Catholicism and Voting

[Ben Kenobi]

Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion.

I was wrong about capital punishment.

[Bosh]

For me my first communion was a promise by me to uphold everything the church teaches. Not just some things, but all things. Catholics who chose to vote for Obama violated the church teachings on abortion by supporting someone who is unabashedly supportive of abortion.

There are very few things that are non-negotiable in Catholicism. One is the death penalty, and another is abortion. Another would be gay marriage.

All the candidates in my riding were pro choice so I voted for the one least likely to get in.

So by your own arguments you have no business taking communion because you voted for a pro choice candidate.

Oh Ben, is there any logic you can't mangle?

[Ben Kenobi]

"A person who is conscious of a grave sin is not to . . . receive the body of the Lord without prior sacramental confession unless a grave reason is present and there is no opportunity of confessing; in this case the person is to be mindful of the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition, including the intention of confessing as soon as possible" (CIC 916).

[Bosh]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

Did you go to a priest to make a confession for voting for a pro-choice candidate? If it's a sin, why did you do so in the first place?

[Barnabas]

Ben is right on abortion and the Catholic Church.

I have known many American Catholics these years, mainly through talking with them at the Catholic.com forums, and I think it is undeniable that they have been and are heavily influenced by the much larger protestant population in many issues, but abortion is not one of those issues.

[Deity Dude]

Bosh are you trying to argue that

a) Ben has sinned,

or

b) that a Catholic Priest who refuses Holy Communion to a Catholic who votes for a candidate that promotes an agenda full of "mortal sins" until he has made a genuine confession or, if impractical, a perfect act of contrition, to be outside the bounds of the priest's authority or inconsistent with Catholic policy.

I don't mean to argue Ben's case for him, but I am sure if your point is a) he will agree with you and tell you that he is a human and humans sin. That is the whole purpose of Confession.

If your point is b) you would be wrong because it is a matter of Catholic faith. If a person chooses not to follow the Catholic faith that's fine, but you can't as a Catholic pick and choose what elements you want to follow.

Part of the faith sets out actions that are mortal sins. Part of the faith realizes that humans are sinners. Part of the faith provides an avenue for confessing those sins and entering a state of Grace. Then another part of the faith says that when you meet certain conditions (Being in a state of grace) you can participate in Holy Communion. There is nothing inconsistent, therefore, with a priest not offering Communion to someone who is not in a state of grace because they support an agenda that promotes mortal sins.

[Bosh]

Deity Dude: no, just that it seems bizarrely inconsistent of him to go on and on and on about how strongly Catholicism stands against voting for pro-choice people and then just casually throw out that he voted for someone who was pro-choice himself. Just seems weird.

[Felch]

Bosh, read the nota bene

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]

I'm with Ben on this. A Catholic is required to oppose abortion, and the priest is required to defend that position. If that bothers you, and you want to take away our tax-exempt status, feel free to try. It'd be a political death for the party that went along with that nonsense though.

[Imran Siddiqui]

So therefore most Catholics (almost all, I'd guess) who voted for Obama can only be considered of "remote material cooperation" and therefore the priest in the OP is incorrect in his statements?

[Felch]

That depends on the proportionate reasons. If the reason you voted for Obama is as a strategic move to deny public funding to other candidates, like BK was talking about, then it's fine. But given that other candidates were more in line with Church teachings on the matter (McCain and Baldwin, off the top of my head), it would have to be a very good reason why a Catholic would support a candidate who holds a fundamentally evil position.

[Dr Strangelove]

It's interesting that he waited until after the election. Why did he wait? It sounds like entrapment to me.

The President has nothing to do with abortion. It's the Supreme Court's fault. It's a pity that Roman Catholic priests don't get a better education in civics.

Catholics who are tired of their clerical leadership should vote with their feet. If they don't support the policies of their church they should leave. That's the fastest way to induce change in the Roman Catholic church.

Sadly too many get religion and ethnicity confused.

[Imran Siddiqui]

That depends on the proportionate reasons.

What about, you are opposed to capital punishment, the War in Iraq, and want the government to care more for the poor, but don't believe that either candidate will really do anything about abortion once in office.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Barnabas
Ben is right on abortion and the Catholic Church.

I have known many American Catholics these years, mainly through talking with them at the Catholic.com forums, and I think it is undeniable that they have been and are heavily influenced by the much larger protestant population in many issues, but abortion is not one of those issues.

The majority of Roman Catholics I've known in Virginia, Maryland and New Hampshire have been pro-choice, probably more so than most of the non-Episcopalian Protestants I've known.

[Felch]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
The President has nothing to do with abortion. It's the Supreme Court's fault. It's a pity that Roman Catholic priests don't get a better education in civics.

And who makes appointments to the SCOTUS?

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
What about, you are opposed to capital punishment, the War in Iraq, and want the government to care more for the poor, but don't believe that either candidate will really do anything about abortion once in office.

That actually is fair. Especially given how the Republican Party seems to dangle the abortion issue out around election time, and then never do much about it. Still, a wide vote margin gives Obama more political capital, and again, he's not likely to appoint pro-life justices to the Supreme Court.

Remember that capital punishment is a form of punishment. The Church takes a dim view of it, but it's not condemned as harshly as abortion. Ditto for the war in Iraq, it's a bad thing, but an issue where reasonable people can differ. Caring for the poor is all well and good, but you can't feed the hungry if they're dead before they're born.

The Church does not compromise on this issue. Catholics who are pro-choice, like the ones DS knows, are not following Church teachings. The problem is that so many Catholics don't understand why this is so important.

[MrFun]

So if one wants to be a Catholic then that person needs to surrender their right to vote and simply vote the same as everyone else in the congregation without thinking for oneself.