Trump v. Clinton matchup has Catholic leaders scrambling

[jtauke]

You honestly fooled me. Absolutely nothing in your multitude of posts hints at anything other than full support for Hillary. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen you make a post stating the obvious, that a Catholic can’t vote for her.

I like your thought process.

Someone expresses dislike for Trump and you automatically assume support for Clinton? Then again, you probably think all of us that won’t vote for Trumpy are all closet liberals.

 

[GaryTaylor]

You honestly fooled me. Absolutely nothing in your multitude of posts hints at anything other than full support for Hillary. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen you make a post stating the obvious, that a Catholic can’t vote for her.

Fooled me too!!!

 

[estesbob]

You honestly fooled me. Absolutely nothing in your multitude of posts hints at anything other than full support for Hillary. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen you make a post stating the obvious, that a Catholic can’t vote for her.

Go see the number of posts they have made trashing Hillary as much as they have trashed Trump. It wont take long

 

[Crossbones]

*No, you can never vote for someone who favors absolutely what’s called the ‘right to choice’ of a woman to destroy human life in her womb, or the right to a procured abortion,"

“You may in some circumstances where you don’t have any candidate who is proposing to eliminate all abortion, choose the candidate who will most limit this grave evil in our country, but you could never justify voting for a candidate who not only does not want to limit abortion but believes that it should be available to everyone”

Cardinal Burke*

It’s not a slam dunk…

INTERVIEWER: If I’m hearing you correctly, you’re saying that for a Catholic who wants to approach his or her vote in three weeks with the mind of the church, it’s not a slam-dunk which way that vote should go. Is that right?

BISHOP KICANAS: Yes, and I think that’s what “Faithful Citizenship” is saying. As a disciple, as a citizen, you have to weigh issues, you have to consider the character of candidates, what you think they will be able to do in terms of affecting the society and the culture in which we live. Clearly, the document is saying that to vote for someone who is proposing actions that are intrinsically evil, because of their position on those intrinsically evil acts, is certainly problematic for someone who is a believer in Christ. You don’t believe in Christ and then vote for a person simply, or primarily, because they hold a position that’s contrary to the church. You have to take those positions into consideration, and then make a choice. These are never easy choices.

 

[jtauke]

Go see the number of posts those who supposedly are voting third party have trashed Hillary as much as they have trashed trump. It wont take long

Since I seem to be one of those that you’re impugning with this implication. I’ll make it crystal clear so you can understand. I speak up against Trump because my party has been taken over by this vile man. I don’t waste my breathe on Clinton because I don’t identify as a Democrat, so I don’t really care what she says.

Tl;Dr I refuse to let Republican ideals go quietly into the night due to an adulterous, xenophobic, rude, torture supporting liar…So I speak out against him every chance I get.

 

[Crossbones]

I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure crossbones is advocating either voting third party or abstaining from the presidential box, same as I do.

Correct me if I’m wrong Cross.

That is a personal decision that should be made in consultation of the Church resources such as the USCCB’s Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship and the teachings of the bishop. I don’t think anyone should depend on someone else’s personal interpretation, but study it for themselves.

That said, I am definitely looking at third party at this point. That is my personal decision and not something I advocate for others as I prefer everyone come to their own decision.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Since I seem to be one of those that you’re impugning with this implication. I’ll make it crystal clear so you can understand. I speak up against Trump because my party has been taken over by this vile man. I don’t waste my breathe on Clinton because I don’t identify as a Democrat, so I don’t really care what she says.

Tl;Dr I refuse to let Republican ideals go quietly into the night due to an adulterous, xenophobic, rude, torture supporting liar…So I speak out against him every chance I get.

I basically agree.

Trump being the candidate shows that there are many republicans who were willing to pick the greater evil when it comes to abortion. Many of the other candidates were in fact pro life, and not because a friend’s child ended up a superstar. Marco Rubio, for example.

Someone posted information about a solidarity party? I’m going to need to research them a little more.

 

[jtauke]

That is a personal decision that should be made in consultation of the Church resources such as the USCCB’s Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship and the teachings of the bishop. I don’t think anyone should depend on someone else’s personal interpretation, but study it for themselves.

That said, I am definitely looking at third party at this point. That is my personal decision and not something I advocate for others as I prefer everyone come to their own decision.

Well said!

 

[Crossbones]

You honestly fooled me. Absolutely nothing in your multitude of posts hints at anything other than full support for Hillary. I don’t believe I’ve ever seen you make a post stating the obvious, that a Catholic can’t vote for her.

Based on the logic by some here presented here that support of an intrinsic evil disqualifies a candidate, then you cannot vote for either Trump or Clinton.

 

[estesbob]

Well said!

Why would you depend on a Non-Catholic to explain Catholic teaching to you? Wouldn’t it be better to actually look to what the Church says rather than what a non-catholic tells you it says?

 

[Crossbones]

Why would you depend on a Non-Catholic to explain Catholic teaching to you? Wouldn’t it be better to actually look to what the Church says rather than what a non-catholic tells you it says?

I assume you are talking about me. It’s interesting how the attacks starts. First Ridgerunner and now you. So now I am supposedly not Catholic because I won’t talk about myself in these discussions, hence my words don’t mean as much.

Simply put, I am advocating a position that all Catholic should review Church teachings including the USCCB’s Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship and all the teachings of respective bishops before determining how to vote instead of depending on personal interpretations of teachings. I’m not telling anyone to do anything (unlike some others here).

 

[TMC]

Constant repetition and derogatory comments cannot change the clear facts. Nothing in Church teaching mandates voting for Republicans, including Trump. Nothing in Church teaching prohibits voting for Democrats, including Clinton. The Church teaches that Catholics should examine all issues and make an individual decision as to the best candidate. Catholics are free to advocate for their candidates, including given their reasons for their choice, moral or practical. But it is not honest to say that the Church mandates or prohibits either candidate.

 

[estesbob]

Constant repetition and derogatory comments cannot change the clear facts. Nothing in Church teaching mandates voting for Republicans, including Trump. Nothing in Church teaching prohibits voting for Democrats, including Clinton. The Church teaches that Catholics should examine all issues and make an individual decision as to the best candidate. Catholics are free to advocate for their candidates, including given their reasons for their choice, moral or practical. But it is not honest to say that the Church mandates or prohibits either candidate.

No on said the Church mandates one vote for Republicans. No one said Church teaching prohibits one from voting for a democrat. And no the Church , as has been meticulously documented, does not say you should examine all the issues and make an individual decision on the best Candidate.

 

[Convert_in_99]

Go see the number of posts they have made trashing Hillary as much as they have trashed Trump. It wont take long

Uh huh!

 

[Crossbones]

No on said the Church mandates one vote for Republicans. No one said Church teaching prohibits one from voting for a democrat. And no the Church , as has been meticulously documented, does not say you should examine all the issues and make an individual decision on the best Candidate.

It seems like Bishop Kicanas is saying that Catholics should examine many issues in this statement:

INTERVIEWER: Can you give a preacher who wants to address the elections a couple of bullet points?

BISHOP KICANAS The first point would be the importance of our responsibility as believers to take part in the public arena. That’s important for people to understand, that we don’t stay in the shadows, we don’t hide out, we have to respond as citizens. We are citizens of the United States, and we have a responsibility as disciples to help form our society. So, to vote is the first message. You have to see your faith as having a place in the public arena, which I think is something that some people question. They say this is not something the church should be considering or talking about.

Then, preachers can help people to understand the complexity of the moral issues that face our culture and our society. The idea, obviously, is not to support any particular candidate, but helping people to see that the church teaches the dignity of human life from conception to natural death, which involves a vast array of issues important in the community in which we live. It’s important to be able to speak knowledgably about those issues, and then to try to weigh the character of the person who is running for office – looking at the issues they propose, as well as their ability to put those issues into action, into legislation that will make a difference. It’s one thing to hold positions, it’s another thing to be able to get results. I think sometimes that’s discouraging, because people may propose positions that are along the lines of what we hold as a church, in terms of the dignity of human life, but they’re totally ineffective in being able to accomplish anything.

 

[TMC]

No on said the Church mandates one vote for Republicans. No one said Church teaching prohibits one from voting for a democrat. And no the Church , as has been meticulously documented, does not say you should examine all the issues and make an individual decision on the best Candidate.

Oft repeated, but not documented. Again, I urge Catholics to read actual Church documents, such as the USCCB guide available here: usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/upload/forming-consciences-for-faithful-citizenship.pdf

 

[GaryTaylor]

Oft repeated, but not documented. Again, I urge Catholics to read actual Church documents, such as the USCCB guide available here: usccb.org/issues-and-action/faithful-citizenship/upload/forming-consciences-for-faithful-citizenship.pdf

We have urged this all day in fact I posted it 3X on this thread and highlighted this twice…

Doing Good and Avoiding Evil
21. Aided by the virtue of prudence in the exercise of well-formed consciences, Catholics are called to make practical judgments regarding good and evil choices in the political arena.

1. There are some things we must never do, as individuals or as a society, because they are always incompatible with love of God and neighbor. Such actions are so deeply flawed that they are always opposed to the authentic good of persons. These are called “intrinsically evil” actions. They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or condoned. A prime example is the intentional taking of innocent human life, as in abortion and euthanasia. In our nation, “abortion and euthanasia have become preeminent threats to human dignity because they directly attack life itself, the most fundamental human good and the condition for all others” (Living the Gospel of Life, no. 5). It is a mistake with grave moral consequences to treat the destruction of innocent human life merely as a matter of individual choice. A legal system that violates the basic right to life on the grounds of choice is fundamentally flawed.

1. Similarly, human cloning, destructive research on human embryos, and other acts that directly violate the sanctity and dignity of human life are also intrinsically evil. These must always be opposed. Other direct assaults on innocent human life, such as genocide, torture, and the targeting of noncombatants in acts of terror or war, can never be justified. Nor can violations of human dignity, such as acts of racism, treating workers as mere means to an end, deliberately subjecting workers to subhuman living conditions, treating the poor as disposable, or redefining marriage to deny its essential meaning, ever be justified.

Its impossible to conclude you can vote for Hillary, how? We already discussed the Trump aspect. How could one arrive at the theory voting for Hillary is consistent with the above?

 

[TMC]

We have urged this all day in fact I posted it 3X on this thread and highlighted this twice…

Its impossible to conclude you can vote for Hillary, how? We already discussed the Trump aspect. How could one arrive at the theory voting for Hillary is consistent with the above?

Of course, you are not quoting the entirety of the Church’s teaching in this area, including this:

1. Catholics often face difficult choices about how to vote. This is why it is so important to vote according to a well-formed conscience that perceives the proper relationship among moral goods. A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who favors a policy promoting an intrinsically evil act, such as abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, deliberately subjecting workers or the poor to subhuman living conditions, redefining marriage in ways that violate its essential meaning, or racist behavior, if the voter’s intent is to support that position. In such cases, a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate’s opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity.

1. There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position even on policies promoting an intrinsically evil act may reasonably decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil

Both of the candidates take positions that oppose Church teaching in important ways. Catholics must use their prudential judgment as to how to deal with this situation, including which candidate to support. This is particularly true this cycle, when both major parties are advancing very flawed candidates.

 

[GaryTaylor]

There are some things we must never do, These are called “intrinsically evil” actions. They must always be rejected and opposed and must never be supported or condoned. A prime example is the intentional taking of innocent human life, as in abortion

Had the roles been reversed with Hillary/Trump the same would apply with Trump. In fact being a 3rd party win is fantastical thinking its the same as voting for the worse of two evils as is not voting. How is it not? Has not a thing to do with a party.

You may find some comfort in suggesting you didn’t vote for example and explicitly speaking thats true, but its implicit cooperation of the likely sequence of events as a result.

Thats how I see it. What I would do if your serious about this, stop reading because your ignorance at the moment is your salvation imho. I can’t logically rationalize that myself. Its not a matter of likes and dislikes, its the lesser evil. The clearer their teaching becomes then the ignorance goes out the window. You become responsible to the truth.

 

[Ridgerunner]

We have urged this all day in fact I posted it 3X on this thread and highlighted this twice…

Its impossible to conclude you can vote for Hillary, how? We already discussed the Trump aspect. How could one arrive at the theory voting for Hillary is consistent with the above?

It is, I think, sometimes difficult for people who are not Catholic, or who are Catholic but do not inform themselves on Church teachings and their underpinnings, to understand. And too, there are those, both non-Catholic and Catholic who rebel against those teachings; sometimes in good faith and sometimes not.

But you really can’t justify supporting abortion on demand or a candidate who does unless there is an equal or greater evil to be opposed by doing so. In this presidential election, as some of the bishops pointed out regarding the last one, there really is no equal or greater evil to be opposed by voting for the one and only candidate who supports abortion on demand, partial birth abortion and, by implication, the ghoulish sale of baby body parts.

It’s true that some religions don’t seem to think much is wrong with the deliberate killing of up to a million unborn children per year in this country. Without naming them here, one has to simply recognize that a follower of one of those religions is not going to think the same way a Catholic does or should, precisely because they (and some Catholics, it must be admitted) don’t accept the proposition that Jesus gave teaching authority to the Church.