What political view should Roman Catholics hold?

  • Thread starter Thread starter IrishDude45
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

IrishDude45

Guest
We can’t be all out capitalists, nor can we be all out socialists. Communism is obviously not compatible. So what is the best political view point for a Roman Catholic? I do not like many aspects of the “its all about me” view of capitalism and I have to say that I agree more with many tenets of socialism as far as helping the poor and such. I am not talking about Republican or Democrat (U.S.). I am asking about a much broader philosophy. Is there a name for it? Does it even exist in the modern world?

Pax Vobiscum
 
I don’t think there is a specific political view for a Roman Catholics, so I couldn’t give you a general answer.

It purely depends on the individual. Of course, their religious beliefs do affect their decision on what to believe politically, but it’s mostly anything that agrees with their own morals.

I hope that helped.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood
 
It’s a personal matter, I’d say.

Many people here think that because abortion is evil, and because in the USA the pro lifers are generally conservative, they must be conservative.

I’m not a catholic, but I’m 100% pro life but would describe myself as a mixture between social democrat and social liberal/civil libertarian.
 
My two cents in this is that we should be pro-Democracy Catholics, and that’s it. We may like more or less government intervention, but as long as we agree that democracy is the best way to go, we should be free to be for or against any political party. My preference is always to be independent, having the Catholic Church teachings as my only basis for criteria, instead of party 1,2, or 3.
 
My two cents in this is that we should be pro-Democracy Catholics, and that’s it. We may like more or less government intervention, but as long as we agree that democracy is the best way to go, we should be free to be for or against any political party. My preference is always to be independent, having the Catholic Church teachings as my only basis for criteria, instead of party 1,2, or 3.
Make sure that’s liberal democracy and not popular democracy (ie North Korea and China)
 
Make sure that’s liberal democracy and not popular democracy (ie North Korea and China)
Agree. Being not an expert in these topics, I am not sure about he proper “denominations”. For example, not sure if the UK is a democracy or not, as they have a queen, but as long as t is a system where PEOPLE have a voice and power to elect their representatives, it will be OK.
 
Agree. Being not an expert in these topics, I am not sure about he proper “denominations”. For example, not sure if the UK is a democracy or not, as they have a queen, but as long as t is a system where PEOPLE have a voice and power to elect their representatives, it will be OK.
It is indeed! The USA is republic. The UK has a constitutional monarchy, meaning parliament (democratically elected) are the legislature and run the country, but the queen plays a ceremonial role, much like the Irish president.
 
For a real eye opener look up a 100 year old papal encyclical called (IIRC) Rerum Novarum.

A fella named GK Chesterton wrote a lot about a system he called Distributism in the same era which has a lot going for it. (Don’t judge by the cover, it isn’t remotely communist)

IMO, American capitalism comes close to being the best system except that in recent decades we’ve made dictinctly preferential governmental policies in favor of the ‘investor’ class rather than the ‘entrepenuer’ class. If we’d get away from the Reaganomics and instead dream up stimilus policies to benefit small entrepenuers more than financiers we’d be better off.
 
Distributism is exactly what I was thinking of! I’ll look into it some more. Thank you.

Pax Vobiscum
 
To be honest, I don’t really know. I keep my religion out of politics and do not force it on anyway, because it’s unconstitutional. This country was not founded on the Christian religion, although many founders were Christian and many of our laws come from English Common Law, which is based almost entirely on the Bible.

We allow all faiths to worship and practice as they wish, and I think that’s important to remember. Christians shouldn’t force their belief on anyone. It’s inconsistent with Biblical teaching and inconsistent with the Constitution. Aside from the Bible, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are, to me, two of the most beautiful documents ever written.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal…”

To me, that’s beautiful.

With that being said, if you’re asking simply in general and are not concerned with the United States in particular, then I would advise you to look at the Vatican. I suppose that’s the ideal way.

As for myself, an Irish-Catholic American, I vote Democrat sometimes and I vote Republican other times. As for a specific ideology? Common sense.

.
 
The more I look what’s going on , on this part of the planet
I begin to understand that Monarchy would work much better than the President’s institute.
At least it seems that for the Slavic nations , Monarchy is more workable .
The President is temporary in power.
What care about country ?
What care about nation ?
What future of the nation ?
The President has his time - a few years .
Beside his duties , he use the opportunity to make his money , because he knows that later another one is coming with the same thoughts.
Presidents its a ‘‘short appearance’’ .
But , where you can imagine the Monarch who could sell the dignity or the wealth of his country in exchange for the money in some anonym bank accounts ?
The Monarch is the one who takes the care for the nation.
I begin to think that Monarchy institute could work much better than the Presidents institute .
Therefore , I think that Monarchy probably the better form of rulership.
 
As long as we can support prolife principles I would think we are free to hold any political view.
 
The is to base your vote on issues and not political parties. Just look at each candidate and vote for the one whose ideals most closely resemble those of the Catholic Church.
 
Catholic social teaching has encouraged subsidiarity in politics (the principle that matters ought to be handled by the smallest, lowest or least centralised competent authority). If we follow this then I think we possibly become more flexible in our approach rather than thinking we must always align ourselves with one party or one candidate. We also become more concerned with “doing the right thing” rather than “supporting the right party”.
 
AMERICANS ALL
Code:
We in America are fortunate, although 'pride goeth before the fall' and boasting is not a good idea. There are some commendable democracies elsewhere, among them Canada, of course, and various countries in Europe and elsewhere.

I am not so sure that America has been a great democracy for long and has some problems even today. I recall, for example, how Woodrow Wilson labeled World War I a 'war for save democracy' while he instituted the worst segregation policies into Washington, DC.  FD Roosevelt was somewhat better on black-white relations, but far from perfect, and it was under him that Japanese-Americans were involuntarily 'relocated'. The election of Obama, whether or not we agree with his policies, is a healthy sign that the USA seems to have made considerable progress when it comes to race relations.

  As for 'Catholic principles' - hm! - I visited Spain during the Franco days, and he claimed to have put Catholic principles into practice. But was it a democracy? No way. He did not permit either political or religious freedom in any true sense. I recall studying Thomas Aquinas years ago. He stated that heresy was more serious than political dissent, as it imperiled the immortal soul, and he recommended that heretics be delivered to civil authorities to be executed. Not very democratic, I would say. It was the 'Syllabus of Errors' of Pope PIus IX (1870?), in which he strongly condemns democracy, that still scares Protestants and others.   

  There is a certain irony in that most Catholics in Congress today are Democrats who are pro-choice when it comes to government policy. That includes such top brass as Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry, and on and on. Interesting contradiction? Perhaps it shows that the Church has lost its influence in the political arena. The most pro-life politicians would seem to be evangelicals from the South. 

  Catholics, like all other Americans, should keep well-informed on the issues and vote their consciences. It's almost impossible to find a candidate with whom one can agree 100%. But we need to do our best. How moved I was this past Thursday when I reheard the Gettysburg Address with its emphasis on "of the people, by the people and for the people." Lincoln doesn't seem to have been a traditional Christian but he certainly was a truly great statesman.
 
A faithful Catholic would be a social conservative (e.g., pro-life, pro-family) while being economically “liberal,” as it is a Catholic principle to help the vulnerable of society. This is a little hard to do in the U.S. because government programs using tax-payer money are funding sex-education programs and now abortions.

In the U.S., the political position of a Catholic could be a moderate, moderate Republican, conservative Democrat or independent.
 
A faithful Catholic would be a social conservative (e.g., pro-life, pro-family) while being economically “liberal,” as it is a Catholic principle to help the vulnerable of society. This is a little hard to do in the U.S. because government programs using tax-payer money are funding sex-education programs and now abortions.

In the U.S., the political position of a Catholic could be a moderate, moderate Republican, conservative Democrat or independent.
Good post - I think that does help to show how futile it is to try to shoe-horn Catholicism into a single party’s politics.
 
To be honest, I don’t really know. I keep my religion out of politics and do not force it on anyway, because it’s unconstitutional. This country was not founded on the Christian religion, although many founders were Christian and many of our laws come from English Common Law, which is based almost entirely on the Bible.

We allow all faiths to worship and practice as they wish, and I think that’s important to remember. Christians shouldn’t force their belief on anyone. It’s inconsistent with Biblical teaching and inconsistent with the Constitution. Aside from the Bible, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are, to me, two of the most beautiful documents ever written.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal…”

To me, that’s beautiful.

With that being said, if you’re asking simply in general and are not concerned with the United States in particular, then I would advise you to look at the Vatican. I suppose that’s the ideal way.

As for myself, an Irish-Catholic American, I vote Democrat sometimes and I vote Republican other times. As for a specific ideology? Common sense.
So-o-o— let me stick my neck out a bit here and ask:

What would you think of a Catholic pastor who is belongs to (at least informally; goes to meetings) and urges parishioners to join and support a group whose goals and ethics are pretty much Liberation Theology? This group is like a little ACORN.

So far, we’ve been able to stay out, but there is a definite push. DH spoke with Fr. and he is v aware of this group’s affiliations (Gamaliel and Industrial Areas Foundation) and we are disappointed (to say the least) that he would threaten our tax exempt status by promoting this kind of thing.

He says he has the backing of our bishop, but I am pretty sure our bishop is perhaps not aware of the implications of the “pedigree” of this group.

Things are going to get interesting soon here. I’ll check back next weekend.

Mimi
 
Catholic Social Doctrine has a long history. Some posters already mentioned Rerum Novarum and the principle of subsidiarity. This is all from a string of papal encyclicals on the proper relations between labor and capital. Here’s a good page:

catholiclabor.org/encyclicals/papal-encyclicals.htm

The Church has been trying to balance between Laissez Faire Capitalism and Socialism for a long time.
 
A faithful Catholic would be a social conservative (e.g., pro-life, pro-family) while being economically “liberal,” as it is a Catholic principle to help the vulnerable of society. This is a little hard to do in the U.S. because government programs using tax-payer money are funding sex-education programs and now abortions.

In the U.S., the political position of a Catholic could be a moderate, moderate Republican, conservative Democrat or independent.
osjspm.org/majordoc_centesimus_annus_official_text.aspx

What do you have to back up your claim that Catholics should be economically liberal? The link above is the official vatican rejection of the welfare state by JPII (para 48).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top