A group of vocal bishops could not sway the Catholic vote enough, and Catholics voted Obama for president in a 54-46% differential. What is supposed to be a solid block of votes for one or all of the five listed “non-negotiables” (if you actually follow Catholic belief) disintegrated into a rough conglomeration of votes for the issue to which people felt most attracted.
All Catholics were told not all issues were the same. It’s easy to determine the highest priority issues. Without “life” there can be no environmental concerns, no healthcare concerns, no war worries, no racism…nothing. If there’s no “life”, why would one even care about the possibility of regulations, or even tax burdens?
Many other issues are hotly debated at election time: the poor, economy, environment, immigration, and retirement security to name a few. But Catholics may legitimately take different approaches to handling these issues. Even though the underlying principles of these issues can be non-negotiable, there are many options for handling each one of these issues, so specifically they are not non-negotiable [www.catholic.org].
That’s why life is first on the list of “non-negotiables” issued by the Catholic Church [Voter's Guide for Serious Catholics (English). There are actually five in that category—abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, cloning, and same sex marriage. All five are considered intrinsically evil—that is, evil every time. No exceptions, no caveats, no conditions. All involve “life”, the primary “non-negotiable”.
Based on Church teachings, encyclicals of the pope, Catholic Catechism, and issue papers from the Office of the Doctrine of the Faith, the listed “five “non-negotiables” are posted above. It should be observed Catholicism never endorses a particular candidate or party—just an ideal.
Pope Benedict XVI describes how Church teachings on abortion, euthanasia, and same-sex marriage must be followed. His words can be found in Vatican tells Catholic politicians to uphold church teaching.... Another recent document that discusses abortion and the pope’s feelings, are in the column Pope: Catholic Politicians Have "Non-Negotiable" Duty to Oppose... .
Gauging each major candidate on the five non-negotiables, McCain passed on four of the five, Palin passed on five of five, and Obama/Biden each failed on all five. Catholics who truly weighed the five non-negotiables would have immediately thought the past presidential election was a “no-brainer”. But what does 54% of Catholics voting for the pro-abortion candidate say about their true priorities?
Those Catholics not believing “life” has the utmost priority has committed a heresy. In other words, any Catholic voting for a candidate who permits, allows, or endorses abortion would be committing heresy, and would technically be a heretic.
But for 54% of a particular voting block, specifically Catholic, to vote for the pro-abortion candidate is a direct indicator of widespread lack of Catholic knowledge, the distinct treatment of issues as equivalent, direct heresy, or all three.
On a flight to Brazil (5/9/07), Pope Benedict XVI left little room for interpretation. During an unprecedented 25-minute in-flight press conference, Benedict explicitly stated pro-choice politicians should not only be denied communion, but face outright excommunication from the Church for supporting “the killing of a human child”.
A reporter broke the ice by asking him if he supported the excommunication of Mexican legislators who had voted to legalize abortion. The pope replied, “Yes, this excommunication was not something arbitrary, but is foreseen by Canon Law…”
The pope was emphatic, and continued to insist such actions involved excommunication.
The pope was talking directly about “latae sententiae”(automatic “excommunication”). This occurs without formal declaration if there is an obstinate persistence in manifest grave sin [Canon Law 915]. Abortion is one of the five intrinsically evil deeds classified as grave. With these sins, excommunication is inflicted by the perpetrator on herself/himself. Therefore, one’s vote for candidates that would enact these abortion laws also incurs excommunication.
Also, very recently Benedict released a new encyclical Caritas Veritate (Charity in Truth), which says all the social political issues are tied to the pro-life ethic: “that the pro-life perspective can’t be compromised in pursuit of common ground on other political issues.”
It is sincerely hoped that all those Catholics [in name only] will come back to the Faith. If they do, then 33 million “supposed” Catholics who voted for Obama in the last presidential election were likely excommunicated. But Obama only won by a popular vote of just over 8 million votes. It’s amazing what true Catholics can do if they wanted.
Kevin Roeten can be reached at roetenks@charter.net.
Dan McLaughlin
Moe Lane
Neil Stevens
Steve Maley
I don't know if you are Catholic or not
streiff (Diary) Thursday, July 23rd at 10:50AM EST (link)and while I sympathize with a lot of what you say, I can’t help but note that you ignore the pastoral letter read before the 2008 elections and without discussing that letter and the basic document promulgated by the US bishops, Faithful Citizenship you can’t really, in any creditable way, discuss the larger issue.
This is the guidance Catholic voters were given:
In short, if you believe ending the war in Iraq, or universal health care, is on par with abortion in terms of importance you have the green light from the US bishops to vote for George Tiller if it advances those positions. Just so long as you disapprove of George Tiller’s killing of babies.
“What keeps me here is the reek of beer, the ladies and the craic”
The problem is
Lammo (Diary) Thursday, July 23rd at 1:22PM EST (link)that the minimum wage, the war in Iraq/Afghanistan, socialized medicine, the death penalty, environmental issues or any of the other laundry list of campaign issues do not rise to the level of “moral” issues and do not supply “morally grave reasons” for a Catholic to vote for a pro-abortion candidate. The sad fact is that, due to a total lack of authentic catechesis for over a generation, most Catholics in this country seem to have been able to convince themselves that the minimum wage is on the same moral level as abortion, cloning and embryonic stem cell research.
In truth, if one really understands Catholic moral teaching and accepts the authority of the Catholic Church on issues of faith and morals there is no way one will be able to believe that “ending the war in Iraq, or universal health care, is on par with abortion in terms of importance” and one would understand that there could never be a “green light from the US bishops to vote for George Tiller if it advances those positions.”
Don’t be so open minded that your brains fall out. (John Corapi, The Black Sheep Dog)
I don't disagree with you
streiff (Diary) Thursday, July 23rd at 1:43PM EST (link)but the thrust of the diary is that Catholics who voted for Obama did so despite Church teaching. My contention is if you read Faithful Citizenship you have to understand that they voted for Obama *because* of the teaching of the American bishops.
Anytime you say you can vote for a candidate who believes in abortion so long as you, personally, aren’t voting for that candidate because of his position, you have essentially said that Church teaching has no place in helping you decide who to vote for.
“What keeps me here is the reek of beer, the ladies and the craic”
I think I understand your point
Lammo (Diary) Thursday, July 23rd at 2:12PM EST (link)and I agree that Catholics who read Faithful Citizenship and who still voted for the current resident of 1600 Pensylvania Avenue probably think they did so with the bishop’s blessing.
My point is that their analysis stopped with saying “Well, I’m voting for him because of the environment, not because of abortion” without ever bothering to take the second step in the analysis, that is, determining whether the environment is morally equal to abortion.
I certainly wish the bishops had been more forceful and clear about this. I wish the bishops would have added a statement to the effect that there is no currently known political issue, alone or taken with others, that rises to a morally equivalent level with the 5 non negotiables.
Human nature being what it is any wiggle room given will be taken. Sadly, I think way too many “Catholics” didn’t even read Faithful Citizenship and, if they heard about it at all, their reaction was likely that the Church can’t tell them how to vote.
Don’t be so open minded that your brains fall out. (John Corapi, The Black Sheep Dog)
Streiff, Faithful Citizenship makes an unrealistic assumption . . .
mailloux (Diary) Thursday, July 23rd at 2:29PM EST (link)It assumes that a normal, everyday Catholic will already have the background knowledge required to understand the often cryptic bishops. For example, if you search the document, nowhere will you find a working, comprehensive definition of “intrinsic evil” or “morally grave matters” as it relates to public policy. This, in my opinion, is a big mistake and leaves open the precise rationale that you mention in your comments.
If one knows what are the intrinsic evils that are in the domain of public policy, then the document may be used as rough guide. Paragraph 34 (you pasted it in your comment above) says you can’t specifically support an intrinsic evil, but then again you can’t ignore a candidate’s support of a laundry list of intrinsic evils just because the candidate opposes one particular intrinsic evil. Paragraph 35 indicates that it is possible to vote for a candidate who supports an intrinsic evil if the candidate opposes other important intrinsic evils.
Paragraph 36, however, is where the document more fully considers situations where all candidates support one or more intrinsic evils. It states:
“When all candidates hold a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, the conscientious voter faces a dilemma. The voter may decide to take the extraordinary step of not voting for any candidate or, after careful deliberation, may decide to vote for the candidate deemed less likely to advance such a morally flawed position and more likely to pursue other authentic human goods.”
Admittedly, this is a cryptic statement that offers very little practical advice. Often, the bishops expect the individual dioceses and parish priests to more fully explain to the faithful the implications and meanings of conference documents such as Faithful Citizenship.
Those mere 2 sentences of paragraph 36 are the tip of an iceberg of Catholic doctrine. In trying to determine which candidates are “less likely to advance” morally flawed positions and which are more likely to pursue “authentic human goods,” one must know a lot about evils. If one did, then “careful deliberation” by a formed conscience would immediately reject Obama in favor of McCain. The bishops unfortunately assume this knowledge among the faithful or assume that priests will instruct such knowledge from the pulpit. Due to horrendous catechesis and non-confrontational priests, that assumption is often dead wrong.
Take Care, mailloux
The Catholic Church Has Been Heavily Infiltrated.
farstar99 (Diary) Thursday, July 23rd at 1:02PM EST (link)Communist “worker” groups and union infiltrators have been busy for forty years worming their way in, and it’s paid off. The Jesuits have been ideologically compromised, too.
???
Swamp_Yankee (Diary) Thursday, July 23rd at 1:04PM EST (link)There is no single institution on the planet that’s had more to do with the demise of communism than the Catholic church.
Yeah those are some pretty wild claims, and yet...
EvanWeeks (Diary) Thursday, July 23rd at 2:16PM EST (link)I see no links to corroborating evidence, or even a reference to anything that would have created this belief.
EvanWeeks – Dad. Conservative. Patriot.
There is no real Catholic Church in America.
Big Apple Infidel (Diary) Thursday, July 23rd at 9:37PM EST (link)So-called American Catholics treat Church doctrine like a buffet where they pick and choose what they want to believe in. It’s all in or all out. I’m no fan of the Church either since they are big supporters of open borders and unrestricted illegal alien immigration, among other activities that are insidious to my country. My holy document is the Constitution.
Greetings from occupied territory!
You really have no standing to make such a sweeping generalization
civil truth (Diary) Thursday, July 23rd at 10:29PM EST (link)And we certainly have a fair number of faithful Catholics here at RedState.
It’s one thing to say that you disagree with certain church positions (and I’m not sure it’s accurate to say that the Church is “big supporters of open borders and unrestricted illegal alien immigration”), but especially if you’re on the outside, it’s not fair to start painting all Catholics with the same brush.
Your last sentence is strange: it’s illogical to call the Constitution “holy” – or mocking of the idea of “holy”.
Take another look at yourself, something’s got to be bothering you to make such inappropriate comments.
The greatest evil…is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the offices of a thoroughly nasty business concern. -C.S. Lewis
http://www.gmsplace.com/
Actually...
Big Apple Infidel (Diary) Thursday, July 23rd at 11:22PM EST (link)I’m hardly on the outside, having been raised in the Church. I’ve also seen first hand the deleterious effects of the Sanctuary Movement run by the RC in the NYC-LI area for the last 30 years.
Greetings from occupied territory!