badly.
Not all of use who are pro-choice wanted a take over of the auto, banking, or tobacco industry either.
And liberals don’t JUST vote on pro-choice either.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
That’s kind of like wanting to talk about splitting wood without talking about wedges.
S
SpiritMeadow
Guest
Since God i Gracious has been unable to find the reference she had seen elsewhere to the Vatican’s reaction, I looked up a couple of things I had: I don’t assume validity to these, only that I read them on Catholic sites:
vox-nova.com/2009/05/05/the-american-problem/
nytimes.com/2009/05/09/us/09beliefs.html?_r=2&ref=todayspaper
americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=11636
These articles sparked my questions and I was interested in what Catholics here thought. Most all of you have responded with serious and thoughtful answers. But I cannot let it go that there is an undercurrent by some that this is some how made up. Thus the above “sources”. I’d be interested on your take of course, since you are closer to this issue than I am certainly.
The difficulties with the Anglican/Episcopal church are often stated here. Our solutions, given over very different heirarchy, will have to be different as well. But hopefully we can both learn from our ongoing struggles among ourselves to worship together while disagreeing on a lot of fundamental issues.
I remain seriously interested in your respective thoughts.
vox-nova.com/2009/05/05/the-american-problem/
nytimes.com/2009/05/09/us/09beliefs.html?_r=2&ref=todayspaper
americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=11636
These articles sparked my questions and I was interested in what Catholics here thought. Most all of you have responded with serious and thoughtful answers. But I cannot let it go that there is an undercurrent by some that this is some how made up. Thus the above “sources”. I’d be interested on your take of course, since you are closer to this issue than I am certainly.
The difficulties with the Anglican/Episcopal church are often stated here. Our solutions, given over very different heirarchy, will have to be different as well. But hopefully we can both learn from our ongoing struggles among ourselves to worship together while disagreeing on a lot of fundamental issues.
I remain seriously interested in your respective thoughts.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
If I support Osama Bin Ladin, I’m supporting terrorism. One who enables the actor, knowing what he means to do, supports the act. Whether one feels badly about it is hardly the point, though one truly should feel badly about supporting abortion by supporting those who promote it. But obviously, some don’t feel badly about it, and that’s between them and God, on that day when He tells them to depart from their ribcages.And some of us who are pro-choice ARE NOT pro-abortion. We are NOT. That is said to confuse the issue and attempts at making someone feel badly.
Not all of use who are pro-choice wanted a take over of the auto, banking, or tobacco industry either.
And liberals don’t JUST vote on pro-choice either.
This government could take over all industries and it wouldn’t have one tenth the moral significance of its promoting the killing of innocent children. Not one millionth. Auto companies, banks and tobacco are just things. Things come and things go, and they’re just things throughout the process. Children are made in the image and likeness of God. Didn’t Jesus say “whatsoever you do to the least of these, you do to Me?” Should we not be moved by that more than the fate of some bank? What’s GM or Citi to 50 million horrific deaths?
If the Church in the U.S. is splitting, and if so, it is certainly splitting over abortion more than any other thing. And if so, it couldn’t do it in a worthier cause.
How’s this for liberal? I think it’s deplorable that the neediest of all; the disabled needy, are expected by this government to subsist on less than $600/month SSI. I think they should be paid a sum sufficient to live a decent life. How about you? Yet, this administration has proposed absolutely nothing for them. Nothing. Not under the stimulus bill, not under the budget plan. Zero. Trillions to be spent on the middle class, but nothing for them. I’m too liberal to think that’s okay.
Under the healthcare plan as now envisioned, though, people with incomes as high as $110,000 will get subsidies. I oppose that, because I think people who can help themselves, and who earn that much, should be able to buy their own insurance. I’m too liberal to think it’s okay that they don’t.
Under the PPIP plan, (totally this administration’s) billionaires are going to be subsidized by the government to buy mortgage packages; packages in which every person who can pay his upside down mortgage is going to be expected to pay it in full, and those who are unable to pay and don’t file bankruptcy are likely to be foreclosed, sued for deficiency, and their wages garnished by those billionaires and their companies. I’m too liberal to think that’s okay.
Under the TALF program (totally this administration’s) billionaires can borrow money from the government that they never have to pay back, (you’ll pay it back if they don’t) to buy “toxic securities” (discounted, of course) and put only 6% of the purchase price at risk. Obviously, no smart billionaire will buy unless he knows for sure that he’ll get at least that 6% back. If he errs, he loses 6% and you lose 94%. I’m too liberal to think that’s okay.
This government expects to cut $600 billion off the Medicare budget in order to help subsidize those people, whose incomes are up to $110,000. And, of course, there will be a federal “Czar” whose office will determine when it just serves no useful purpose to do, e.g., a hip replacement (typical life span 8-10 years) to an octegenarian because his life expectancy, according to mortality tables, is less than that of the prosthesis. I’m too liberal to think that’s okay.
And I’m too liberal to think 50 million deaths of totally innocent people is okay.
I could go on, but I won’t. Suffice it to say for now that I guess I’m just too liberal to support Obama.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
G i g couldn’t find a source in which the Vatican (certainly not the Pope) criticizes American Catholics for vilifying Obama, for his pro-abortion policies or for anything else, precisely because none exists. On the contrary, this Pope and Pope John Paul II have plainly said that political support of abortion is seriously wrong morally, and that there is no political cause on the horizon equivalent to it. As one of the articles you cite mentions, there is a growing number of U.S. bishops who condemn this administration’s abortion policies, even the appointment of pro-abortion Catholics to high office. My own bishop, though not as high profile as some, is one of them.
I will, however, restate my prior point. I think there are those who would love to see a de jure, as well as a de facto split in the Catholic Church in the U.S., and, in my opinion, Obama is one of them. However, inasmuch as Catholics (and it’s not limited to Catholics) are sometimes unfaithful to the teachings of their Church, yet return to fidelity, I don’t know that a true split is in the offing. Sometimes people rationalize infidelity and immorality in order to avoid feeling defiant or immoral, and sometimes they are defiant or immoral and mean to be. But many of us reform our consciences with time, and return to fidelity.
Just so you know, “America” is a dissident Catholic publication, and not only as regards abortion. But, as with the order which publishes it, it will either reform eventually, or disappear in time.
G
GodIsGracious
Guest
Of course the first thing Ridgerunner was going to do was say that I couldn’t find it because it doesn’t exist. Baloney. Next thing he/she did was discredit the sources. Of course, if something isn’t part of this extremist views it’s not “Catholic” or not “Catholic Enough.” Whatever.
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Stillllllll waiting for the reference where the Vatican (the Pope himself would be better) says it’s not okay for Americans to vilify Obama for any reason (for his promoting abortion would be even better)Of course the first thing Ridgerunner was going to do was say that I couldn’t find it because it doesn’t exist. Baloney. Next thing he/she did was discredit the sources. Of course, if something isn’t part of this extremist views it’s not “Catholic” or not “Catholic Enough.” Whatever.
The sources someone else provided didn’t do it. They were just secondary sources saying prolifers are extremists. All their own opinions.
And condemning the late Father Richard John Neuhaus? Now that’s extremist.
H
HappyRevert
Guest
I really like this post - so thanks OP. I think those who consider themselves more orthodox shouldn’t be saying we get rid of the liberal ones. Rather, we need to beckon them back to our faith. I fell away from the faith and came back, but it wasn’t because people rammed my inaccurate beliefs down my throat. The Holy Spirit worked on me in a variety of ways and all of us should strive to do that with our brothers and sisters. I harp on this a lot, but quite a Catholics in their 30s and 40s were barely catechized at all and have never really understood why the Church takes the positions that she does. They need to be assisted to see why we believe what we do and let the Holy Spirit do the rest. We don’t need to split, just help each other see the beauty of our faith 
R
Ridgerunner
Guest
Another extremist:
Reuters 5/7/07.
"ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE (Reuters) - Pope Benedict on Wednesday warned Catholic politicians they risked excommunication from the Church and should not receive communion if they support abortion.
The Pope was asked whether he supported Mexican Church leaders threatening to excommunicate leftist parliamentarians who last month voted to legalize abortion in Mexico City.
“Yes, this excommunication was not an arbitrary one but is allowed by Canon (church) law which says that the killing of an innocent child is incompatible with receiving communion, which is receiving the body of Christ,” he said.
“Selfishness and fear are at the root of (pro-abortion) legislation,” he said. “We in the Church have a great struggle to defend life…life is a gift not a threat.”
You know, I’ll bet he has said even more extremist things than that.
Reuters 5/7/07.
"ABOARD THE PAPAL PLANE (Reuters) - Pope Benedict on Wednesday warned Catholic politicians they risked excommunication from the Church and should not receive communion if they support abortion.
The Pope was asked whether he supported Mexican Church leaders threatening to excommunicate leftist parliamentarians who last month voted to legalize abortion in Mexico City.
“Yes, this excommunication was not an arbitrary one but is allowed by Canon (church) law which says that the killing of an innocent child is incompatible with receiving communion, which is receiving the body of Christ,” he said.
“Selfishness and fear are at the root of (pro-abortion) legislation,” he said. “We in the Church have a great struggle to defend life…life is a gift not a threat.”
You know, I’ll bet he has said even more extremist things than that.
E
Eleve
Guest
Why is this thread so determined to become an abortion discussion?
E
elgar
Guest
Maybe because abortion is the MOST dividing issue between the two Catholic factions. This is something both sides could agree upon.
D
Dale_M
Guest
How about the crackdown on Liberation Theology, back in the 1980s?
This thread makes for interesting speculation, but I don’t think a split is at all likely. The Vatican lives in horror at the thought of schism - consider it’s decades long effort to woo the Chinese Patriotic Catholic Church (the Chinese government’s official Catholic Church), Or consider the Vatican’s willingness to eat humble pie in order to get the schismatic SSPX back into its fold. The Catholic Church will take great pains to avoid a split.
The SSPX formed in reaction to the dramatic changes of Vatican II. If something as earthshaking as Vat II only produces the relatively small SSPX, I can’t see any sizable split coming from lesser causes.
I think abortion is very much a rallying issue for conservative Catholics, but I am not sure that it has an equal pull for liberal Catholics. Referring to “two factions” may be an overstatement. I think there is one faction which is mobilized over abortion, but I am not sure there is a counter-faction.
G
GodIsGracious
Guest
There is no discussion possible with you. I already told you I could not find it and you simply dismissed it and other links provided to you. I’m not going to get into it with you at this point because I see that anything that anyone tries to present to you you’ll just toss it aside.
G
GodIsGracious
Guest
Like I’ve said before, the one trick political pony of many people can turn a discussion on how to make sponge cake into an abortion issue discussion. Which makes any other discussion about anything else impossible. There are other issues of concern as well but those of us who don’t have a one track mind on “abortion issue!” are vilified and attempts are made to strip them of their Catholicity.
It’s unfortunate.
P
Peter_J
Guest
I’d be interested to see the news/articles that you’ve seen. I’ve read this article, but it doesn’t actually say what you’re saying here.
H
Hesychios
Guest
Like I stated above, I doubt that any such thing will happen, but I did come across this article.
Also here…
I don’t know where all of this is heading. It’s quite obvious there is some kind of disconnect between the traditional Catholic church and the bulk of the modern American laity (and some priests) but all this talk about schism looks to be more geared toward selling articles with sensationalism.
E
emeraldcoast
Guest
Hi HappyRevert,I really like this post - so thanks OP. I think those who consider themselves more orthodox shouldn’t be saying we get rid of the liberal ones. Rather, we need to beckon them back to our faith. I fell away from the faith and came back, but it wasn’t because people rammed my inaccurate beliefs down my throat. The Holy Spirit worked on me in a variety of ways and all of us should strive to do that with our brothers and sisters. I harp on this a lot, but quite a Catholics in their 30s and 40s were barely catechized at all and have never really understood why the Church takes the positions that she does. They need to be assisted to see why we believe what we do and let the Holy Spirit do the rest. We don’t need to split, just help each other see the beauty of our faith
Great post! Can you please tell me how your local Church is helping to educate adult Roman Catholic about their faith outside of Mass? Often I have read on here some recommending RCIA, but what about Adult Sunday School or Adult Bible Study—are these encouraged by your priest? If you have adult programs, are they well attended?
God Bless!
P
Peter_J
Guest
That’s a very good point.
Also, it is often possible for a very small number of very passionate people to garner a lot of attention. For example, if you look at forums.catholic-questions.org/index.php , there’s more than 179,000 posts in the “Traditional Catholicism” forum. That’s a lot of posts!
P
Peter_J
Guest
I guess I’m kind of torn on this issue. I hear what you’re saying, but at the same time it kind of seems like the Vatican wants to “have their cake and eat it too”: they’ll make fine-sounding statements about how such-and-such teaching is mandatory (or “De Fide”, “binding on Catholics”, etc.); and yet there’s such a large percentage – even among Catholics who go to mass every week – who don’t believe it. (Not that all this justifies the let’s-kick-out-all-the-liberals mentality that some conservative Catholics have; I’m “just saying”.)
- Status